Action | Revision from Periodic Review |
Stage | Proposed |
Comment Period | Ended on 1/2/2004 |
I simply had to respond to an earlier posting in an attempt to dispel its perception, that by studied actual facts, is not true. We need to be careful to present our opinions in this forum, as just that, if we have not educated ourselves to the actual facts: Here it is:
Innuendo: “A second benefit of these proposed changes is likely to be reduced staff turnover.” Quote from Mary-Margaret K. Gardiner, public forum comment, posted
Fact: Child care services in
At my own day care, turn over is something I have not witnessed. The same staff have been there since the beginning of the Summer 2003 when I came off the long waiting list for my school-age child. Many workers have been there for many years. The commenter who posted the above innuendo obviously had a problem was but that is not fair to suggest a high turnover rate in this profession and as a reason to make such drastic and costly changes. At least that commenter agrees that costs will be increased and haven’t ignored it like other commenters. I am thankful for her that she obviously will not be financially impacted by this change because I will and that is a fact.
Another Fact: From the same above referenced studies, Both JLARC/VCU and GMU studies indicate that 96% and 95%(respectively) of parents in Virginia are satisfied or very satisfied with the quality of care their children are currently receiving and parents have not changed child care providers in the past two years*.
Opinion: So, why did the Governor’s office staff make these changes to the standards and hand them to the Day Care Council for passage and implementation? This is in sharp contrast to previous Child Day Care Council procedure that allowed members to work in subcommittee fashion as they actually performed the difficult task of drafting and editing the regulatory language themselves and, as a result, produced a product which was truly "owned" by the council and truly represented the needs of the populous. The Economic Impact Analysis for this change could only muster that there will be a "likely" increase in tuition cost. In my opinion that study was not was grossly incomplete if I know for a fact that I will be facing a 30% increase in tuition. Every care provider must be surveyed to share their impact on cost to their consumers. It seems the government would not want to hamper any signs of an economic recovery with such a potential financial impact on the consumer. I am sure the changes are well intended, but lets be sure the people they are intended for can afford them.
*Please write Vernon Holloman (Exec. Dir PCCAV) as I stated in my earlier posting. There is other information like the above that was sent by him to the Governor to help to dispel the perception that there is a major problem that has to be corrected in our licensed child care market in