Assembly Select Committee on Child Care Costs

Hello? Hello?

I checked it before I started. You broke it.

I broke it. Hello? Can you hear me now? You want me to sing? I will be just starting momentarily, Miss—Assemblymember Nguyen's on her way over, so we'll start as soon as she arrives. I don't know how they get dirty as bad as they do.

Because they go on and off, on and off, and if I touch my hair.

Yeah. Okay.

Okay, just time to start. Just, I'm starting. Okay. Welcome everyone. Thank you for being here. And we're going to go ahead and start. Everybody has a busy schedule and holiday shopping to do, so let's do this, right? I want to thank you for all, all of you for being here today.

Welcome to the third hearing of the California State Assembly Select Committee on Child Care Costs. Thank you all for joining us for the important and timely discussion on the future of early learning and care in California, especially as we continue to support the expansion of transitional kindergarten and to strengthen the full mixed delivery system for our children, families across California.

Transitional kindergarten, as we know as TK, is now a key part of California's early learning landscape and is providing new opportunities for many families. For a lot of middle-class parents, TK has provided opportunities for early learning that used to be out of reach and that's something worth recognizing and building on.

As we continue this conversation, we know our families across California have diverse needs. Many of our working and low-income families needs full day, year round child care with flexible hours and transportation options that don't always align with how TK exists today.

And we know community-based child care programs, family child care homes, centers, and other early educators continue to be essential in helping meet these needs. They have long served as the backbone of early childhood learning and for our working families.

The question before us is now—the question before us now is—how do we make sure these systems work together so that all our kids, regardless of income, geography, or family circumstance, have access to early learning opportunities they need to thrive? We can't choose between TK and childcare. Our families and our kids need both.

A strong mixed delivery system means our early learning models complement each other, expand choices for families, and support our educators across all settings. Our objective here is to ensure families do not have to navigate gaps and tradeoffs to get the care that meet their needs.

Today's hearing is about understanding what's working and where we need to be aligned and how we can better be better coordinated across programs to support our children, families, and our workforce.

Across our panels, we'll hear from parents, educators, researchers, and community leaders who bring needed expertise on how TK and child care can work together as part of a cohesive system. So, we have three goals today to help achieve our objective.

First, to understand TK's role within California's mixed delivery child care system and how to align it with existing programs. Second, to better understand the needs of our families so our mixed delivery system can increase access to choice and equity for our families.

And third, to examine the economic impact of early learning, including how TK and childcare support family stability, workforce participation, and local economies. So, for those of you that have been following the select committee, you may remember that our first two committee hearings covered perspectives from Northern and Southern California.

We want these conversations to reflect the whole state, so, today, we're focusing on the Central Valley and how our early learning system affects our families, workers, and local economy here. I'm now honored to turn to my colleague and Select Committee Co-Chair, Assemblymember Nguyen, for her opening remarks.

Thank you, Majority Leader. I want to thank everybody for being here this, this afternoon. This is our third one, right? Third one.

And it has been such an honor to be able to participate in this Select Committee to hear from members of the community, to hear from many of you who are both parents, providers, educators, family members, advocates all across this area here. It is very important that we continue to have this dialogue and this conversation.

I think the Majority Leader and I both agree that while this is the third one, it doesn't stop here, that we look forward to having ongoing conversations and that it is about the whole family as a whole. It is about the child.

It is about all of you in this room, all of you that were here for the first one and the second one as well, and that for us, it's about finding what is the balance, to be able to bring everybody together and to be able to make this work.

And that may mean that we don't solve it today, that may mean that we don't solve it next month. It may mean that it's going to take a while. And I think that's okay because we need time to be able to figure this out.

We don't want to rush to something and then realize that it isn't what we wanted. We want to be able to have these ongoing conversations but also have the opportunity to look at what works and what doesn't work. Like life in general, things change all the time, and so, we have to be open to change.

We have to be open to finding ways that we can make this work for the Children, for families, for providers, and for the future. I want to thank the Majority Leader for leading this and really the team behind us in helping us get prepared for this.

But also, taking the opportunity to be able to listen to so many of you that called in to our offices, so many of you that reached out via email, phone, and in person, and for taking the time out of your busy day to attend these hearings. I'm going to kick it back over to our Majority Leader.

Thank you, Assemblymember Nguyen. I want to welcome—we have translators that are going to be here in the room with us today and I appreciate that you're going to be here. Thank you very much. Are you all settled? Okay. Okay. So, these rules—we have a few rules that we have to follow before we get started here.

The House rules are these rules apply equally to everyone, regardless of viewpoint. They are meant to protect everyone's rights and ensure effective deliberation. During the hearing, we won't permit talking or loud noises from the audience. Public comments will also be allowed only at the time designated by myself or the Co-Chair of our Select Committee.

Comments must relate to the subject of today's hearing. Disruptive or threatening behavior will not be tolerated. After your testimony, you may exit the room or return to your seat. And violations of these rules may result in removal or other enforcement actions. So, I want to thank you in advance for cooperating and participating today.

So, with that, let's begin our first panel. And if the panel could come up for the transitional kindergarten in context, integrating TK into the mixed delivery system. Welcome. Nice to see everybody, some of these familiar faces that have been working in this arena for quite some time. Okay, so we have with us today—thank you very much.

Today, we have with us—I better put my reading glasses on. Sara Cortez, the Legislative Analyst Office. Welcome. Nina Boothy. I say it wrong every time, Nina. Every Child California and Patricia Lozano, Early Edge. Welcome.

Good afternoon. Sarah Cortese, Legislative Analyst Office. I was asked to briefly provide a history of transitional kindergarten expansion. You have also been provided a one-page table that we have produced that at a high level describes the different state and federally funded preschool programs available to a four-year-old in California.

I won't go into this table in detail in my formal remarks, but I'm happy to answer questions about it. All right, jumping right into the TK overview. So, under state law, transitional kindergarten, TK, is the first year of a two-year kindergarten program offered by public elementary schools.

From 2014-'15 through '21-'22, students were eligible for TK if they had their fifth birthday between September 2nd and December 2nd. As part of the 2021-'22 budget agreement, the state established a plan to gradually expand TK eligibility from '22-'23 to '25-'26.

This school year, the '25-'26 school year, the state has reached the final stage of TK expansion where a child who has had their fourth birthday by September 1st is eligible for TK, making the grade available to all four-year-olds. With the eligibility expansion, we saw enrollment increase.

In October of 2019, there were 89,000 students enrolled in TK and in October of 2024, the most recent data we have, 178,000 students were enrolled in TK and although the total number of students enrolled has increased, we estimate the share of eligible students participating has somewhat decreased during the expansion.

I'd like to highlight that participating in TK is not required, but it is an option available to all 4 year olds. If families are interested in enrolling their child in a different preschool program, depending on the eligibility, they could opt into one of the state's state or federally funded preschool programs listed in the table that we've provided or enroll in a private pay program.

Alongside TK expansion, the state has also modified some of the programmatic requirements of TK.

Notably, the state set a maximum TK class size of 24 students and beginning the school year, schools must maintain an average one adult for every 10 TK students. Also, this August, the state began requiring that TK teachers have at least 24 units of child development coursework or comparable experience.

Now that I've provided a brief summary of TK expansion, since we're here discussing mixed delivery, I'd also like to highlight some major changes that happened to other programs during this period and these programs are the before and after school program at schools and the State Preschool Program, which is California's other large preschool program that serves four year olds.

So, I'll start with before and after school programs. During the TK—during the expansion of TK, the state has significantly increased its funding for before and after school programs through the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program which effectively provides school programming—after school programming—for all interested low-income students in elementary schools.

So, ELOP funding can be used to address the childcare needs of family beyond the normal instructional school date. And now, I'd like to highlight the three big changes in state preschool that happened over the past few years.

The first is in '22-'23, which was the first year of TK expansion, the state increased the income threshold to participate in the state preschool program, and this made more children eligible for the program. So, eligibility is currently set 100% of the state medium income and prior to this change, it was 75% of state medium income.

The second change I want to highlight is that the state significantly increased reimbursement rate for three-year-olds. So, prior to this change, a provider would receive the same rate regardless if it served a three or four-year-old. Currently, the rate for three-year-olds is 80% more than the rate for four-year-olds.

And third, the third last change I want to highlight today, is that the state also expanded state preschool eligibility to 2-year-olds. Beginning in '24-'25, state preschool providers can opt to serve 2-year-olds, but they aren't required to. Previously, the program only served three and four-year-olds.

And this concludes my formal remarks, but I'm happy to take questions at the appropriate time.

Great. And thank you for bringing that. We will be doing questions at the end if that's okay, so we can get through your presentations. All right, Nina.

All right. Thank you so much. Good afternoon. Really happy to be here today. My name is Nina Boothy. I serve as the Executive Director of Every Child California, representing more than 2,500 early care and education.

Programs acrosss the state. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today about how transitional kindergarten fits within California's mixed delivery early system. So, first off, I want to say in California, universal preschool is not a single program, but it is a continuum of early learning opportunities that together meet the diverse needs of families.

This mixed delivery system, as already noted, is transitional kindergarten, Head Start, the California State preschool program, the General Childcare and Development Program, also known as CCTR, voucher based care, as well as private pay programs. Each of these components plays a distinct but essential role in providing families with choice, flexibility and continuity of care.

Nina, can you just slow down a little bit so our translators can keep. Absolutely. Thank you very much.

I have a tendency to speak a little bit too.

So do I, but it just dawned on me.

No worries. Thank you. True universal preschool depends on maintaining and strengthening this full continuum, working together as one coordinated system that ensures every child access to high quality early learning and care regardless of income and circumstances. A single model cannot meet the wide ranges of schedules, incomes and developmental needs across California.

And that's why from this panel looking at mixed delivery, we must focus on expanding access, not replacing existing programs. Strengthening this continuum ensures that families have real choice, that providers remain stable, and that every child can access the early education environment that best meets their needs.

So as we look at the path forward and integrating transitional kindergarten and as California continues to expand, expand transitional kindergarten. It's really important to view transitional kindergarten as a part of the broader early learning continuum, not apart from it.

So rather than being siloed on its own a part of all of these other programs, transitional kindergarten, state preschool, General child care, Head Start voucher programs and private pay all play essential roles in ensuring that every family has access to care. As transitional kindergarten grows, communities based programs have seen shifts in Enrollment.

To make financial planning a little bit more difficult to move forward, we can take several key steps. I've also provided a handout to you all which are outlined in that back to back handout. First off, we encourage building local partnerships, encourage school districts and community based providers to plan and deliver services collaboratively, not separately.

Joint planning for facilities, enrollment and professional development help ensure smoother transitions for children and better coordination for families. State policy and funding should incentivize share use agreements between LEAs and early learning providers, especially to support full day year round care.

We also recommend aligning funding and oversight, streamline contracts, reimbursement structures and administrative requirements so families can experience one unified system rather than a collection of separate programs.

We also talk about investing in the workforce we recommend advancing compensation parity between early learning educators and transitional kindergarten teachers, ensuring that professionals across all settings are recognized and supported for their expertise.

Additionally, we recommend incentivizing teachers with infant and toddler specialization, which would address critical workforce shortages and ensure that quality care extends across the entire birth to five continuum. To support facility development. Licensing we recommend modernization grants so that programs serving infants and toddlers and preschoolers can safely expand. Upgrading classrooms and playgrounds takes both time and funding.

We know that many programs want to grow and meet community needs, but facilities and licensing barriers remain a major constraint. The state should also make permanent the flexibility allowing state preschool programs to serve two year olds.

As my colleague was saying earlier, this policy is currently set to expire in 2027 and just last year alone we saw a 242% increase in CSPP programs serving two year olds. This change would provide critical continuity for families and help stabilize enrollment as TK continues to expand. Lastly, there is a need for one.

A need for one family will not be the need for another. So some parents will prefer part day TK in a school setting. Others may need full day year round care through community programs. When we view transitional kindergarten in the context of California's mixed delivery system, the path forward seems clear.

Integration will allow us to create a comprehensive, family centered approach to early learning. By strengthening collaboration, aligning systems and investing in our workforce, California can ensure that the expansion of transitional kindergarten lifts the entire early learning community and builds a truly universal system that supports every child, every family and every educator. Birth through five.

Thank you very much for the opportunity to provide comments today. I am happy to answer any questions when time allows.

Thank you very much. We'll look forward to those questions relatively soon. I think we have a few of them for you. Good afternoon and welcome. Patricia hi, good afternoon.

My name is Patricia Lozano and I'm.

The Executive Director of Early Edge California. We do advocacy for early learning, access to care and compensation for the workforce. So before I, you know, share our recommendations and I support everything that my colleagues shared is I wanted to, you know my story.

I came to California as an immigrant from Colombia and I started my career as a preschool teacher. And since then I always thought this is like the hardest job I've ever done. Right. And I think that our workforce is not appreciated. Right. And since then my goal has been to advocate for that to change. Thank you.

So when I came to the U.S. i saw the opportunity to do that and there's so many things that we need to work on but also appreciate what we have.

And the main thing here is the first time I dropped my kids in their preschool, my thought was, I want every child in California to have access to this, where they have a warm, welcoming adult in the classroom, where they have access to toys and materials, where the teachers are compensated and respect that.

We're still working to get that. But I think all these programs that have been described, including tk, we should celebrate because even though we're not where we want to be, where every child has access to care, we've made progress. I think now there are a few things that I would highlight that we need to work on.

And it's, you know, we have to invest more so we can pay our providers across settings what they deserve, right? And the beauty of having a mixed delivery is that parents have choice, right? Because not every program can serve the needs of the parents. So we have to, you know, invest in, in infant and toddler care.

We have to invest in home based care. We have to integrate family, friend and neighbor, because that's a very common care. So I think now is how do we find that way to invest more to support the workforce, to train those who are in TK to work with little ones? Because it's different. It is different.

When I was a preschool teacher, when I worked with force, it was very different than tooth, right? When I had the tooth, I was. Like, zero my God, this is really hard, right? And you need different skills, right? So I think investing across in training and supports is very important. And also the partnerships that Nina mentioned, right.

We need to work together to mainly what is it that parents need and how all these different programs can work together to serve before care, during the day and after care. And I think if we organize it and try to work on those partnerships, we can make it happen.

And now infant and toddler, which we know it's really hard to find, we should say, how do we start offering trainings and transition to so providers can serve younger kids? Because it is different and it is difficult. So facilities, we need more investment in facilities, more investment in training compensation.

So I do think that it's important to highlight how and maybe just learn from those who have figured out how to partner. And one last thing I wanted to say is the supports for dual language learners and English learners.

We know that 60% of kids in California, 0 to 5 are English learners, or we call it dual language learners. And we know that if we start early, it's really, really more beneficial to support those families who don't speak English at home.

So both Supporting parents and supporting providers and how to work with families who don't speak English at home. It's really beneficial. That's what I wanted to share. I think we're all here because we want to work together and we want this to work for us and we have now. The opportunity to figure it out.

And I think we have a great potential. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much. We'll start with. Do you have any questions you want to.

You want to go first?

No, you go ahead. Yeah, we're in this together, girlfriend.

Thank you. Thank you for being here. I agree with many of the things that you all said and the fact that we have to figure this out together.

The area in which I feel like there is some improvements that we have to do in is I feel like in some ways when we planned TK so when you said you'd work with 2 year olds and you've worked with. Many, many years ago I had graduated from college and wanted to become a teacher.

I took part in being a preschool teacher and then I took part in actually working with third graders and then I actually did some years working with the infants. So the infant room.

And you're absolutely right that there is such a difference in working with infants and than there are with 2 year olds, than there are with the 5 year olds or whatnot.

While the years are minimal, the ability for each child to be able to complete a certain task or being able to do things or the provider and the amount of time in which they have to care for the young one takes up different types of skill sets and takes up different time that you have to care for the young one, the two year old, the infant, the two year old or the preschooler.

Where I'm getting at is that there has to be a model in which we support these providers, these home based providers that you talked about, you talked about language capacity and many of our home based providers are dual language, right? They speak another language. As a mother I had as a foster mother as well too.

I had the opportunity to enroll the kiddo that I cared for in a home based care center and the provider spoke Spanish only and I absolutely loved it because the kiddo that I placed there was Asian, but he picked up Spanish like that because of the provider that he was at.

If we're talking about kiddos that are wanting to feel more comfortable and giving that pathway for them to be successful and it starts at birth, right. And that if they're in a home based provider that speaks the language, there has to be A path for them to eventually move into a school setting. Right.

So that they can be successful.

I feel that in pushing this at a young age for them to be in a school setting and not making sure that the schools and the teachers and the providers have the ability to be successful is something that we absolutely need to work on, that we need to figure out a way how do we make this right.

And so I appreciate you talking about and I think, Nina, you said the same thing, that we need to incentivize school districts and community providers to figure this out and to try to make this work. Because we're not going backwards. We've done so much to get here.

The only way to be successful now when we talk about our children is a path in which we need to move forward.

And I appreciate that you all three are saying that, that we need to figure out a way to make this work so that way our home based providers don't get left out of the conversation, but that we do everything that we can to ensure that they are successful as well too. And it may mean more investment.

I heard Nina say more investment. And I believe that there needs to be more investment in many of these centers and more investment in many of these home based providers as well too.

Because as I did tours of some of these settings, that was the one area in which they felt that they were not a part of the conversation. And then that, that we moved forward and we didn't do what we can. And I wasn't here for that.

I'm just learning about that as I got on this select Committee and I'm so glad I did because I want to be a part of this conversation in which we try to figure this out. But my question to you three is that you all said that we need to figure out a way to move forward and.

Move this together and make this successful for all of us. I'm wondering if any of you have any ideas or plans. I hear more investment, I hear incentivizing. But what are maybe just you've had some opportunity to see this kind of roll out a bit already. Some of you even champion this.

And now seeing this, what are maybe some ideas that you might have that you think you can share with us, that we can do, that we can get this conversation going. And it might be a loaded question. I apologize for that. But. I think we're looking for ideas and we're looking for maybe some type of answers.

I think the key here is how to figure out partnerships that are really easy to structure because that Requires probably licensing, training, all these steps. So I said, how do we set up a system where LEAs, home based providers, family, friend, neighbors, centers, can all partner and we make it easy for them to make it happen. Right.

We've heard that licensing for younger children is harder because of all the transitions. It takes a long time. So how do we help the state agencies to make that process easier, especially now that we're in transition still. So I think it is more like building all those systems so it's easier to make that happen. Right.

And there are not all these obstacles and steps to get the license, to get the permits, to get those contracts going. And also look at current partnerships that are working. Right. What can we learn from them?

And because they are right, LEAs who are successfully partnering with CBOs and home based providers that we can learn from and kind of like, can we make that more official, more efficient?

Yeah, I would say. Thank you for the question. I would say a very easy thing to do is mandate that partnerships have to happen. The Learning Policy Institute did a report in 2324 and found that only 8% of all LEAs that offer transitional kindergarten are working with other type of providers, community based providers within their community.

The reason is because they're not required to do so. And so when they're not required to do so, it's harder to make those partnerships. And so what they're doing is they're offering transitional kindergarten as three and a half, as a.

Three and a half hours a day, as a part day, four hours a day is a full day program that does not meet the needs of full day program in my world. I don't know about yours, but certainly doesn't.

So I think if we are really looking at seeing what we could do to bridge some of the community based organizations to work with LEAs potentially doing extended hours, commingling some children doing it during breaks when you can have a full year program.

We really do need to look at what some of those requirements are and possibly require LEAs to be able to do the collaboration. So I would say that would be one thing.

Also what we're seeing across the state is that transitional kindergarten has grown most in more affluent areas where families have the ability to pick up their children in the middle of the day. That certainly was not necessarily the intention of transitional kindergarten, but that's what we're seeing right now.

So a number of private providers that would traditionally take private pay for those families are being displaced right now are starting to serve younger age children as well as starting to serve subsidy children to make up those lost children.

So I think what we can do is also look at those private providers that have been adversely, unintentionally affected by transitional kindergarten. What are some ways that we can prop them up? Can we make accepting vouchers a little bit easier? There are some provisions we can change. What are some other pieces we could do?

And equally, as we look at the California state preschool program that we noted prior to a couple of years ago was only able to serve three and four year olds, they're able to serve two now.

Looking at either extending that sunset provision or making that permanent, that in itself would also help with some of those partnerships as well because they would be able to serve younger age children and as they got a little bit older, and if it met the needs of that family, then they would be able to go into transitional kindergarten.

So would that be considered like a backfill? Basically, because they're losing some of these kids that are going into transitional kindergarten. We would go younger, Some of these. Right, you would go younger.

It is a backfill. And I will say all of the policies that we've talked about today are all reacting to transitional transitional kindergarten expansion. None of these are proactive policy choices. These are all because we have seen the effects of transitional kindergarten taking away children, if you will. And so absolutely that is 100% what it is.

Because that is what programs are having to do now equally in budget and policy conversations. Especially when we're looking at family, friend and neighbor, we're looking at family childcare homes, we're looking at state preschool programs. The directive has been to serve younger age children.

And so absolutely it is a reaction to children being displaced and moved over into transitional kindergarten.

And then I'm not, forgive me, I just don't know. Is the pay for the two year olds the same as the kiddos that are older that are going to transitional kindergarten or is it less, is it more? Because I like the idea of the backfill almost like replacing one age for another, which is great.

But is the pay equal? Is it the same? Is it less than like in the state?

And I'll defer to my other. But it's a very complicated answer. And the reason it's a very complicated is because two year olds get reimbursed at different amounts depending on what program you are serving them in. So that's number one.

Number two is the ratios from the adult to child are different depending on what program you're looking at. So the answer is that it's very, very complicated.

Which also leans into the need to simplify some of these pieces because as you noted earlier, Assemblymember, serving three and four year olds is very different than serving a two year old. And it is not just as different as the child not being as verbal having to do all of these other things.

But it also requires different space requirements, different sized furniture, different expertise for those professionals that are working with those children. So there's a lot of different elements and the pay does completely differ depending on which program you are enrolled in.

Okay, thank you. Thank you very much for those answers. I mean, you know, when we did this, this Bill was done whenever it was.

I can't remember the year right now, but my frustration was from day one is the transition that we're going to be making and how are you not going to forget about the younger ones and facilities change and the workforce changes and you know, now we're down the path and so we need to make sure we come up with something that works.

Sarah, I have a couple just a question for you. How has the evolution of California mixed delivery system shaped the state's current approach to TK expansion and what lessons from earlier policy shifts should inform decisions as we go forward? And it's not meant to be loaded.

It's just like, you know, where do you see we're going to go? What's our vision and how can we all work together?

Yeah, and I think I could answer. That question through kind of what have been the actions, the legislative actions post. Expansion of TK, which has been around expanding the pool that's eligible for preschool. The preschool program used to be very focused on serving low income families, low income working families for the full day component.

And the state has been kind of. Expanding access to that. We saw that with the income eligibility. We see that with the age going. From serving primarily wanting to serve 4 year olds, 4 year olds were prioritized.

So then we were shifting to keep going, increasing the rate for three year olds, kind of putting, putting a fiscal incentive on, on serving the three year olds and now opening up that, that eligibility to 2 year olds. So we're seeing in the preschool program.

At least that more folks, the eligibility rules and the prioritization rules making that program more available to, to other folks.

That's a tough one there. Thank you. And it'll be interesting what we learned from all of our workshops we've had so far. And as some Member Nguyen said, we're just gathering more and more information to make sure that we can do the right thing for families.

Anina, from the provider perspective, what are the most urgent operational or workforce challenges child care programs face as TK expands and how should the state respond to avoid destabilizing the broader system?

We could probably spend the rest of the day talking about that question, but I will try to be as succinct as I can. I think expanding the two year old provision would be a big piece. First off, just to stabilize the programs that have already started to serve that younger age child. I would say.

A number of the incredible rate increases that we saw throughout Covid are incredible, but they need to be combined into a single rate rather than two separate rates. Just because one time only use for some funding means that you cannot give salary increases. Especially as you're looking at increasing specialization for younger age children.

I think looking at the different reimbursement rates that are given to 2 year olds and 3 year olds and making those uniform, that is making them higher to incentivize programs to be able to serve those two and three year olds, I think would be a very, very good policy as well as looking at.

Some facility funds to see if there are any funds available to do the costly transition from a preschool classroom to either an infant or a toddler classroom. So those would be some things that would be doable relatively easily.

When you say expand facilities, I just see the challenges. And like you said, we have to work in partnerships better when we're gonna make these work because we can't always depend upon the state to do it all, as you know, but we have to work as partnerships. And so I have a fear. I don't have a fear.

The challenge is how do we do that? So it's equitable. And so, you know, that's one of the things I'm gonna be keeping an eye on this year as well and accountable. You know, I want my 2 year olds to be taken care of, but I know how much it costs for a facility.

And I'm just noticing even in my community they're building a TK room right now and there's some grumblings with it. And now people are settled into it now that we've, we have a new norm that we didn't have before and we're not going to go back.

I don't see any way we're going to go back, but we've got to make sure it's equitable. So anyway. Okay, Patricia, one last question. I think I have what promising models or local examples have you seen where TK and community based programs Are effectively coordinating to create a truly mixed delivery approach. And what made those efforts successful?

I can think about a partnership that kirango had in the Bay Area with school districts. So basically they were declining enrollment and they were going to close the elementary school in San Jose. So they basically said, why don't we just come in and start serving younger kids?

And so kidango brought their expertise as a provider and they were able to use the facilities of the school district that was going to close because of declining enrollment.

And the other factor that they did is that they included other partners that it was not just childcare, but supports for parents and other local community that was very helpful for them. So it's more that the whole child. So it's not just because, as you know, kids need health, parents need support, mental health.

So that, you know, we went and visited in San Jose and it was like, zero, you know, it can work. Right. Especially. And one thing we didn't talk about too, is that there are less kids now in California. Right. So that's something we need to be aware of. So.

So there's less 4 year olds, less 3 year olds because of many factors. Kids, families are having less kids. People moved after Covid. So that's one more thing we have to put into the equation that we have to be aware that how do we balance the number of kids that need care and what's available out there?

So I think that that's a model that we should look into more and as we said, what are the key steps? So it happens more often. Right. And then we can, instead of closing the school, we can re, you know, purpose it. Right. But you need this, you will need investments for facilities and other. Right.

Other things that. Need to happen in order that to work.

Yeah. Assemblymember. If I could give an additional example, since the focus of the hearing today is on the Central Valley. Lindsay Unified school school district in the Central Valley has been very, very successful in making their transitional kindergarten and state preschool program work.

One of the ways that that has worked so successfully is they blend their day to be able to do full day, full year. The transitional kindergarten program and the California state preschool program are underneath the same division within that school district. And that has really helped to coordinate both the TEACH curriculum, the developmentally appropriate facility.

And that is an incredible model and has worked incredibly successfully for those families that need full day, full year care. So Lindsay Unified would be a really wonderful model to look at in the Central Valley.

Do they have a private daycare provider or is that what you're Seeing because it's all in one. Right. So you could drop off.

Both of the programs are offered by the school district. So the school district itself has a subsidized Title 5 contract. So it provides state preschool program and it also blends it with that transitional kindergarten program. So they do it seamlessly within themselves. So both of those contracts are held by the school district.

It is not a community based partnership like Patricia was mentioning. It's just another scenario.

So what's the youngest age that can get dropped off at that location? So that would be a 2 year old. Because that is what CSPP allows. Yeah, I guess I like that idea. But what about our home based providers? Right. Because that contract, my understanding is that it's a contract with the school.

So would it be like somebody who opened up a daycare for two year olds and they have the contract with the school and so they're on site there, or is that separate in their school employees?

It starts getting really, really complicated when you start talking about family, child care, home or family, friend and neighbor. There is almost no coordination with school districts. I would say there's probably little coordination at all with school districts. So that would be separate.

That would be those family childcare providers or in home providers providing a service and then going and literally picking up the child from transitional kindergarten and taking them home would be providing the care outside of those hours. But that would be. A conversation that is done on the family parent level.

There is no coordination on that school district level, if you will, with that level provider. Equally, unless the state preschool program is provided on site. Again, there's very, very little coordination with community based providers and school districts.

Yeah, I could see that model working, but I think about the in home providers and the small daycare, those. Right. Because we're seeing many of them shut down because of this shift. And if we can in some ways get them involved with this conversation too, so that way they can be a part of it. That would.

I just, you know, I don't. If we're talking about having to shift and change, I don't know that schools that would have enough money to reimagine and change it. So that way now they get a. Little upset with us. Exactly. Yes. Yes.

So I think while that's a great idea, and I agree that would be a seamless transition for the families and for the children and the child and whatnot. I just, I'm not sure that school districts would be able to make that change right away. Especially with, you know, changes in equipment, the classrooms, you know playgrounds and whatnot.

Yeah.

Assemblymember, I absolutely agree with you and I certainly do not think that it is a best case scenario to make our family childcare providers or our family, friends and neighbors do all of that. As we know, transportation is incredibly expensive. In regards to also liability insurance, all of those other things.

At this moment in time, transitional kindergarten can only be offered by school districts. There is no possibility for private pay centers, family child care, home in home learning, or state subsidized programs to be able to offer those services. So since there is such a limitation on who can provide transitional kindergarten, it's.

Unless the school district is willing to do that partnership, then it's just not going to be possible. Right.

With that, I would like to thank you very much for being here today. I think we'll sit here if you don't mind waiting a minute. We'll do some public comment. If anybody would like to come up to the microphone. You have a minute to speak?

I know it's quick, but if you could express your concerns, your challenges, your vision, we would love to hear it. So come on up. Would you mind saying your name and if you're affiliated with any group, please. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair and. Members, Pamela Gibbs, representing the Los Angeles County Office of Education. I know you have a number of panels today, but I did want to take the opportunity to thank the Committee for this work and for addressing the child care needs. We heard you speak about the mixed delivery system.

And so the reason I'm here today is to speak on behalf of Laco, who has been providing supports to. To all of our local education agencies who are involved in the transition and dealing with younger children, as well as moving towards the mixed delivery system.

Today we provide all of these services, including professional development, as we already are participating in early childhood education ourselves, and we can help them. And so we have put in a request for. For funding to help us to continue that work. That is the planning and implementation grants that are about to expire, but were extended.

So thank you to the Legislature and to the Administration for extending the encumbrance dates, but we feel we will still need funding in the future. We will send a letter to the Committee and again, thank you for this important work.

Our priority is to serve all children, but we know that the babies need a good head start and an early start. And we appreciate the work of the panel as well. Thank you.

Thank you very much for your comments.

Welcome. Thank you. My name is Leilani Reed. I'm a FFN childcare provider from LA County and I'm a proud member of CCPU and I've been providing care for over 20 plus years. Every day. I care for children.

Whose family work very long hours and they need family child care during the times when centers or schools are not open. This is a real reason why. The mixed delivery system means something to the families. And to all providers. Providers need funding support from the state to support all child care options for families.

Families need family child care, FFN care as well as centers because all options matters. Choice only works when the state demonstrate respect for family child care providers and all providers by funding a child care system that cares about working family. Family depends on family child care providers. So. We need rates that reflect the true cost of care.

Oh, my eyes are bad. The true cost of care. So our. Businesses can remain open and to serve families. And we are pro family and pro true cost of care for family child care providers and all providers. Thank you for your, for your time.

You're very welcome. And I understand you can't see. Yeah. Hello.

Can I just say thank you? Thank you for. Ma'am. I just want to say thank you. You're doing the work as a parent, we appreciate those that take care of our babies and take care of them as if they are their own.

I can tell that you're one of those that every child that you care for, they're your own babies. I just want to say thank you.

Yeah, and it's just. An important. Partnership so that you guys can recognize, you know, what the rates are and to collaborate together and to see how the system can work and how the care is needed across the board for a lot of the families, you know. So it's very important. Thank you. Thank you.

You're welcome.

Good afternoon, Madam Co Chairs and Assemblymember Schiavo. Rosanna Carvacho Elliott here on behalf of the Early Care and Education Consortium. I'm not sure how I follow that, but I will do my best.

The Early Care and Education Consortium is a nonprofit alliance of multi state, multi site, high quality child care providers serving almost, excuse me, over 65,000 children in the state at 460 centers. So we are center based providers. As you've heard from the speakers here today especially.

Ms. Boothie did a great job explaining the unintended consequences that we have seen in the child care space due to the expansion of transitional kindergarten. And there are just a couple things that I wanted to highlight.

You know, as children have gone from community based providers like my members to the public schools, we have seen of course, as Ms. Boothie also said, families leave the community based providers and go to TK. And then that has also meant that we have classrooms that are sitting vacant. Right.

I know there's been a discussion today already and there may be more later about facilities. We have facilities that are sitting dark because we have lost four year olds and have had to close those classrooms. You've also heard a little bit about the challenges with licensing and trying to shift to younger children.

So there's a lot of things here. But I just wanted to also highlight that in addition to these closed classrooms, losing four year olds, it's also meant that the costs have gone up for infant and toddler care because the care is so much more expensive and the staffing costs, as you can imagine as even some way.

Assembly Member Nguyen talked about the challenges of serving these younger children and how much harder it is and that we do have lower ratios which are rightfully so given the young age of these children. So we just want to do continue to work with the Committee and find solutions.

Unfortunately, I don't think there are any easy solutions to this problem.

But we need to do something to ensure that we don't continue to lose the community based providers that have cared for our children for decades and have those closed classrooms when there's been the investment and Assembly Member Aguarkur, you talked about investing with the private sector should not be the state. Right.

There's been millions of dollars of investment in these facilities and we shouldn't let them go to waste. So look forward to continuing this conversation and working with all of you. Thank you.

Can I ask you a question? I'm sorry, so you had mentioned that. Right. You're losing the four year olds, but. One of the ideas is backfilling, trading out the four year olds for the two year olds, making the licensings easier.

And since you're here representing all of those centers up and down the state here, I wanted to kind of get your input. Would that be something that you think your membership would be interested in and you feel like that would be a good start in the right direction?

Well, I have to be honest, this Member, we have been hearing this since the TK enrollment started. Right? Just take the younger kids. Just take the younger kids. We did that the first year. Right. And there's not an. We have taken all the three year olds that are out there.

We've taken all the two year olds right there. There's an a finite number of children that we can quote unquote backfill with. And then We've also heard today, which is true about, you know, the declining population of children. And so I don't know that that is an end all, be all.

The other thing I think needs to be kept in mind is the reality of the rates and the voucher slots there and subsidy slots. There's a finite number of those slots. We have thousands, hundreds, maybe millions of families on that waiting list. And so there are families that need the care that qual for those subsidy families.

And I will say that the, you know, about 40, I'm sorry, the majority of my Members take subsidy and some of them even take 40 to 60% subsidy. So it's not that we're not willing to take the subsidy children.

It's the fact that there aren't enough subsidies out there for families who are eligible for them to truly get that care.

So more vouchers. More vouchers is what we're looking for. More vouchers, especially if they're.

Well, of course, it's always more money. Right?

Yeah. Sorry. Yeah, no more vouchers and probably a higher percentage in pay because caring for two year olds is going to be a lot more than caring for a four year old.

Yeah. And I think Nina talked about the increase in pay that the state preschool program received for some of the younger kids. The other programs didn't receive that as well, you know. So Nina also talked about parity. Right. That's along the same lines of that. Parity. Making sure all providers are lifted because they're all struggling, frankly. Yeah.

Thank you. Sure. Okay. Thank you for all those that participated on the first panel. Before we get started, I'd like to introduce my colleagues that are here today. Assemblymember Schiavo and Assemblymember Stefani. But I'd like you to do your comments if you don't, if you have anything to say. But I know she has. Go ahead. Pilar.

Hi, good afternoon. Very happy to be here. Also, as a parent who knows how important it is to have a safe, loving place for your kiddo to go, you know, I've had an opportunity to go and do a day in the life at multiple childcare centers in my district and it is eye opening and frankly exhausting.

And I am really grateful for all of the work that you all do because it is very hard to keep up with toddlers and babies. All day long they were racing me on the tricycles and I finally had to just give in and, and say that they had won. You win already.

We don't need to go for a 10th time. But, you know, but. But through the conversations I had with providers, I heard a lot of what has been discussed today. You know, one provider that I met with said that she basically does not take any pay.

She's not being paid for the work that she's doing, and she's actually paying the kids out of her own pocket. I mean, this is insane. Obviously, you cannot work for free and you cannot pay to work. And that is really the reality of, you know, some providers.

And that means that we are falling short of our job as a state. And, you know, I know there's been a long time promise to increase the slots to increase pay. It's hard budget times, and how we figure that out right now is difficult.

But we really have to prioritize this work because we know that not only is it the right thing to do, other states are creating free childcare for their states, and California should be leading in this space and not falling behind.

We have to figure this out because we know not only is that what's right for kids and that's what's right for families, but that's also what's right for women who are trying to get back to work. It's right for those families who need that extra income.

And I've been in a situation in my family where we've decided for my spouse to not work because we couldn't afford childcare. And it meant a whole other income that our family did not have because of that.

And I know a lot of families have to make these hard decisions that they can't afford to go back to work, and it shouldn't be like that.

And we know that there's economic benefits to our state and to our communities when families who, you know, parents who want to be working are able to work so on so many fronts, I think that this, you know, is really a priority.

And our chair has been an incredible leader in the women's caucus to make sure that child care is consistently and constantly prioritized for us as a women's caucus. And we have been really trying to move the ball forward. We are committed to continuing to do that this coming year.

And really, the voices that are here today raising the issues that you're facing on the front lines of. Of. Of our child care ntk, you know, challenges is really, really important for us to hear, to be able to fuel that fight. So thank you so much.

Thank you. Want to say anything?

Yeah. Well, it's. It's a pleasure to be here. I'm Catherine Stefani. I represent Assembly District 19, which is the west side of San Francisco in parts of San Mateo County. And I don't think I could have said it better than. I ditto to everything you said.

But, you know, I am the first mother that has ever represented San Francisco and not northern San Mateo county because we had the amazing Jackie Spear. But as a mother, my kids are now 20 and 16.

I know the childcare challenges that so many people face, and it's one of the reasons why I wanted to be part of the select Committee. So I thank you, majority Leader, for engaging us today in this important conversation. I look forward to hearing from everybody.

Thank you very much. So thank you to the first panel. And I'd like to bring up my second panel. We will be welcoming Dr. Erica Eva Colman. I'm sure she'll clear that up. A parent speaker, Raquel, who's a parent speaker, Sarah Bachez, Children Now. And Philip Fisher, professor at Stanford Graduate School of Education. Welcome, welcome, welcome.

And we're missing one person.

So please go ahead and go. I believe Mr. Fisher may or may not be here today.

I am here.

Are you? Oh.

I am. I'm on Zoom.

I hear him. There he is. Can everybody see the screen? Yes. Okay, that's all that matters. Okay. So welcome. And if you'd like to start.

Perfect. Good afternoon, Chairmember Sara Bachez Director of Education Policy and Advocacy for Children Now. We're a nonpartisan whole child research, policy and advocacy organization dedicated to improving children's health, education and well being. In California, There are over 3 million children under the age of five and they're one of the most diverse populations in the country.

While we've made meaningful investments, including the creation of transitional kindergarten and the increased funding in early learning and care, access remains deeply unequal, especially for infants, toddlers and three year olds. Research shows that two years of preschool have significantly more impact than one, particularly for children from low income families.

Yet far too many California children still miss out on this critical opportunity. Our state has begun taking significant and meaningful steps in expanding access to early learning through tk.

This commitment to offer publicly funded preschool to all four year olds is a historic movement, one that recognizes the power of early childhood education to advance equity, strengthen school readiness, and support families. The state framed its approach of building a universal preschool program with TK as a critical part of that vision.

However, the way we fund TK relative to the rest of the early learning system is yet not aligned with the developmental needs of young children or the diverse needs of families. In practice, it risks perpetuating inequities even as we make progress towards universal access.

As you determine paths to solve the affordability crisis, we want to bring back the focus to children what they need developmentally, what their families need to access care, and what the systems, state agencies, providers, educators, school districts and communities need to ensure every child thrives across race, income, language, ability and geography.

Young children flourish in environments that are developmentally appropriate, culturally and linguistically responsive, and rich in relationships. Family likewise make early learning decisions based on an array of practical and cultural considerations, not just availability. Research consistently shows the four dimensions of shaping family choices are effort and accessibility.

Families struggle to find care that's easy to locate, understand and secure, especially those navigating poverty, language barriers, or special needs. Affordability cost remains one of the strongest drivers in this decision, even when free options exist. But wraparound care is just not affordable or it's non existent. Not all TK programs are full day, full year.

That is the critical issue to address to make it a viable option for most vulnerable families. Developmental fit families prioritize small group settings, culturally aligned environments, continuity of caregivers and settings that match their children's temperament and needs. Kiddos have big emotions. Kids need to feel and be seen and to be able to play.

So making sure that we make these settings kid appropriate and for them is what's always critical in making sure that families feel that support and then work and logistical needs. In a world of unconstrained choice, families would not all choose the same setting. A universal preschool system must reflect this reality.

TK is a vital component to universal preschool, but it cannot on its own meet the full range of children and families needs. A strong mixed delivery system is essential. We see this clearly in jurisdictions that have built UPK successfully. I'll give you two examples.

Washington, D.C. they use their mixed delivery model that includes preschool districts, charter schools and community based providers. This model enables exceptionally high enrollment, maintains family choice and upholds shared standards. Colorado's UPK allows any qualified provider, school districts, private centers, family childcare homes and Head Start to participate.

That flexibility helped Colorado rapidly scale capacity and jump from number 27 to number three nationally and in serving four year olds in just one year. Today UPK serves roughly 70% of four year olds and 15% of three year olds, an approach that mitigated disruption to the private providers as UPK rolled out.

These models demonstrate that the path to true universality is done through leveraging the full ecosystem of early learning providers, funding streams and models. Children now believes that we could strengthen our own state's UPK vision by rebalancing investments across the early learning system so opportunity does not depend on geography or setting.

Advancing a genuine mixed delivery approach drawing from successful models with shared standards, streamlined funding and authentic family choice Incorporating Head Start and Early Head Start, more intentionally integrating their comprehensive supports into a broader UPK system and better leveraging federal funds and resources Adopting an alternative methodology that fully funds the cost of care in all settings including livable wages and compensation benefits for all early educators that aligns to the TK to 12 education system.

We need parity centering TK implementation on developmental needs by ensuring age appropriate classrooms, ratios, facilities, play based content such as alignment with the CSPP curriculum and finally designing enrollment systems that reflect real family decision making including logistical by providing full day full year care to ensure working families can genuinely access TK with cultural, developmental and economic considerations.

California has made major strides and TK is a cornerstone of our progress. The recommendations above do not replace this vision. They complete and strengthen it. They ensure TK expansion contributes to a coherent early childhood system where every child has access to safe, nurturing and environmental educational environments with skilled and supportive adults.

Thank you for your leadership and opportunity to share our perspective. I have copies here just in case, as well as examples of other states. We'd like those after we get done here.

I'd like to now hear from the parents.

Hi, good afternoon. My name is Raquel. Sorry, a little nervous. And I'm here from the Central Valley. I am a mother of two and drove all the way from Bakersfield to talk to you about two different things. One is the positive impact of the daycare that my kids had.

Now my kids are 22 and, I'm sorry, 24 and 26 years old now. But the daycare lady that I chose was I wanted my kids to go where they could do like more one on one interaction.

And I knew that if it was a center, sometimes, you know, the staff ratio to the kids is probably larger than a family home daycare. Plus I wanted my kids to feel more like they were at home that they were.

I went from, excuse me, from having family Members take care of my kids to having to put them into a daycare center. And I was very worried at first because, you know, nobody can take care of your kids better than your mother in law, your mom, your aunt, you know. So I did take them to a lady.

It was a mom and. Mom and daughter duo that took care of my kids. Mercedes, the older lady was Carmen. And my kids called her grandma from the first moment. My son was six months old and they went to daycare until he graduated from junior high. That's great. And they went from.

They used to live in Lamont, which was a little town, and they moved about 20 minutes away to another city. And guess what? I moved with them. I mean, I would not leave my daycare lady for nothing, you know, because I know, thank you. That when I went to work, I. I knew my kids were safe.

I knew my kids were cared for. And you can tell when you drop off a kid at school at a daycare center, if they're fighting you tooth and nail and they're crying, you know, that they're not, you know, they don't feel comfortable.

And my kids, it was funny because, you know, I would go and drop them off and they'd be like, bye, mom, or whatever, you know, plus this lady, they didn't just provide the care for my children, but they were family Members. I remember one Christmas they gave us a whole composition of moments. My kids Did.

Including my son breaking a dozen eggs. He was with the refrigerator open and broke a dozen eggs, you know. But that was just the type of atmosphere that I thought was great and my kids learned. Plus, everybody kept telling me how my kids were so. Well, you know, they'd say thank you and pleased and educated.

And I said, well, I can't take all the credit for that. That was my childcare provider that would teach them the manners, you know what I mean? And just love them as if they were the own. My kids, like I said, are now old. They both moved out to Cerritos, which is in the Bay Area.

And every time that they come, especially for Mother's Day, you better believe that one of their stops is with Marci. Zero, sweet. Yeah, they always take her flowers for Mother's Day.

And she's not even a mom herself, but she's a mom of all her daycare kids, you know, and the fact that my kids still go over there is. To me, you know, it's very emotional because I know my kids were loved and they were cared for.

And even though I don't need child care anymore for them because they're older, I just think that the people that do childcare do deserve the best and should get paid accordingly because I know I used to have pay and that was the one payment that I did not mind having to pay because I think I also did a better job for my employer knowing that my kids were in a safe space and I didn't have to worry about them.

So I think it kind of works both ways. Our caregivers are what lets this world turn because we all have children and we all need care for them. And sometimes we don't have family Members that will help us out and they're an extension of our own personal family is my thought. Thank you for your time.

Thank you for driving all the way up here in the fog. It wasn't too bad, but we appreciate it. We'll have some questions soon. Thank you.

Okay. Welcome. Good afternoon. Can you hear me? Yeah. Okay. Good afternoon, Chair and Members. My name is Erica Eva Colmenares and thank you for the opportunity to speak today. So I was born and raised in Caracas, Venezuela, and I immigrated to this country at the age of 18.

I am a proud resident of Oakland, California, and I'm a former elementary school teacher. Currently, I'm an associate professor of liberal studies teacher preparation at San Jose State University, specializing in multilingual learners and social justice oriented teacher education. But today I. I'm here primarily as a parent I have two children.

A six year old in kindergarten who previously attended TK last year and a four year old who missed the TK Cutoff by six weeks. And those six weeks changed everything for my family. My eldest daughter, who attended TK In a dual language Spanish immersion school in the Oakland Unified School District.

And she I witnessed firsthand how transformative the TK Experience was for her as a pandemic baby. She needed the structured, the scaffolded social emotional development that transitional kindergarten provides.

TK Gave her the chance to learn what school is, how to be a student, to build the stamina, to make it through the end to the end of the day without having to take a nap, to build her emotional resilience and to find belonging and care in a classroom community.

When she transitioned to kindergarten this year, the difference and I go into classrooms a lot as part of my job. The difference between students who attended TK Versus those who didn't was stark.

While many of my daughter's classmates were still adjusting to school and learning how to do school, my daughter was ready to learn she could focus on academic growth because TK had already given her that foundation. But here's what TK Also gave my family beyond my daughter's development.

It gave me, a Latina immigrant, a career in this country as a tenure track professor. I'm required to publish research in order to keep my job.

And I can say with absolute certainty that I would have not earned tenure without TK it was not until my daughter could attend a free, high quality early learning environment from 8:30 to 2:30 plus aftercare Monday through Friday, that I finally had the mental capacity, the financial reserves, and the time to be productive in my own research.

Before TK I was drowning not just financially, but cognitively and emotionally as well. And so when I first learned that I had been granted tenure and promotion this past June, the first people I wanted to thank were my daughter's TK Teachers, Maestra Amara and Maestra Lindsay. And now let me tell you about my youngest son, Julian.

So Julian missed the TK cutoff by six weeks. And because of this, we now pay $1,800 per month, or $21,600 per year for childcare in the Bay Area. And we are incredibly fortunate. My partner and I have advanced degrees, and thanks to tenure, I have now stable employment for the the foreseeable future that provides health insurance.

But even from this very privileged position, the financial burden is crushing, the anxiety is constant, and I think every day about families who don't have Access to what? We have families for whom these costs don't just cause stress, but impossible choices. Because there's also another painful irony.

Even though TK Is supposed to be universal, it still isn't for many. At my neighborhood public school, for example, there are three classroom sections for every grade level. There's three classroom sections for kindergarten, three for first grade, three for second, etc. Etc. But there's only one section for TK only one.

Right now, I'm on pins and needles waiting to hear. I just turned in the application last week, waiting to hear my son will get a TK Spot for next year. If he doesn't, we will have to continue paying. We. We will continue with that anxiety.

So my family continues to be proof that even universal TK hasn't expanded enough to reach everyone who needs it free. High quality early public education shouldn't be a lottery. It opens doors, allowing parents and families like mine to work, providing financial and mental relief and giving children the opportunity to learn and grow in a community.

Raising a child takes a village, as we all know, and TK Created that village for us. My daughter thrived in TK And I can only hope that my son Julian and all other California residents get the same chance as well.

So thank you for the opportunity to present, and I'm happy to respond to questions when time is great.

Thank you very much. We'll now move on to Professor Philip Fisher. And welcome from wherever you are.

Thank you. I'm phoning in from Palo Alto. My schedule didn't allow me to be there in person today, but I'm very happy to be here, and thank you for the invitation to the Committee.

I have some slides that I'd like to present, and I believe Dania is going to be helping to get those up so I can share them with you. Great. I want to talk to you about data that we've been gathering in the state of California for the last three years via a survey called the Rapid Survey.

And in particular, I want to talk to you about data that we've been collecting on a number of occasions about parents awareness of an enrollment in TK in the state of California. And I'll make some recommendations as well. Next slide, please. There we go.

So the Rapid Survey is a survey that's been ongoing outside of the state of California since 2020. It's a monthly survey. Every month we gather information from parents, and in the state of California, we do this statewide to be as close to representative of the population of the state as possible in terms of geography.

In terms of race and ethnicity and in terms of income in California, we distribute the survey in eight languages. It's an online survey. It takes about 15 minutes to complete. We compensate people $5 for their participation. Let's move on to the next slide, please.

So, as I said, we have specific data from California parents with children age 5 and under about their knowledge of TK and about enrollment. So let's move to the next slide and we'll get into some of that data.

So the good news in terms of awareness of TK is that a large proportion, the majority of families in the state of California are aware of tk.

Nevertheless, over one third in our survey, which again is representative of the state, were either unaware or unclear that it's an option for their family with a child age 5 or under.

I also want to note that there's a decrease in awareness since we asked the same set of questions in 2023 when there was much about double the amount of parents who were aware compared to unaware. And especially this is concerning given that the eligibility and the number of programs continue to expand for children across the state.

Next slide. Perhaps the greatest concern that we have, and this is mirrored in research that's been done in a number of other locations as well outside of the state, is that awareness is lowest for the lower income families in our sample. Middle income families about 10% more, 74% are aware of it as an option.

And higher income families, who are the primary ones in terms of proportions, who are enrolling, the awareness is higher. And some of what we think is going on is that the way in which families access information about TK varies depending on these demographics. So let's look at the next slide.

So again, if we ask people, would they be likely to use tk, it's interesting to note that a large portion of families, when asked that question, say that they would be.

And the other thing that's interesting about this, and we've seen this in some of our other data as well, is that the likelihood of use is highest among both low income and high income families and actually substantially lower for middle income families.

And so again, the question of what can be done to make sure that each and every family with a child has the opportunity to learn about and use TK and enroll in it is something that seems to be really critical to making the TK system more equitable, including letting people know what it is, who's eligible, and that it comes at no cost.

Next slide, please. One of the things that's particularly noteworthy in our data is that if you look at low income versus middle and higher income, when people say that they do know about tk, the means in which they're learning about it is quite variable.

And we see this true not just for TK, but in our overall survey for public health issues and other issues, that a lot of lower income families learn about these kinds of things through friends or family versus middle and upper income family. Well, often families will often hear about these kinds of things through news and social media.

And so I think the idea that we should just be comfortable with the fact that the information's out there and people are choosing to enroll or not is probably a bit of a misunderstanding in terms of how people typically get their information about programs like TK. Next slide, please.

The other thing, and we heard this in the remarks of parents, and I cannot underscore this enough, TK as a structure works well for some parents. It works especially well for parents that need care between standard working hours and also have the ability to fill in for the hours that aren't covered.

But as you can see from these quotes, which we also collect along with the quantitative data, there's a lot of concern about the structure and whether the TK that's available is actually going to fit for working families. And this is particularly a concern for lower income households.

In addition, as we heard from the other speakers, the many lower income families and other demographics would prefer to have their children in a childcare and early education setting that's close to home, where the same language that's spoken in the home is spoken. Similar foods that are served in the home are served.

And so the idea that we have an equitable arrangement through the public TK system is probably something that needs some reconsideration. Let me move on to the last slide or set of slides here.

So next slide is actually not from our survey, but from work that was done by the UC center on Equity and Excellence in Early Childhood. They have data in particular from LA County. And you can see similarly there that what they're seeing is that there have been increased enrollments in TK in the county in General.

But the places where the majority of the enrollment has increased by the most substantial amounts are affluent, predominantly white neighborhoods. And so you can see that this system, even in and of itself, has amplified some of the inequities that we heard about from some of the other speakers in terms of affordability and cost.

So my last slide is just a couple of suggestions that I think should be taken into consideration in thinking about a more equitable TK and Universal Pre K system in the state of California.

The easiest step that could be taken is to think about disseminating information about who's eligible and about what TK entails and how to enroll via means that are more commonly used amongst those who are under enrolling in and underutilizing that in and of itself. We don't know for sure that that would make a difference.

It may or may not, but it's relatively straightforward to think about ways to have public information campaigns really be distributed through much more local community networks as opposed to kind of large public service kind of programs.

Second, and I think this is perhaps the most important of all that we've already heard from other speakers that really mixed delivery models through all of the research that's been done on Pre K across the country seem to have much better success at having equitable enrollment.

Allowing parents to choose whether they want their children enrolled in public school a year sooner or whether they would prefer to be able to get care in community settings in home and center based licensed care providers, in addition to having the choice of public school is undoubtedly the biggest step that needs to be taken.

And our center sees very much that. Introducing Universal TK was a huge win for parents in the state of California, but it was an insufficient win.

And so the question that we pose is how to make things continuously better, how data like ours can continue to drive this improvement process because we can learn about what's working and what's not working and for whom and make progressive changes to make things more equitable.

But we really need to pay attention, as you are doing in this hearing, to the voices of parents and the voices of the early care and education workforce in order to make this system the best that it can be. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Thank you, panel. I'm opening up to questions. Do we have any questions right now. Seeing no question. We're going to public comment, but I'd like to ask CDE to come up. I think they had some comments they wanted to make and you're more than welcome to be the first one today.

And if you have any questions, would you like to sit at the table? Sure, sure. Come on up. You're part of our partnership. We can't ignore you. Welcome. Thank you for coming by today. We appreciate it.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak here on this. I'm getting a little tangled here. Pardon me, on this issue. It's very important to us at the Department of Education. I'm Stephen Profter.

I'm the Director of the Early Education Division at the California Department of Education and I'm speaking here on behalf of State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Herman. We appreciate the conversation that you all are talking about today. Like I said, it's very important to us.

We oversee both the transitional kindergarten expansion as well as the California State Preschool program, which you've heard a little bit about today. We know that effective learning before kindergarten, whether that's in a TK classroom, state preschool, Head Start, community based program, it's very important for children.

Strengthens early literacy, language, math, creativity and social emotional skills, especially for children who are furthest from opportunity. Our California's UPK system, including TK is. Including TK. The California State Preschool program and our community based partners works best when we view UPK as a shared opportunity.

And that shared opportunity is to ensure that every child has access to a high quality preschool experience. TK plays a critical role in, in that, in expanding access for four year olds across the state, many of whom wouldn't have access otherwise to a, a high quality preschool opportunity.

And it takes some of the pressure off of the licensed statewide capacity which continues to fall short of family needs. So just as a point that, in 2023, California only had enough licensed childcare spaces to provide access to about 35% of the 2.5 million children birth to 5 or birth to 6. In California.

You heard this a little bit earlier, but in TK last year enrolled about 178,000, which is about 54% of the eligible four year olds. From that year, we've also seen state preschool pivot to serve more three year old children.

So just as a point on that, we are, from the time 2021 through 2025, enrollment of 3 year olds in state preschool has increased 77% at a time when overall enrollment for state preschool only increased 8%. So you know, so we know that three year olds are a substantial part of that increase.

Heard this a little bit earlier, but another intersecting point or a thing to consider is population decline, the decline of young children in California. We've got about 400,000 fewer children birth to five in California than we did in 2020.

How many?

400,000 fewer children birth to 5. So it's about 16% decrease.

So there's, you know, you could see some silver lining in that, is that family, there are more spaces, but getting families into those spaces, I think is some of what you've heard here is a challenge to support progress in UPK and support ongoing Collaboration at the local level. I think you heard that on the first panel.

We are working on implementing recommendations from the UPK Mix Delivery Quality and Access workgroup which the Legislature funded and required CDE to do in 2023. I think starting 2023 and we wrapped up in 2024 and there were some cost neutral recommendations for improving and strengthening mix delivery.

We'd be happy to share that report with you as a follow up if helpful. Just beyond as I wrap up here, beyond the recommendations we'd highlight three important grants.

You heard it in public comment on the from the first panel that had there was these grants for planning and implementation that had one time funding that were focused on funding various planning and implementation activities around upk both in you know, for the with the focus on UPK and the focus on mixed delivery, those grants really did work.

They do work well together. Most counties have funded UPK coordinators and some have even funded preschool to third grade alignment coordinators. But one of the amazing things that these coordinators do is they help convene preschool programs. I've seen it firsthand.

I've been able to see a few counties bringing convening TK educators, state preschool educators, family child care, Head Start, really the ecosystem in the county to support things around professional development planning for implementation of upkill.

Just I would point out that these funds are set to expire in 2028 and I think the theme that we're hearing here is that we have more to do. So one thing that could be done is an expansion of these dollars. Beyond when they expire in 2028. And I think that's it.

Thank you for your time and we're happy to answer any questions or talk further as it's appropriate. And I'm also joined by, sorry Virginia early from Early.

Great. Thank you very much. You brought this up. The 2028 funding. Do you see that's we're going to be able to meet our goals and it's going to be implemented based upon the timeframe that we have here.

So the purpose of the funding so the funding came in a couple of buckets. So there was universal pre K planning and implementation dollars. Some of the deliverables from that were LEAs had to develop plans. And then implement those plans. So those plans were developed in 2022-23 and they were posted publicly.

So all LEAs who received those dollars had to do that. But there are other things. But beyond planning, there's data reporting that they due to the Department of Education, we publish reports on what's in there. We'd be happy to share those as well.

But, you know, doing things like speaking to staffing capacity, speaking to facilities, you know, two of the big things that, you know, we heard early on, bodies and potties, right? So facilities that had accessible toilets and things of that nature, but also supporting curriculum, supporting developmentally appropriate practices.

Those planning and implementation dollars also support went to county offices of education to, in part, convene these, you know, convene these mixed delivery or these UPK mixed delivery. You know, gatherings in counties as professional development. And then there were mixed. There was mixed delivery funding, which counties. The two grants were required to work together.

And that's really where we saw a lot of the inclusion of, you know, Head Start Family Child Care, those partnerships that. Don't always happen naturally. It really takes great leadership. It was included in statute that those partnerships were required to happen. And so we did.

We saw planning and the development of local plans, inclusive of voices across the mixed delivery system. And then, yeah, so I think, just to your point, right, the work is ongoing. After the fun sunset, we will lose.

Some of the capacity that we've built around having UPK coordinators to support those developmentally appropriate practices, curriculum selection and things of that nature.

Anybody have any other questions? Any questions? Thank you. Anyone else would like to do public comment while we have. Welcome, welcome, welcome.

Good afternoon. Thank you. Chair and Committee, I'm Elle Grant from the California Alliance of Child and Family Services. The California alliance represents over 200 nationally accredited nonprofit community based organizations in all 58 counties impacting over 1 million of children, California's most vulnerable children, youth and families each year.

I just want to briefly highlight the statewide insurance crisis that's impacting foster youth and youth serving providers which directly undermines our goals for educational access, choice and equity for families.

Unsustainable insurance premiums are devastating operations at foster family agencies and short term residential therapeutic programs and licensed care facilities that directly threaten the critical support system for thousands of children, including medically fragile youth, LGBTQ teens and high needs students.

Because of the liability insurance premiums that have become unaffordable or unavailable, we're seeing programs destabilize foster youth, lose placements, transportation, behavioral health supports, and the consistent caregiving that they need in order to access early learning opportunities like TK So we can't really consider creating equitable access if providers who care for our most vulnerable children can't stay open.

So we just urge the Committee to state to consider that the insurance crisis is an important equity issue and to support solutions that keep youth serving providers stable so that foster children can meaningfully benefit from these critical early learning opportunities.

Thank you very much. Welcome.

Hello everyone. My name is Paloma Corona and I'm a family childcare provider from the Los Angeles area. I have been caring for children for over 16 years and I opened my in homes about six years ago. I am already I know how to keep my business open for families.

It takes paying rent, mortgage insurance, food supplies, paying assistance benefits, and it requires long hours. That it is invisible for labor that no one sees. For the cost of care model to truly work, real numbers must be reflective of what family child care providers and all providers live with true business codes. And the coast takes care.

For mixed age groups. And when the new rate structure is implemented that reflects the reality of family child care providers. Providers like me can survive above the water and families can benefit by having choices within a mixed delivery system.

And also, let's just all remember the family child care providers are ready to create partnership with the other institutions just to benefit the families and children that we serve. And we remember we have open schedule, we have many other. Transportation and we're here to support the families more than anything and make sure that the children are thriving.

Thank you. Thank you.

Welcome.

We are here and doing Eve. If I can survive. Okay. Sorry. Okay. Through the legislation and then negotiation. The providers of. Child care.

Okay, go ahead. Go ahead. I'm hearing it on my right ears. Well, but go ahead.

Okay, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay.

And providers of child care. Assured the protection. Providers and receiving less. Less pay through the new structure of tariffs. This protection is key for the providers. And it's a promise. That a state made. The state made. The new model should push us forward.

No hacatras.

Not backwards.

And the family care providers should not be punished for caring for California's children.

Nosotros Homos El Simiento De SOS NINOs Quebec.

We are the future, the foundation of this children. The future of our nation.

Gracias porres cucharme.

Thank you for listening.

Good afternoon. My name is Charlotte Neal and I'm a large 24 hour family child care provider from Sacramento county and I'm also a member of CCPU. I've been a provider for 27 years and I care for children that have many different needs.

The new rate structure must consider that family child care providers open their doors to all children, including children with special needs, exceptional and severe needs that require transportation and all at all hours.

The base rates should be strong enough to keep our businesses open while their enhanced rates cover the cost connected with additional work of caring for children with extra needs. The family child care providers in my community may close if the base rate is too low and does not reflect the true cost of care.

If this happens, families lose stability and they lose their caregiver who is oftentimes the only available care option they have when they work non traditional hours, unexpected overtime. We call upon the Legislature to ensure significant base rates as well as enhanced rates for additional costs we incur.

Family child care providers are one of the backbones of this economy for California. Thank you.

Thank you. Welcome.

Buenas tardes. Mi nombres. Grandes El Condado De Maderas.

And for parents that. The transport that I provide is. From school. Time. The greater cost is the personnel additional. That I have to pay. To care for the girls during the day. While I pick up others. Some providers.

Of home health of home child care.

Antenido que dejar.

Have had to. Stop offering services.

Transporte and suprogramma.

With transportation in their program. Due to these additional costs. These tariffs based. On real time costs of caring. Should include transport. So that families can. Count on the support of who needs it.

Thank you.

Muchas gracias.

Thank you very much.

Welcome. Thank you. I have a cold. I'm sorry. Drag a glass of water. Hi, my name is Marianas and I from Madera County and I'm a proud childcare provider for 14 years providing care for our kiddos. And I'm a proud member of CCPU.

Costs like rent, food supplies, staff pay, benefits and insurance that are associated with family child care are constantly changing.

For family child care providers to be stable in our jobs and run our programs, the cost of care model and our rates based on this must be updated regularly so that it reflects changing cost, not the cost from decades in the past.

This select Committee is the type of stakeholder process that will keep the model honest and families can continue assessing the family child care they to rely on. Thank you very much for hearing my.

We're just happy that you're here. Thank you very much and thank you for what you're doing for the children. Thank you.

Oh, thank you.

Welcome.

Buenas tardes. Angelica Baragan.

Good afternoon. My name is Angelica Barrera. I'm sorry. Madera County.

Member of the CCPU. Writer for six years.

Parte De Unsalario Houston.

Fair salary. Taking care of the girls and my community. With too much frequency. Girls more than 40 hours a week. Mention the sacrifice. Even though the crows they are not under my care. Californian workers. So our earnings are so low. Per week.

Gracias.

Thank you for listening.

Thank you very much.

Welcome. Hello, my name is Gloria Garcia. I'm a daycare provider. I've been a daycare provider for 16 years. I'm a large daycare provider and I'm located in San Joaquin county and I'm a member of the CCPU. The families that that are in my care have all types of jobs requiring all types of hours.

These are the jobs that they find and can help them. One in three kids in childcare are there about outside of 6am to 6pm on weekdays and weekends. But to be open early mornings and nights and weekends has its extra cost. Hiring staff to support at these hours cost more.

It is not safe for me to work around the clock and still be able to focus on children safely and education. It's critical. California now invests in ensuring that providers like me get paid higher rates to cover our higher costs for each of these hours outside of regular weekend hours. California kids and our economy depend on it.

Great. Thank you so very much.

Thank you very much and I appreciate all of you from the Central Valley for showing up today. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Jacqueline Brado. I'm a large family child care provider. I'm from Kern County and I'm also a CCPU member. I've been caring for children more than 11 years. Providers are waiting 21 days or longer after they submit their timesheets to get paid for work we have already performed. That is not right.

It creates anxieties and fears about stability that essential family child care providers should not be faced with prospective pay, which is how private paying families pay providers, will bring stability to the lives of family child care providers and dignity to this work that we do.

We can pay our staff on time, pay our bills and focus on the most important factor, the children. The state has allocate funding to make this change and it needs to happen now. And thank you.

Thank you very much. Is there anyone else that would like to make comments? I'm going to make a comment.

First of all, I want to thank all of you that are attending here today, and particularly the parents that are taking time out, that there's some children maybe at their homes right now that someone else is watching over the children. And I know advocacy is so important.

When you come to the state Legislature and you tell your story, they're all heartfelt. And I just want to assure you, we hear you. And it's hard for us to try to figure out solutions that's going to fix everything. It just takes us time.

And so some of the outcomes that I hope that we'll see today, and we have one more panel, I just want to say the outcomes I hope we see today is that we've listened and that we come up with good policy or solutions or at least alleviate some of the challenges that you all have.

The last one that we went to in Los Angeles, you know, things that I forgot about, that people talked about, is that Cecilia, you know, I have to pick up children and that's gasoline costs and I gotta move from point A to point B and the insurance costs. All those things you don't necessarily think about.

You're thinking of being inside a home or a facility taking care of children, but those other things that we forget about, right? And I broke my heart. I just really opened up my heart thinking you're stopping your day. You're going to the grocery store to make sure you have the supplies that you need for the children.

That's your time. You know, you're taking it from point A to point B. So that's why these meetings are so important, because sometimes we get really focused and look like this instead of looking at the whole picture. So I want to thank you all.

So far that's been here today, it's very meaningful to me and particularly to see my Central Valley families show up so thank you. With that, we're going to move on to panel number three. And again, thank you all for coming and thank you, cde, for speaking as well. Okay, let's welcome up. Let's see. Oh boy.

Dr. Jennifer Koisleon. I'm going to make a mistake here. Aiden, Jamie, Central Valley provider Luis from Central Valley Parent speaker and this panel is about the economic impact of childcare on the Central Valley workforce. So you all get five minutes each to speak. If you want to do less, that's great.

If longer, you know, and then we'll have public comment and questions afterwards. Okay. So Jennifer, would you like to go first? Sure. Okay.

Thank you. Chair Vice Chair, Committee on Child Care Costs for the opportunity to present testimony on behalf of the UC Merced Community and Labor Center, I will primarily be discussing analysis conducted by the Labor center and the U.S. census Bureau, American Community Survey and a recently published community assessment of the South Central Valley.

California currently faces a child care accessibility crisis. Child care workers form a major pillar of our economy, providing critical support for working parents and nurturing a future generation. Yet, as I will share today, child care work is largely low wage, part time in many cases, and understaffed.

This in turn has downstream consequences for working parents in our economy. The eight county Central Valley region is a focal point of the state's child care crisis. Seven percent of the valley's population is under the age of five, the highest rate in the state. That's pretty high. Yet Only less than 1 in 5 Central Valley working parents.

Have access to a licensed child care provider, compared to 27% in the rest of the state of California. This has to do in part with the economic context of the region. Among California's 10 major regions, the Central Valley region consistently ranks last or next to last in every major indicator of well being.

The region ranks last in high school educational attainment, second to last in median wages, household income in having US Citizenship and first in unemployment poverty, and in receiving snap food assistance.

As a result, young families with children under five, led usually by workers in their 20s or 30s, struggle to earn enough support a family, including the cost of child care. At the same time, child care work is often underpaid, creating barriers to enter and remain in the workforce.

The latest estimates show that between 2019 and 2023 child care workers had staggeringly low earnings. In the Central Valley, child care workers earned a median of $13 an hour and only $8,330 a year. Outside of the Central Valley, child care workers earned a median of $14,014.34 per hour and $10,000 a year.

As a result of low wages, 27% of Central Valley childcare workers receive SNAP food assistance, almost twice the rate as their counterparts in the rest of the state. Stable, affordable and quality child care is a foundation for labor participation and economic health. Yet child care is often a family's highest expense after housing costs.

The Community and Labor Center South Central Valley Community Needs Assessment found that the median age of a parent requiring child care was 34, that they were overwhelmingly Latino, largely women, mostly immigrant, and a sizable minority had less than a high school education.

Parents who financially contributed to child care costs spent a median of $148, which on our study was a share of 15% of the estimated household income. When we consider specific infant, toddler and preschool care costs, which difference the child care affordability crisis is even more pronounced in the Central Valley.

Between 2019 and 2022, households paid an estimated 19 to 28% of their income on infant care, for instance. That's a share of up to four times higher than the Federal Government's child care affordability threshold of 7% of a family's household income. In turn, the current shortage of California child care workers has massive downstream consequences.

Low wage essential workers, such as agricultural workers who help put food on our tables and who often work irregular hours, as you've heard already, will continue to face challenges making ends meet until child care accessibility and affordability improves.

A vision of accessible and affordable child care for all requires an approach that ensures that every family has the ability to afford and access high quality care requires supporting child care workers struggling to stay afloat and of course, strengthening of labor standards. Thank you for your time.

Thank you very much. Welcome. And now we have. How do you say? Welcome?

Thank you. Well, first of all, I want to thank you guys for the opportunity of letting me express our needs as child care providers and educators. Like you said, my name is, and I've been a child care provider for the past 12 years in Kern County.

I live in Arvin, and I've been serving families in Arvin for the. That. Work in agriculture, okay? These families have big needs of care for their children. And one of the biggest things is that their hours are really irregularly.

They could say they're going to work eight hours and suddenly a parent calls me and tells me, you know, something, there's a shipment that they need to fulfill and I have to work 2-3 extra hours or there's times they don't exactly know how many hours it's going to take them to fulfill that shipment. So guess what?

Even though I was planning to close at 5, or I had plans with my family or I had something else to do, I have to stay put where I'm at, I have to continue working until this parent is able to come out of work and wait for them and go ahead and take care of their child.

It could be one child, it could be three children. I mean, but I'm there for them to help them, and I'm there for them. It doesn't matter the time it is.

There's times I have to open my doors at 2 in the morning because there's times that they worked like an hour and a half, two hours of distance and they still have to go to work. Why?

Because they need to put their food in their table and that's critical, you know, so they need to go wherever the crop is, is going. That's where they're going to follow the crop.

So one of the things I really want to stress, and it's not just myself, but it's my other colleagues, other child care providers that right now we're hurting very, very much. In a way that we could work all these long hours. It doesn't matter how many hours we work of the children are approved for nine hours.

That's all we're going to get paid those nine hours. Or there's times children get approved for 12 hours. But guess what? We're only going to be paid for those nine hours because that's the only thing the state allows for us to get paid. So what's happening? We're working all these long hours without getting paid.

I want to ask you guys something today. Would you guys work without getting paid? If you guys work without getting paid, is that going to put food in your table? Is that going to provide for your own families at home? Are you going to be able to dress your kids?

Are you going to be able to send your kids to school? That's something to think about. That's the boat I'm in right now. And just like myself, there's so many providers right behind me. So I actually, I want to tell you guys, we really need to do something because this is critical. You guys heard it already.

I don't need to tell you guys we have to pay insurance, we have to pay assistance. And I just want to stress this. We're not like the school. Where a school has a janitor, where a school has the teacher, has the aides. There is times I do not eat till three in the afternoon. Why?

Because I don't have the time. Because my children need me and I have to be ready for them. I cannot stress that enough and I know that there's so many providers here in this room that could relate to that.

So I know you guys are paying attention to us and I know you guys feel us because you guys are mother yourself. But you know something? We really need you guys to put your part. We need help and we're here to tell you guys we need help. We're not getting paid enough. And not only that.

Not only our families are getting hurt, but our children that we provide services for. Because if we don't get paid enough, we cannot provide for these families. How high has food went? It's been so high that that takes away from our own families that we're providing for these children. Another thing, just essential needs to educate these children.

We cannot provide. I could bring a book to you guys where we order materials. It's so expensive. Schools, they have the materials. They have, these teachers have the materials. They're handed to them. We don't have that blessing for the materials to be passed to us so we could educate these children.

I cannot stress enough that we need your help. Critical. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Thank you for your comments. We understand and our hearts are there. But we're not going to give up on any of you. And that's why we're sitting here doing this Committee. We're not going to turn our backs on anyone. We'll continue to work hard for you. Thank you. You're welcome. Hi, Luis.

Hi. Hi. Buenas aires. Good afternoon.

My name is Luis. I live and work in the Central Valley. I'm a father of a child under care of a child care provider. And is proud to be a CCPU member. I work in a packing house and I work in the fields of the valley.

We're one of the many families who provide food to all of California and the nations. We work under the rain.

In high temperatures. And near forest fires. My workday doesn't start at a considerable normal workday. Sometimes I come home very late from driving home from work. From a considerable distance. And a considerable one and a half hours to two hour drive in the like. Winter weather.

Is moving impressively.

The weather is very. Unpredictable. Times there's fog and it could be wet from the rain. It's a danger for me, at least for me as a father. My runs from work to home. We know of many programs that run in the Central Valley. That we need the help to have the accessibility.

To be able to go to work. And leave my son in good care. It was hard to find a provider. We looked and we didn't have many options. In particular for a night shift. Because in packers we can work night hours. And it's really hard for us to find a person to watch my son.

We were really desperate in finding a provider because we really didn't have options. But at the end of the day we were able to find Mrs. Eden. She opens the doors for us any moment, any hour. Very early in the morning or very late at night.

Dozela Manana.

To in the morning when she should be resting. Finding her was a great change for us. Because she doesn't only care for our son.

She feeds him. She supports him while we're working.

She helps better his schoolwork. And that was a great change for us. She understands the type of work that we do in the fields. Or in the packers or of the fruit and vegetables. She doesn't only give care but education. To the children. But she worries about the children's families.

That type of service and attention is not very common. That really is interested in. The care of a child. I value a lot, value her a lot. And I know there's lots of families in the Central Valley. That depend on this type of childcare. Imagine standing. In a temperature of higher than 100 degrees.

Or a really foggy day or a really rainy day in the fields. We know that even though the temperature is the way it is, we have a long day of work ahead of us. Sometimes we have to do the eight hours ahead of us and sometimes even extra hours. We are able to confide in calling our.

Childcare worker and trust that she'll be able to care for our child. And she understands and is able to care for our son for more time. Our comfort is that he's in a place where he's receiving care. He's able to get transportation and food.

Where we have that need to be able to work long shifts in the fields. I'm coming from Arvin, California. And my story is not the only one of the Central Valley. There's thousands of families that need. The support and the help. The support and access to child care.

A child care system that respects the realities of farmworking families. Agricultural.

From the valley. Not only the Central Valley, but all the valleys. In reality. The providers and. A community and sacrifice and labor just like us. Thank you for listening to me. And taking account our family. And at the end. I ask that you please support these providers. The day after day. Fighting with us. For. To.

To bring our children forward. Thank you for your attention.

Thank you. Thank you very much. And, you know, every occupation has a different need. And when you remind yourself about in the Central Valley, how many people are farm workers and are out and about. It's a different climate. It's a different type. Not meaning climate, climate.

It's a different look at how child care should be talked about. So I want to thank you very much. I do have a question. For you. oh, you see? Yeah. I have new glasses, so I have to look through here. Sorry. Before I go through this one, you said something about the census.

Your data that you collect is from the census, and I just want to throw it out there.

My biggest concern in the next couple of years is we need to get an accurate census and make sure our communities make sure they're counted for so that when we try to get funding, whether it's childcare or education or health care, I need to make sure the numbers are there.

And I'm kind of playing with UC Merced and your community is that we need to get out in front of our communities and make sure everybody gets counted, because otherwise we don't get the funding that we need because people are scared. And so we got to figure that out. So I'm just throwing that out there.

And I'm sure you know this. So, anyway, okay. From the statewide business perspective, what sectors in the Central Valley feel the impact of inadequate childcare most acutely, and how does increased access to TK help address those gaps?

Well, definitely agriculture is one of them. Manufacturing. Service, restaurant workers, those were the top among the top categories in the survey that we last conducted. As you've heard, a lot of the work is the agricultural work is inconsistent. It's seasonal. It includes irregular hours. Dairy workers, for instance, work around the clock.

And so shifts are often overnight in some cases. And access to childcare is essential. Access to flexible care. And it doesn't always look like a child care center. Right. It could be more in home providers, and so. It may not be TK. Right.

Yeah. We're going to have to give it a lot of thought about how to bridge this gap. Right. There's a big gap here, and then we've talked about it before, but we really, I think, need to hone in on that because there is a gap.

And the last one I have for you, what policy or investment do you believe would have the greatest immediate economic payoff for employers when it comes to strengthening the child care system?

Well, we could look at other models. In fact, Assembly Member Schiavo brought up another state that has universal child care regardless of income, including before and after care up to age 13 that is free to all. People living in New Mexico, obviously that requires a lot of investment.

One thing that I'll highlight about their policy is that they've made strides to also increasing labor standards, which is important, increasing pay, ensuring that there's at least 40 hours offered consistently, which doesn't always happen. And so we can look at other models as examples, as this literally just happened in November. Right.

So we will follow, follow closely how it all plays out and how it, how it affects and supports families. And who's left out. Right. If that happens, living wage is, of course, important. In the Central valley. Anywhere from 30 to 44 wage earners are living under the living wage.

And that's in comparison to 26% of wage earners in the rest of California living under living wage. So living wages is particularly important. And, you know, just stress that early learning and Head Start, if you, as you've heard, is there's such strong evidence for the benefits of it.

There's a recent study that followed 22.5 million children enrolled in a Head Start, and it followed them until they were adults. And the study found that when children participate in these early learning programs, they were 8.5% more likely to enroll in college. They were 39% more likely to finish college.

Just really stressing that childcare is important for economic stability, for enabling parents to work, but it's also really important for children's learning and growth, especially for marginalized children living in communities that often experience multiple forms of inequity. I'll end by saying that affordable child care also means affordable health care. It also means affordable housing.

And so we really need to be looking at the interconnection of the high cost affordable food. Right. And so really thinking about how all of these high costs interconnect shaping families experiences and. Resources that are limited.

Thank you very much. Is there anyone that would like to do any public comment or. Come on up. Don't be shy. Oh, it's Dina

Hello, Nina Buthee, Executive Director of Every Child California. I just wanted to add that prior to 2008, 2009 any unspent return child care funds, whether they were General child Care or Prop 98 funds were earmarked if you will, to go back into the child care field.

Since the Great Recession that is no longer the case. What happens is Prop 98 or General Fund actually just goes back into the General Fund pot. Department of Finance traditionally scores that as savings and it does not go back into the early care and education field.

There has been talk for a number of years about doing setting up in California either a reversion account or in Connecticut what they just did was they set up what they call their child care endowment. And basically what they did is in Connecticut they took $300 million of unspent child care funds.

They put it in a secured account which then accrues interest. They did that for 300 million dol over two years. They were able to get enough interest so that this year is the first year they're actually serving additional children with just that interest and they're serving 16,000 children.

So just wanting to put that out there that I know the Legislature, you all fight so hard for the money that we get as childcare programs. And there's very real circumstances why sometimes all of those funds cannot be spent.

So this is another proposal that could be put out there there that could earmark those dollars for future expansion funds. So just another idea.

I love options. Thank you. Welcome.

Good afternoon Chair and vice Chair. My name is Juliet Terry. I'm here on behalf of the Child Care Resource Center. I just want to thank you all for putting together the select Committee and hosting these hearings during a really tough time of year and pulling us all together for that. We really appreciate the stuff space.

I just want to say as you know, Child Care Resource center, we're a community based organization based in Southern California. We serve over 60,000 children, families and child care providers. We help families find and pay for child care and we do a host of all of all of their services.

We are on the programmatic side of child care. But you know, TK is here and it's here to stay. And we are fully embracing TK as a free and viable option for some families. But clearly, as a lot of parents and providers have spoken to the issue today, it's not a viable option. Right. For those.

And you've spoken to yourself about closing that gap. Right. So we are just here to really encourage the Legislature to continue on the path towards the final rate, the single rate for childcare providers to pay them the full cost of care, as well as embracing a universal approach as we move forward. It can be a philosophy.

I know it's a hard philosophy to get to, but clearly other states are getting there, right. And so if we want to be leaders, we have the fifth to fourth largest economy in the world. We have resources to leverage. Let's go ahead and do that.

I know Vice Chair, you mentioned that we aren't in a particular rush to solve this issue. However, our system is collapsing underneath our feet. Right.

And for the 4 year olds who use part or full day TK, they still need a lot of wrap services and other care to complete the full needs of non traditional hours and all of these needs that our families right in front of us are expressing. Right. So there's a path forward.

We do need to embrace partnerships that don't cost any money. And I am fully behind Ms. Buthee's idea to maybe mandate those partnerships with LEAs. Thank you for your time. And I just want to say on the access point CCRC alone, we have over 30,000 children on our wait list right now just for alternative payment plan program.

And we've closed the wait list because we just can't fill any of it. Right. So the need is there. Let's get our slots fulfilled. Let's get our rates going. Thank you very much.

Hi chairs. McKenzie Richardson with Thriving Families California Foundation. Again, thank you so much for holding this hearing today. Thank you so much to the staff who worked on this. I think it was so important to hear especially from parents for Thriving Families California Foundation.

CCRC is one of our 70 members serving families in all 58 of California's counties. So, so powerful to hear from parents who have gone through their childcare struggles. Thank you, Louise, for your testimony today on what it's like trying to find childcare during non-traditional hours. And so as we all go for rather looking for solutions together.

TFC is in strong support of furthering partnerships for TK as well as Nina's suggestion of trying to keep money in the field, spending down every dollar we have, and continuing to uplift parents. As Juliet just mentioned, there are thousands on the wait list across California in many of our counties. So every dollar counts.

And we're really looking forward to working with this Committee and the Legislature in 2026 to further those goals. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Lily Stewart. I'm with the California Child Care Resource and Referral Network.

Excuse my computer for my notes, but I just wanted to uplift and echo, you know, the first panel's recommendation for having an integrated TK and child care system that talks to each other and that's able to collaborate to better serve our children and families.

At the same time, we know that partnerships take time because it requires building trust. And we also know that full system change also takes a lot of time.

And so I think one thing that we can do is just connect our school districts and TK providers with local resource and referral agencies as well as AP programs who provide, you know, free resources that are already state funded to parents and to connect those providers who, you know, are having a hard time finding parents to be enrolled in their care. So thank you.

Good afternoon, chair and Member. My name is Jeanette Carpenter and I'm here behalf on. Sorry. And I'm here on behalf of Child Action. So we serve 20. Sorry, we serve 20,897 children and we partner with over 4,000 child care providers here in Sacramento County. We wanted to just really, you know, appreciate the professor.

Sorry, Professor Fisher's reference to equity in Sacramento County. We have a high population of Afghan and Ukrainian refugees that we serve and so just wanted to highlight having culturally and linguistic. Sorry. Linguistically and culturally appropriate child care available to the families and children that we serve.

And this is an essential part of the MICS delivery system and we look forward to working with the Legislature and staff in 2026. Thank you so much for your time.

Thank you. The majority leader had to step out to a brief moment, but I think we both wanted to say thank you to the third panel for your words.

Thank you, Louis, for sharing your personal story and for giving us the opportunity, reminding us about what parents go through and that you're not the only one, that you speak for many others as well, too.

And I wanted to thank Ayde for coming and also advocating for the folks behind you, the other providers that continue to work for families like Louis, and that don't turn them away and are not getting paid for these extra hours that you do because you do care for these families and that you do care for the kids, but that when you become a provider, you are the family to that child.

You are a family to all of those children that you bring in. And I will say that both of us care deeply about this, which is why we are chairing this Committee.

But we also know that the speaker also cares about this, which is why he made this a priority for us to be able to work together, to figure this out, to pull as many people together as possible to try to get us to come up with some, some answers and maybe some solutions.

And the fact that we've been able to do three of these committees already and that this conversation needs to continue, that we need to continue to work together, but more importantly, we need to find a way to pay our providers for the work that they do.

As somebody who utilized a provider, an in home provider, 20 years ago, she was not paid what she should have been paid then. And I can't believe that 20 years later that is still the issue now, that we need to absolutely put more attention into the work that you all do every single day.

You know, in a regular job, most people get to come in on Monday through Friday at 8 o'clock and leave at 5.

But I know that providers, you get that phone call from the family, whether it's 3 o'clock in the morning or 3 o'clock in the afternoon, whether it's on a Sunday or a Saturday, and you don't turn them away. You take them in and you are willing to care for their child. Right.

And so that's a little different than what we're used to. In the world of those that just get to work Monday through Fridays from 8 to 5. And you are doing that so that. Folks like myself can go to work. You're doing that so that other folks can be able to, to go do their jobs.

And that's something that we shouldn't let get past us. And we need to embrace that if we want to talk about being able to afford folks to be able to go to work. Our childcare providers are those that are doing the work so that the rest. Of us can be able to go to work.

And I know that we see that and we appreciate that and we need to do better in supporting you in this work that you do every single day. This, as I mentioned earlier, is not a conversation that stops here.

This is something that started so that we can get this conversation going so that we can continue to hear from everybody, from the providers, from the researchers, from those that are impacted now, to those that were a part of this legislation that was changed several years ago, and that we need to figure out a way that we can either fix it or move forward, ensuring that we take into consideration those that we left behind, or, as mentioned earlier, the unintended consequences.

I believe that moving forward with TK was a great thing because it did allow those that had children that wanted to get a head start in kindergarten the opportunity to be successful. Though I also feel strongly that we left behind those that we took away from and that we need to figure out a way to backfill them.

In addition to backfilling them and making sure that they don't lose the kiddos that they were caring for, then we also need to make it right by paying them more. So now, I believe, is the perfect time to have all of that conversation.

And the blessing in disguise with TK is that it opened up the conversation to say, great, you took away our four year olds, but now give us something else. Give us something to replace those.

In addition to that, let's talk about the fact that we haven't been paid or increased in the work that we've done in the last 20 years. Right? And so I think that this is a great way for us to end this year, but also kick it off in 2026 to ensure that we continue this conversation.

I think the Majority Leader is back and maybe she may want to give some remarks as well too. But I want to thank. I want to thank you. I want to thank you for being here.

I want to thank you all for sharing your stories and being so transparent, so open about it and being so honest, because we need to hear these types of stories and we need to hear from all of you. Thank you, Madam Majority Leader.

Thank you, Assemblymember Nguyen. I want to thank my staff that's here too, Selema and Shannon back here and the rest of the staff. It's been really helpful to do what we get to do. This is not the end. And you know as well as anyone that I will never give up on this topic.

And I wish I could have magic like that, but we know this is a tough one. And I'd like to think that after we sit down and review, if we have to have another workshop to fine tune things, if we're going to sit down as a group and have continual conversations, that's what's important.

So I want to just show you we got to do policy, right? We just can't be slapstick when we're going to do this. And I don't want. I want to make sure that all of our families are taken care of and our children.

So I want to thank you all for being here today and thank you for the public comment.

Thank you.

Are we going to adjourn?

Yeah, go ahead. Okay. Meeting adjourned.