An independent analysis by the University of Maryland shows school systems are employing the most promising strategies to expand private prekindergarten but providers are not coming to the table, some citing lack of funding reliability from Maryland State Department of Education.
Researchers from the University of Maryland, College Park were contracted to conduct a detailed analysis of mixed delivery prekindergarten implementation in Maryland as mandated by the Blueprint for Maryland’s Future (Blueprint). They recently presented their findings to the Blueprint Implementation and Accountability Board (AIB). Their work made several recommendations that included considering more state funding but also, citing in bold, that “if a mixed delivery system is not working as intended, it may need to be revisited.” This assessment was based on the adjusted ratios that were already decreased after the initial rollout did not meet progress requirements.
Researchers David Blazar and Kayla Bill from the University of Maryland, College Park led the discussion and stated that their charge was to consider the extent to which the mixed delivery model, as mandated, is feasible in Maryland and under what conditions. They began the discussion highlighting why prekindergarten improves academic outcomes and under what circumstance mixed delivery can work. They also presented the challenges that often arise in other mixed delivery states, but clarified that implementation in Maryland is not yet to an appropriate phase to experience those challenges because the primary problem is a lack of providers and a lack of willingness from those that do exist currently.
More importantly, the report said clearly that the key takeaway is districts are struggling to find eligible and willing private providers to partner with in the first place even as they are engaging in best practices to do so. This means they haven’t even encountered the standard problems that exist in other states because of the lack of providers and unwillingness of existing private providers to participate.
From researcher Kayla Bill:
“The really high level takeaway from this table is that the vast majority of strategies the districts were engaging in across phases fell into the mostly and potentially promising categories.”
An example cited by the presenters was that private provider unwillingness also stems from prior negative experiences with the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE), the grant procedures, and the failure of MSDE to pay on time. The participation problem was referenced as a core challenge that may be beyond the ability of the districts and require additional state investment. Bill went on to share that they were able to find systematic evidence that the participation challenges the schools are reporting are in fact the case, as well as:
- eligibility requirements
- staffing shortages
- lack of qualified teachers
If the programs do get up and running the report shared that the below challenges were common among other programs nationwide, but school officials will likely need to cross that bridge when they get there.
- lack of cohesion or continuity across disparate programs
- lack of infrastructure for coordinated enrollment systems
- staffing challenges
- differences in salary between private and public settings
Future directions were offered for consideration to the AIB that include potentially changing the ratio requirements to reflect a jurisdictions actual and reasonable private provider capacity. A greater role as well additional funding from the state was suggested and a directive to consider revising the Blueprint to address the implementation realities.
