White Paper on

Abbott and Early Childhood Program Aid Implementation

Cecilia Zalkind, Chair
Early Care and Education Coalition

Position Paper Prepared by:

Cynthia Rice
Association for Children of New Jersey

David Nash
New Jersey Principals and Supervisors Association

35 Halsey Street, Newark, NJ 07102 (973) 643-3876

ABBOTT AND EARLY CHILDHOOD PROGRAM AID IMPLEMENTATION

INTRODUCTION

Thousands of New Jersey's most disadvantaged students are being denied access to a high quality early childhood education because of the lack of strong and visionary leadership at the state level and the lack of state capacity to effectively implement this critical reform. Because access to a high quality early childhood education is one of the most effective strategies available today to begin wiping out the disadvantages associated with poverty the consequences of this failure in state policy are great. This White Paper was developed by the Early Care & Education Coalition to help inform Governor James McGreevey regarding the tremendous promise and challenges facing New Jersey in the area of early childhood education, and provide a set of recommendations for turning the promise of early childhood education into reality.

The Early Care & Education Coalition came together in 1999 in effort to ensure that New Jersey realized the great promise of effective early childhood education. We are pleased to offer this report on behalf of the 40 organizations included in the Coalition, and the more than 200 constituent members these organizations represent. We have attached a list of the Coalition members for your information.

The report is divided into the following sections:

• Section I provides an overview of the rationale for effective early childhood education;
• Section II briefly summarizes the most critical elements of a high quality early childhood program;
• Section III summarizes the current status of implementation efforts in the Abbott districts and non-Abbott ECPA districts; and
• Section IV provides a comprehensive set of recommendations that we believe can provided by state government with a blueprint for success in overcoming the serious implementation challenges outlined in the report.

New Jersey is on the verge of becoming the national leader in the implementation of high quality early childhood education. Much of the framework for success is in place, thanks to a combination of judicial, legislative and executive action at the State level, and extraordinary implementation efforts by public school districts, community based centers and other key stakeholders at the local level. The most important missing ingredient has been visionary leadership from the highest levels of state government, beginning with the Governor. We are hopeful that this report will assist Governor McGreevey in filling this leadership void so that New Jersey's children may realize the tremendous benefits associated with high quality early childhood education.

The Early Care & Education Coalition stands ready to work side by side with the new administration to develop and implement a statewide vision of early childhood education. We recognize the complexity of the task at hand, and the reality that success cannot happen overnight. But we also know that the time to chart a path for success is long overdue. We believe this report helps chart that path, and we are anxious to begin the journey.

SECTION I: OVERVIEW

While all children, at every age, are ready to learn, many children from low-income families enter kindergarten significantly behind their more advantaged peers because they often lack access to quality educational resources prior to entering school. Disadvantaged children are capable of learning as much in the first years of school as others; however because they begin so far behind their peers, they are often prematurely labeled as being unsuccessful in school. (Entwisle, Alexander, & Olson, 2000) Children who do not realize success in the early grades tend to fall further behind and drop out of school as the years progress. Thus, many poor children living in high poverty areas, are ready to learn, but do not have the educational foundation needed to be successful in school.

During the last decade however, there has been extensive research and significant findings on the importance of quality early childhood education, particularly for disadvantaged children. The following are a few of the important results of this research:

• Recent brain research concludes that the brain stores information early in life that lays the foundation for future learning. Quality early childhood experiences help in the development of children's brains.
• Quality early care and education programs are highly effective in improving the developmental outcomes of low-income and disadvantaged children. Such programs can produce both long and short-term benefits including school achievement and success in young adulthood, thus closing the achievement gap between advantaged and disadvantaged students;
• "Quality" is critical. If outcomes are to be met, any early care and education program must meet adequate standards of quality;
• Quality is particularly important for children from low-income families. Disadvantaged children are harmed more by poor quality care and benefit more from high quality care than children from middle and upper-income families ;
• High quality early childhood programs are an important element in preparing children to be ready for entering school; and
• Researchers from the Perry Preschool Program conducted a cost benefit analysis that found for every $1 spent on quality early childhood education, approximately $7.16 was saved in lower public expenditures for welfare, education and other services.

The justices of the New Jersey Supreme Court have recognized the importance of providing high quality early childhood programs for three and four year old children in our poorest school districts under two of the Abbott v. Burke decisions. Their mandates, in both Abbott V, 153 NJ 480 (1998) and Abbott VI, 163 NJ 95 (2000) require the State to offer quality early childhood programs, in an attempt to provide children with the educational foundation necessary to succeed in school. Further, through the Early Childhood Program Aid (ECPA) section of the Comprehensive Education Improvement Financing Act (CEIFA), nearly 100 additional districts comprising the next tier of school districts with high percentages of children and families in poverty are now required to provide full day kindergarten and half day programs for four year old children. State compliance with both the constitutional and legislative obligations is vital to the achievement of this young population.

SECTION II: WHAT CONSTITUTES HIGH QUALITY?

Research has demonstrated the elements that are necessary for the delivery of a high-quality early childhood education program in each classroom. The most successful early childhood programs have a number of common elements. Where these critical elements are present, there is a significant increase in the quality of early childhood instruction and in the resulting student outcomes. The New Jersey Supreme Court has accepted many of the elements listed below as describing an effective early childhood education program. It should be stressed that this is not an exhaustive list but does identify some of the most important elements of a quality early childhood education:

1) Small Class Sizes: The most effective early childhood education programs for three- and four-year old children, particularly in classes with a significant number of disadvantaged and minority children, have no more than 15 students.

2) Qualified Teachers: There is a strong correlation between effective early childhood instruction and teachers who have certain qualifications. These include a bachelor's degree in a program that includes specialized early childhood instruction, an instructional certificate, and access to ongoing, high quality professional development. An effective teacher is able to actively engage students with unique needs and diverse backgrounds, individualize instruction, effectively utilize "play" to support learning and link the instructional program in preschool to instruction in the elementary grades and to state educational standards.

3) Qualified Assistants: It is not enough to simply have another adult in the preschool classroom to assist the teacher. The assistant should be equipped to support developmentally appropriate instruction. In order to assure teacher assistants are appropriately qualified, such assistants should minimally have a CDA credential, an Associate's Degree and access to ongoing, high quality professional development.

4) Effective Supervision: Elementary school principals and early childhood supervisors face significant challenges in supervising early childhood programs, particularly when those programs are not physically located in a public school. It is important that principals and supervisors have access to high quality professional development on effective supervision of early childhood programs.

5) Appropriate Facilities: Effective early childhood education requires an environment that is conducive to learning. The key components of a quality facility are included in the attached Early Care & Education Coalition report on Quality Facilities Indicators.

6) Developmentally Appropriate Educational Standards: All children in early childhood programs should be expected to achieve to standards that are developmentally appropriate and are aligned with New Jersey's core curriculum content standards.

7) Appropriate Instructional Materials/Technology, etc.: In order to actively engage all preschool students in meaningful educational experiences, students should have access to appropriate manipulatives, technology, books, toys, etc. that will enhance the teacher's ability to effectively stimulate learning.

8) Provision of Appropriate Instruction for limited English proficient and learning disabled students: Limited English proficient and learning disabled students have unique needs that should be addressed in early childhood programs. Teachers need sufficient professional training to identify, understand and address these needs.

9) Provision of Necessary Health and Social Services: Students are less able to learn when they come to school without adequate health care or are in need of social services. Such obstacles are significant for many disadvantaged and minority students. Effective preschool education must include the provision of necessary health and social services so that students and their teachers are able to focus on educational needs.

10) Access to Full Day/Full Year Program : Much of the educational gain derived from high quality early childhood education that takes place from September through June is lost when students do not have access to full-year instruction. This is particularly true for disadvantaged and minority students who traditionally have less access to educational enrichment activities during the summer. Similarly, minority and disadvantaged students benefit from full-day programs, with "wrap around" services. Such extended programs are also necessary for many families with two working parents, or a single working parent.

11) Maximum Participation of Eligible Children: High-quality preschool education is only effective for those students who participate. Where parents are unaware of the availability of such a program, or are unable to access the program due to transportation problems or other unmet needs, children are deprived of this critical program.

SECTION III: THE STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION

History of Abbott and ECPA Districts

In the1994 Abbott v. Burke case (Abbott III), the Supreme Court of New Jersey directed the New Jersey legislature to enact legislation by September 1997, which would address two distinct funding mandates. The Court's first order was for the legislature to allocate adequate funds to ensure that the same amount of money was spent per pupil for regular education in these poor districts, now known as Abbott districts, as was available on average in New Jersey's high performing districts. The Court's second mandate was for the State to develop, adequately fund and implement "supplemental programs" that met the needs of the poor children of New Jersey.

As part of the Comprehensive Education Improvement Finance Act of 1996 (CEIFA), the Legislature responded to the Court's mandate by including early childhood program aid (ECPA) as a categorical program. The ECPA funds were to be distributed not only to Abbott districts, but to all school districts with high concentrations of low-income pupils, to provide full-day kindergarten and half-day preschool classes for all four-year old children by the 2001-2002 school year. N.J.S.A. 18A-7F. In addition to the 30 Abbott districts, the ECPA legislation provided state aid for approximately 100 additional school districts that met the specific eligibility criteria. In the 1997 Abbott IV decision, the constitutionality of CEIFA was challenged as it applied to the Abbott districts. The Court found that ECPA was unconstitutional as well because it was not based on an assessment of need.

In 1998, the plaintiffs returned to Court and the Justices ordered the Commissioner of Education to implement "well planned, high quality" full-day kindergarten and half-day programs for three and four year old children in the 30 districts by September 1999. The Court further stated that each district must complete a needs assessment and that the "particularized needs" of the district must drive the programs. (Abbott V).

In October 1999, the plaintiffs again returned to Court alleging that the State was not implementing the mandates of Abbott V. In March 2000, the Court's Abbott VI decision provided specific guidance to the parties in defining high quality. The Court ordered class sizes of 15, certified teachers in every class, intensive outreach and participation by Head Start in implementing the programs.

As recently as September 25, 2001, plaintiffs returned to the Supreme Court because the State had not demonstrated sufficient progress in meeting the preschool program standards articulated by the Court within the required timeframes.

Abbott Districts

While the Abbott VI decision provided the parties with a framework for program execution, the stakeholders responsible for the programs have experienced major barriers in implementation. The following list highlights the most critical barriers:

" There has been insufficient state guidance to assist districts on how best to uniformly implement high quality early childhood programs. In Abbott VI, the Supreme Court required the State to develop detailed substantive standards that described the educational content of preschool programs. While the DOE did develop a set of standards, they have not provided adequate and comprehensive technical assistance necessary to ensure that those standards are being effectively implemented. This approach has led to varied levels of staff training, with some districts providing more training than others. DOE is currently in the process of developing a curriculum framework. Although the framework is an important component to program implementation, its importance is minimized without significant staff training on its usage.

• There has been a lack of State leadership to ensure that all Abbott early childhood teachers are well-trained. The Supreme Court mandated that every Abbott preschool classroom, regardless of whether the classroom was in the public school or in a community child-care program have a certified teacher. However, many of the teachers in community programs lacked the formal education required by the mandate. The Court set short timelines for these teachers to return to school to receive their BA degrees and their Preschool through Grade 3 endorsement so that any disparity between district-run programs and programs located in subcontracting centers would be quickly eliminated. Neither the State or the institutions of higher education have developed a statewide, comprehensive plan for assisting these teachers meet the Court=s mandate. While there are instances of innovation in some parts of the state, issues surrounding access and support have been inadequately addressed. Teachers in subcontracting centers may lose their jobs because of the existing barriers to higher education. The state has not addressed fully the disparity in wages between teachers in the public schools and those in centers. After obtaining their degrees and appropriate endorsement, many teachers in subconctracting centers are leaving their positions to work for better pay in the public schools. Further, the state has given the school districts the responsibility in developing salary parity through their district budget review processes. Some districts, however, have placed ceilings on the community centers' budgets, and thus have precluded salary parity.
  
  
• Issues surrounding early childhood facilities have remained inadequately addressed by the State. While the Justices in Abbott VI made it clear that early childhood facilities must be the State's "top priority," major problems in construction and renovation continue for public schools and subcontracting community centers. There are currently two separate state systems for processing the construction and/or renovation of early childhood facilities. Any public school construction or renovations is the responsibility of the Economic Development Authority and the Department of Education (DOE). The Department of Human Services (DHS) is responsible for overseeing the construction or renovation to community provider buildings. Since state standards for quality early childhood facilities currently do not exist, the propensity for two levels of quality facilities is inevitable. Further, DOE has not partnered with districts in developing a comprehensive preschool facilities plan. Currently, there is no state requirement for districts to include community providers in their long-range facilities plans. Without such information, the plans provide neither a clear nor complete picture of each district's strategies for meeting their facilities needs. Lastly, the state has delayed the review of district plans for permanent preschool facilities. The DOE's delay has resulted in the continued use of "temporary classroom units" (TCU's) for housing preschool children with no usage termination date in sight.
  
  
• Collaborations between individual districts and Head Start continue to be problematic. In Abbott VI, the Supreme Court was clear that districts are still responsible to provide high quality preschool programs for children enrolled in Head Start programs unless the programs meet the standard articulated by the Court. It is only recently, however, that DOE has expressly permitted school districts to subcontract with Head Start centers. There continues to be no assessment on whether these programs meet the Court criteria for quality, thus violating the Court's specific directive.
  
  
• Community outreach has been limited and the State has not adequately monitored district progress. The Court also made clear in Abbott VI as to the importance of community outreach. Since the March 2000 decision, the State has not developed a set of outreach guidelines for school districts to follow. The types of district outreach have varied tremendously often stemming from a lack of facilities space. There are currently proposed regulations that would codify a method for calculating the universe of three and four year old children and institute a corrective action plan for districts that do not meet specific maximum enrollment rates. While these are positive steps, the proposed regulations do not include any guidance, technical support or additional funds to school districts for developing and implementing better outreach programs.
  
  
• Leadership, responsibility and authority for implementation of Abbott preschool programs continue to be unclear. Abbott VI clearly vested the responsibility of preschool implementation on the DOE band on the local school districts. However, because of its oversight authority over child care centers, the DHS continues to play an integral, albeit undefined role in the implementation of Abbott preschool. During these past two years of implementation, the lack of clarity over DHS=s "authority" has created great confusion and conflict and has often been an obstacle to effective implementation.

ECPA Districts

In 1997 and 2001, the DOE adopted regulations to guide ECPA districts in the implementation of their early childhood programs. While intending to provide districts with a framework of needed program components, the regulations were overly vague, leaving district administrators responsible for both individual interpretation and implementation. Further, during the period between the passage of the legislation and the mandated date for program implementation, little data was collected by the DOE on the progress of program implementation in ECPA districts.

As the deadline for mandated implementation of ECPA programs approached, the Association for Children of New Jersey (ACNJ) and the Center for Early Education Research (CEER) at Rutgers University, partnered to assess program implementation in the ECPA districts. ACNJ and CEER partnered to develop an instrument and to survey ECPA districts on their progress and plans toward program implementation. (See attached report) The following is a list of the survey's key findings:

• The greatest benefit of the ECPA funding was that districts were now able to provide early childhood programs. Some districts responded by stating that providing the preschool program ensured that their children would be adequately prepared and ready to learn upon entering kindergarten. One comment acknowledged that that the programs would never have been implemented in their district had it not been for the "money and the mandate.
  
  
• Nearly one-third of the districts expressed concerns about sustained funding. The districts fear whether state aid will be a continued source of revenue. This is a legitimate concern since the current regulations only include a two-year period of guaranteed funding for those districts that may fall slightly below the percentage of low-income pupils from one year to another.
  
  
• Only 17% of all the districts that responded are using a nationally recognized curriculum model. Many districts opted to develop their own early childhood curriculum. This may be problematic because most districts do not currently employ staff members with adequate early childhood training and experience.
  
  
• Collaborations between school districts and community providers and/or Head Start in providing early childhood programs were nearly non-existent. This is quite different than the implementation of early childhood program in the Abbott districts, in which most of the districts have developed an educational relationship with community providers. This relationship has been critical in addressing both the facilities issue (increased collaboration would address this) and the needs of families whose schedules warrant the flexibility that has been traditionally provided by community based programs. Although current ECPA regulations permit school districts to collaborate with providers whose teachers possess the necessary qualifications, it appears from the survey's responses that such collaborations were not considered as viable alternatives to district implementation.

From both the survey results and review of the first three months of mandated ECPA programs, it is clear that two levels of quality have developed between Abbott districts and ECPA districts. While both types of districts must base their early childhood programs on the State's Early Childhood Program Expectations: Standards of Quality, the similarities end there.

For example, the way in which community providers in ECPA districts can partner with school districts is very different than their Abbott counterparts. Abbott VI stated that teacher certification is an important component of any preschool education program and required that all early childhood teachers be certified by September 2004, regardless of whether they worked in the public schools or in a subcontracting community program. The current ECPA regulations are more stringent than the Abbott mandate. The only community providers that can subcontract with school districts to provide early childhood programs must currently employ staff already possessing their early childhood endorsement.

Further, Abbott VI, required that there be one certified teacher for every 15 preschool children in class. The current ECPA regulations make no mention of class size, thus leaving the teacher-child ratio to the discretion of the individual districts.

Lastly, both Abbott and ECPA districts have had inadequate State support in ensuring that they consider the needs of children with disabilities while developing their early childhood programs and collaborations. Currently, there is not an existing infrastructure for teacher preparation for early childhood special needs programs. Although this program specialty is under development at several New Jersey institutions of higher education, the State must take a more active role in encouraging the development of this specialization.

SECTION IV: A BLUEPRINT FOR SUCCESS

Listed below are specific actions the State of New Jersey should take to move forward on a comprehensive agenda for the provision of high quality early childhood education. State level leadership must begin with the Governor. It is critical that the Governor make the delivery of high quality preschool education one of the priority issues of his administration. The Governor should immediately assert leadership on early childhood education in the following ways:

Articulate a Vision
Beyond resolving the Abbott litigation, it is important for the Governor to articulate a vision for early childhood education. This vision should clearly identify the benefits of high quality early childhood education to individual students and society, describe the necessary components of a high quality program, and lay out a coherent plan for effectively providing these programs, first to Abbott and ECPA districts, and as it becomes feasible, to the remaining districts.

Settle Litigation
During the last five years, the Supreme Court has repeatedly and forcefully recognized the right for children in the Abbott districts to have access to high quality preschool education. This is, of course, a tremendously complex task under the best of circumstances and is made far more difficult by the adversarial stance taken by the State over the years. Resolving this litigation once and for all is a critical first step in realizing the long-term educational benefits that the provision of high quality preschool education will provide to our State.

Resolve the "Turf Battles"
Only the Governor can put an end to the "turf battles" between the Department of Education, the Department of Human Services, the Commission on Higher Education and the New Jersey Presidents' Council. These battles have made it impossible for New Jersey to develop and implement a coherent state early childhood education policy. A senior staff person should be appointed in the Governor's Office who has the clear authority to resolve any turf battles that may emerge between state agencies and maintain a coherent statewide policy for early childhood education. The Governor's Office should also ensure that state early childhood policy addresses critical issues such as teacher qualifications, early childhood facilities, needs-based funding and the unique needs of Abbott districts, non-Abbott ECPA districts and non-ECPA districts.

The New Jersey Supreme Court has recognized that the NJDOE should be the lead agency for overseeing preschool in the Abbott districts. The Legislature has given the NJDOE similar authority to oversee preschool education in the non-Abbott ECPA districts. Unfortunately, this legislative and judicial direction has been largely ignored by previous administrations, resulting in great confusion for local school districts and providers about who is in charge at the state level. Clear lines of authority need to be established from the NJDOE to preschool providers, whether the providers are public schools, community based centers or Head Start. The NJDOE must maintain responsibility for ensuring program quality for preschool programs operated in public schools, in community-based centers contracting with public schools, and in Head Start programs contracting with public schools. This should include oversight authority for curriculum, staffing, including the role of the family worker, facilities and budgeting. Without such clear lines of authority, a dual system of preschool education will be established that fails to ensure the same quality of education for students attending public schools, community based programs, and Head Start programs. The NJDOE should, of course, consult and collaborate with other state agencies and stakeholders. For example, the NJDOE should recognize and build upon the expertise and trust built up over the years between DHS and community based early childhood providers.

Further, effective collaboration on the local level is critical to program implementation. Currently however, a state framework to guide districts in this collaborative process does not exist. The lack of such a framework has led to serious implementation issues between some superintendents and their subcontracting centers. Guidelines are needed to ensure effective collaboration of all parties on the local level.

Strengthen the Office of Early Childhood Education
The NJDOE's Office of Early Childhood Education should receive the necessary resources to assume a leadership role. This Office, which was formally created through statute, is charged with developing and administering state policies, identifying appropriate funding levels, and providing local school districts and community providers with the necessary support services, guidance and oversight to ensure the delivery of high quality preschool education. To date, the Office has been severely understaffed and lacking in the authority to effectively provide guidance, oversight and standards for school districts and community based providers.

Given the inherent complexity in developing and implementing a statewide system of early childhood education, it is critical that the Governor engage all key stakeholders in a continuous dialogue on this issue. The Commission on Early Childhood Education, established by statute more than a year ago, should provide one effective mechanism for receiving continuous feedback and input. Unfortunately, the Commission still has not had a single meeting, more than one year after legislation creating it was signed into law. The Commission should be immediately activated. The Governor should also consider statutory changes to elevate the Commission to a direct advisory role to the Governor's Office.

Improve Higher Education Delivery System
The Governor's Office should also take the lead in bringing together New Jersey's higher education community to develop a seamless statewide system of service delivery. This collaboration between New Jersey's community colleges and four year institutions is critical in light of the Court mandated timelines placed on teachers in Abbott subcontacting centers who do not currently possess their bachelor's degree, instructional certificate and preschool through 3rd grade endorsement. The majority of these teachers returning to school are not "traditional" students, yet the higher education delivery system has remained very "traditional." While some programs have attempted to meet the needs of this particularized population, the successes have been region specific.

Listed below are detailed recommendations for improving the higher education delivery system to ensure that a majority of teachers in Abbott districts will meet the Court's timelines.

Create an incentive fund for two-year community colleges and four-year institutions, with funding eligibility conditioned on satisfying the following conditions:

• To develop seamless program systems between community colleges and four-year institutions to better meet the needs of teachers returning to school;
• To provide counseling and mentoring by qualified professionals to assist community based center teachers in navigating the confusing higher education system;
• To provide innovative approaches to improve higher education accessibility, including offering courses at convenient sites in communities being served, offering programs on weekends and in the evenings and offering some courses on-line;
• To expand higher education program eligibility to include teachers in non-Abbott ECPA districts;
• To increase the capacity at two-year and four-year schools to serve the needs of all eligible teachers in Abbott and ECPA districts.

Expand and Strengthen New Jersey's Tuition Support Program
New Jersey currently offers tuition assistance of up to $5,000 per year for Abbott preschool teachers working in community-based centers who are seeking to attain their P-3 endorsement. This program meets important needs but can be improved in several ways. Listed below are recommended reforms:

• Provide funding as a forgivable loan, and require recipients to work in an Abbott district for at least four years after receiving their P-3 in order to have the loan fully forgiven. Current recipients are required to work in an Abbott district for a far shorter period of time after receiving the grant;
• Expand the grant/loan program to include community based center teachers working in the non-Abbott ECPA districts;
• Expand the grant/loan program to include teacher assistants in ECPA districts who are seeking their CDA credentials, associates' or bachelors' degrees; and
• Establish the P-3 endorsement in statute and require all community based child-care centers contracting with public schools to employ properly certified teachers.

Reform Facilities Aid and Standards
The delivery of quality early childhood education requires a physical environment that is conducive to learning. Alarmingly, New Jersey has failed to take the steps to implement this fundamental principle, including the adoption of appropriate facilities standards and the timely dissemination of state funding for preschool facilities. The Early Care and Education Coalition has developed detailed, research-based standards for quality preschool facilities. These standards should provide a benchmark for determining preschool facilities needs. The same standards should apply whether children receive early childhood education in district or through Head Start or a community provider.

Revise Early Childhood Funding Model
New Jersey's current funding model for early childhood education, both in the Abbott and ECPA districts, fails to reflect the elements of a high quality program that are documented in the research and have been mandated by the New Jersey Supreme Court for the Abbott districts. A high quality program requires, among other things, a certified teacher, credentialed assistant, class size of 15, a full-day, full-year program and necessary health and social services to address individual student needs. Such a program necessarily costs more, not less, than a traditional elementary school class. New Jersey should adopt a code educational model that includes sufficient funding for the elements common to a quality early childhood program outlined above, including the additional needs-based funding to address the unique needs of individual students.

The cost for key components of this model are relatively easy to calculate. The state per-pupil funding average for elementary education in the Abbott districts is approximately $9,000 per student. Adding in the additional costs to provide class sizes of 15 with a certified teacher and aide brings the cost to approximately $12,000. Costs for expanding the program to full-day (10 hours) and full-year (250 days), as well as provide any supplemental services, would be in addition to the $12,000.

Phase-in New Funding Formula
This revised funding formula cannot, and should not, be implemented overnight. This additional funding should be phased in over the next three years in order to achieve full parity in funding by the 2004-05 school year. Such a phase-in plan should provide additional funding to compensate preschool teachers in community based centers as the teachers move closer to full certification. It is critical that community based centers ultimately receive sufficient funding to provide salaries for teachers comparable to those provided in public schools, in order to attract and retain highly qualified teachers.

Phase-In Abbott Quality Standards in non-Abbott ECPA Districts
The current funding for Early Childhood Program Aid is not correlated with the elements of a quality early childhood education program outlined above. New Jersey should develop a long-term plan for increasing ECPA district funding to permit these districts to provide the same quality program offered in the Abbott districts. New Jersey should also revise the ECPA formula to provide greater stability in funding, with funding guaranteed for four years once a district begins receiving state ECPA funding. Legislation providing this stability passed during the 2000-01 legislative session, but was conditionally vetoed, with the ultimately passed bill providing only two years of guaranteed funding.

Study Feasibility of Universal Pre-K
Given the significant long-term benefits to students and society associated with high-quality early childhood education, New Jersey should begin to study the feasibility of expanding access to preschool beyond the Abbott and ECPA districts and moving towards the provision of universal preschool. The Commission on Early Childhood Education should be charged with studying the feasibility of such a goal over the long-term, including a review of preschool programs operating in other states. In Georgia, for example, more than 60% of all four year olds in the state now participate in a preschool program. New Jersey may be able to learn from the successes and obstacles faced in Georgia and other states.

Enact Necessary Legislation
Implementing this ambitious agenda will require the enactment of a comprehensive legislative and fiscal package. Listed below are some possible components of such a package:

• Establish loan forgiveness for teachers and teacher assistants, establishment of P-3 (See S1402 and A2552 from 2000-01 legislative session)
• Increased Funding based on Coalition's Core Model and Needs-Based Funding
• Abbott Implementation Bill - enact legislation to fully implement key components of the New Jersey Supreme Court's preschool mandates
• Increase ECPA funding levels
• Establish Incentive Fund for Higher Education
• Explore Pilot Program to expand access to preschool beyond Abbott, ECPA