Blue Boxes Blue Boxes

Minnesota Early Learning Foundation
Blue Boxes
Search

  • What type of research designs does the MELF consider acceptable and/or desirable?
  • The RFP mentions that various measures will be required on all MELF projects. What are they, and have they been developed? Will the evaluator be providing feedback?
  • What modes of measurement are being considered?
  • What are the number of in-person meetings between evaluator and MELF that are necessary during the planning phase?
  • What are the expectations regarding size of the Technical Working Group (TWG)? What mixture of local vs national members is expected? Are they expected to meet during both planning and implementation phases?
  • Are there specific plans for professional development activities that MELF is implimenting that will increase quality that should be factored into the evaluation?
  • Is a specific home visiting model included in the Early Childhood Development (ECD) Scholarship program?
  • Will the evaluator be expected to collect data on all the programs that children and families use?
  • What does a subcontractor with “local entities” mean? If we had a local subcontractor, would they have to have a local office space?
  • Will evaluator have other local data (for example, subsidy data, Head Start, Minnesota Resource & Referral data) through MELF so it can be integrated into evaluation design?
  • Will evaluators need to provide technical assistance (Page 10, Phase II description)? To whom will the TA be provided?
  • Will variability in types of programs be included in the scholarship plan?
  • What are the target neighborhoods?
  • What is the quantity and quality of the family child care and early childhood programs in the target neighborhoods?
  • Do programs in the target community know this Scholarship program is coming?
  • Who are MELF’s local partners in the two St. Paul planning districts?
  • How will scholarship eligible families be identified?
  • How many families will be served each year, and how many families that receive the letter will participate and be retained in the program?
  • Do we know about the languages of the families to be served?
  • What other incentives do programs have to participate?
  • Will there be just a one-time enrollment of children – is it rolling admission or once per year?
  • How mobile are the scholarships?
  • How will the programs make budget decisions based on having scholarships when the kids are so mobile?
  • How will the program work when the money could be scattered across a number of programs?
  • Is there a floor for the number of hours that the family must use care to get the scholarship?
  • Describe the parent mentoring component of the program.
  • Has the QRS been developed? Is the QRS a part of the Minnesota Early Learning Foundation?

  • What type of research designs does the MELF consider acceptable and/or desirable?

    MELF is interested in thinking about both experimental and non-experimental designs and is not ruling out either approach. The Scholarship Pilot is still in design, and formal efficacy testing may be premature. However, we also believe it is critical to identify ways the Scholarship Pilot contributes cost-effective resources for promoting school readiness, and how these outcomes compare to other resources and service options. Various research designs will address these issues; we expect bidders to describe their plan and a rationale for its use.

     

    The RFP mentions that various measures will be required on all MELF projects. What are they, and have they been developed? Will the evaluator be providing feedback?

    Currently, the University of Minnesota's Center for Early Education and Development (CEED) is looking at the range of measures used in other evaluations (0-3 and preschool).  Specific measures have not yet been selected, but we expect this work to be completed in the first quarter of 2007. These common measures will include parent outcomes, child outcomes at different stages, and program outcomes as well.  Certainly other measures could be included in the Scholarship evaluation.  MELF measures would be a minimum.

    The scholarship evaluator will be involved and able to provide feedback to the CEED common measurement model. We intend to work collaboratively. 

    What modes of measurement are being considered?
    We expect a variety of measurement sources, including direct assessment of child development, parent- and teacher-report, direct observation, and survey or administrative data review. We also expect measures of service type and intensity, as well as cost estimates. This work is partly guided by what MN is using already – for example, statewide Kindergarten readiness assessment (work sampling-http://education.state.mn.us/mde/index.html)– this is a measure that involves teachers and observation.

    What are the number of in-person meetings between evaluator and MELF that are necessary during the planning phase?
    We expect a maximum of two two-day, in person meetings, but expect that there will be ongoing close contact between evaluator and MELF.

    What are the expectations regarding size of the Technical Working Group (TWG)? What mixture of local vs national members is expected? Are they expected to meet during both planning and implementation phases?
    We are not specifying size, and are open to mixture of local and/or national members – we are leaving this up to the evaluator to judge what is necessary.  We will also have the evaluator determine type of TWG and frequency of meetings.  We would like to have TWG in place for entire project period.

    Are there specific plans for professional development activities that MELF is implimenting that will increase quality that should be factored into the evaluation?
    Not specific to the scholarship, but generally QRS will provide program support and incentives to increase quality, as potentially will other MELF-funded programs. We are interested in seeing if some professional development activities are more closely linked to outcomes than others.

    Is a specific home visiting model included in the Early Childhood Development (ECD) Scholarship program?
    While there will be an assortment of organizations providing home visiting and home visitors will have different backgrounds (public health nurses and early childhood professionals), it’s likely that MELF will adopt some common standards and best practices for home visiting programs to follow.

    Will the evaluator be expected to collect data on all the programs that children and families use?

    It will be important to know the other programs in which families are participating that may also affect their parenting or choice of child care. Family mentors may be able to assist in gathering information about whether a child participates in other child care settings, for how long, under what circumstances and how the parent chose the particular arrangement, etc.

    What does a subcontractor with “local entities” mean? If we had a local subcontractor, would they have to have a local office space?
    This is a national call for bidders, but we realize that there will need to be some on-site, local partners to allow for efficient and effective data collections.  We are encouraging all types of partnerships.  Sub-contractors would not be required to have a local office space.  We are seeking the most cost-effective way to run this contract. It is possible that contractors could work out of the MELF office.

    Will evaluator have other local data (for example, subsidy data, Head Start, Minnesota Resource & Referral data) through MELF so it can be integrated into evaluation design?
    MELF has relationships with data collectors and systems. We believe we can act as bridge to those data sets for the Scholarship evaluator, assuming data privacy is not an issue.

    Will evaluators need to provide technical assistance (Page 10, Phase II description)? To whom will the TA be provided?
    Yes, there will be TA regarding data collection – the evaluator will work with the programs to insure the quality of the data – the TA is evaluation-related, not program-related.

    Will variability in types of programs be included in the scholarship plan?
    Childcare programs can be center-based, licensed family child care or school-based preschool programs.

    What are the target neighborhoods?

    In St. Paul, the scholarships and parent mentoring will be available to families in two planning districts (6 and 7) – Thomas/ Dale and North End.  These areas have been selected based on high poverty rates, number of children under age 5, and concentration of early childhood programs. 

    (In Minneapolis, the location has not been specifically targeted yet, but will be on the North side of the city.  The Minneapolis project is separate from the Scholarship project. This evaluation will not include the Minneapolis initiative, except perhaps for comparison purposes.)

    What is the quantity and quality of the family child care and early childhood programs in the target neighborhoods?
    Counting all programs inside the perimeter and a some blocks surrounding it, there are about 4 Head Start programs, 9-11 child care centers, 5-6 preschools and a number of family-based child care programs. Quality assessments for the programs are not available at this time. Over the next year, the QRS pilot will assess the quality the programs.

    Do programs in the target community know this Scholarship program is coming?
    We will work with the Child Care Resource and Referral Network to get information to local programs and providers. The City of St. Paul will also issue a city-wide press release in early 2007 to inform the public about the upcoming initiatives and work with local media and community organizations to notify parents and families.

    Who are MELF’s local partners in the two St. Paul planning districts?
    The City of St. Paul is the local partner. The City will partner with many local organizations including the local Child Care Resource and Referral Agency, St Paul Public Schools, and Ramsey County Public Heath. St Paul will also create a local advisory group to provide feedback and guidance specific to the implementation of the scholarship program. Members to this advisory group include representatives from philanthropic foundations, St Paul Public Schools, practitioners, Ramsey County, and advocacy/policy makers.

    How will scholarship eligible families be identified?
    Eligible families will be identified through a number of channels. Pregnant mothers will be identified by hospitals and social service agencies. Families with children eligible for scholarships will be identified through social service agencies, WIC, public schools, and through the parent mentor program. Once parent mentors are working in the neighborhood, they will be able to gather leads and make contact with eligible families.

    How many families will be served each year, and how many families that receive the letter will participate and be retained in the program?

    The target area has over 250 eligible children in each age group. Beginning January 1, 2008 and continuing for the first three years of implementation of the pilot, 200 children at birth and 200 at age 3 will enter the program per year.  Families with pregnant mothers or infants will receive parent mentoring; families with children aged 3 will receive parent mentoring and scholarships. In the fourth year of the program, children who have participated in parent mentoring since the first year will reach age 3 and be eligible for scholarships. In the fourth year, only 200 children will enter the program at birth.

    While we are not sure what the acceptance rate will be, information provided to families about home visiting and scholarships will be followed up with face-to-face contact by a parent mentor.

    Do we know about the languages of the families to be served?
    There is a high level of diversity in the selected areas. According to the 2000 Census Data, approximately 30% of this population over age 5 speaks a language other than English, over half of which speak English less than “very well”. The non-English speaking families, primarily Hmong and Spanish-speaking, will have mentors who will connect with them in their native languages.

    What other incentives do programs have to participate?
    Besides receiving the scholarship funds, programs that demonstrate strong performance will receive a monetary award or program support. These details are under consideration.

    Will there be just a one-time enrollment of children – is it rolling admission or once per year?
    There will be an emphasis on beginning of school year, but it will be rolling admission.

    How mobile are the scholarships?
    While scholarships will be distributed to families in target communities, programs eligible to receive scholarship funds can be located inside or outside of the target communities. 

    How will the programs make budget decisions based on having scholarships when the kids are so mobile?
    Payments made to programs will provide some continuity of funds independent of child mobility. For example, if a child leaves the program due to a family move, payment will flow into the program for a short period of time following the leave, not end the day the child leaves. The exact time period is under consideration. However, the payment system will be set up so that a program’s best insurance against loss in scholarship funds is to keep the family involved in the program so they are connected and invested and to maintain a waiting list.

    How will the program work when the money could be scattered across a number of programs?
    Programs will determine whether to adopt a business plan to specialize on serving children with scholarships or to accept just a few into their program alongside children whose parents pay tuition or receive other public support. Studying how programs respond to the incentive of the scholarship funds is a component for the evaluation. At this point it seems that at least during first year or two of the pilot, the number of children eligible for scholarships will be greater than the available supply of programs

    Is there a floor for the number of hours that the family must use care to get the scholarship?
    The MELF is currently considering the level of dosage tied to the scholarships in terms of time required for a program’s eligibility to receive scholarship funds. The lower boundary will likely be no less than half-day, five days per week. 

    Describe the parent mentoring component of the program.

    The parent mentor component will include home visits from professionals trained to work with parents of infants, toddlers and preschoolers on issues including health, nutrition, child development and education. Mentor relationships may begin as early as pre-natal through age 5 (kindergarten). Several partners may provide mentoring services, including Ramsey County’s public health nurse home visiting program (http://www.co.ramsey.mn.us/ph/yas/hf_home_visiting.htm), home visitors from existing early childhood development programs, and potentially new sources. A seven county effort in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area to expand access to home visiting and implement some common standards across programs may provide an avenue for additional home visiting. It’s important to note that home visiting is currently happening, however, it’s not clear whether current efforts reach all eligible families in the target area. MELF will study the baseline penetration and determine what resources are needed to reach eligible children.

    The mentoring relationship will include more frequent visits during the first few months and years of a child’s life, and less frequent visits as the child grows older. When children become eligible for scholarships at age 3, parent mentors will provide guidance to parents on selecting a qualified early childhood program. Bilingual parent mentors or translators will be available for families who primarily speak a language other than English.

    Has the QRS been developed? Is the QRS a part of the Minnesota Early Learning Foundation?

    MELF is funding the pilot of a QRS, the MN Child Care Resource and Referral Network is responsible for the implementation. MELF is working with Child Trends to evaluate the QRS.  All MELF programs are being built “as we go” – for example, we are developing the QRS measures/indicators that will be considered as CEED develops measurement model.  The QRS in MN will have a specific goal of school readiness.  We will also look at how parents are using QRS to make decisions.

     



    Home | About Us | What's New | Board of Directors | Staff Directory | Issues and Agenda | Grants | MELF in the News | Contact Us | Related Links | DONATE | Scholarship RFP