The above is the text of my statement at last night's school board meeting. At the conclusion of the meeting the superintendent informed me that there was never any intention of turning the teen parent building into admin offices and that the building would be "moth-balled." He said it was the "Board's decision" to close the day care - which was news to the three board members I spoke with briefly after the meeting. If they do turn the building into administrative offices, you have my promise that I will be outside holding an informational picket with signs saying "Shame on You." I half hope they try it although my greater hope is that they restore the program.
Jackie Hachtel had been busy over the weekend. We ran into each other on the way into the meeting and discovered we had been planning to speak on the same topic. According to her research, the district is required by law to provide day care to teen parents and the district, in addition to all the adjustments to ADM outlined above, was also receiving block grants to help pay for the day care.
Which brings us back to the original question - If the program pays its own way, why is it being eliminated? I think it is so they can use the additional monies they receive to educate those students to back-fill the general budget. Robbing Peter to pay Paul and kicking teen mothers and their babies to the curb. For shame!
This is one area I do not agree with the blog, sorry KS. The day care at times was costly, sometimes having two aides for one child. I have had contact with this program and know this to have happened. It had two staff members, and if the kids didn't show up, they were technically overstaffed, and the state reimbursement only is on a head count, so I think that this program could be taking money away from our other students. So who do we pay for, babies that are not techinically students, or students.
ReplyDeleteThank you for posting about the absurdity of dismantling a program that was outstanding and paid for itself. In closing the daycare and the alternative program building, we witness a great disservice to our students.
ReplyDeleteThe previous poster does not seem to understand childcare. It is indeed a crap shoot. Some times the two full time daycare staff had ten babies all day, sans lunch or other breaks. Other days, only one or two babies attended. It should be noted that those employees were awesome at what they did. They worked not only with babies from six weeks to three years of age, but they mentored the young parents and helped guide them through parenthood, teen life, and high school.
The weighting of the teen parents by the state more than paid for the staff, building and supplies. The larger question is, "Where will all that money go now?" Or maybe the district office has already written off those students as dropouts...
The district receives around $6,000 for each student as our "state school fund" allotment. It receives an additional $6,000 for each student who is pregnant or parenting. It receives an additional $6,000 for each student with an IEP; $3,000 for each ESL student; $1,500 for each student in poverty; $1,500 for each student in foster care or who is neglected or delinquent. Many of the teen parents qualify under more than one of the above provisions. At the very least, the district is receiving an additional $6,000 per year for each teen parent. Last year there were 23 students enrolled in that program which meant the district received an additional $138,000. The day care program cost $85,000. And as the writer above noted, the day care was not just about providing a convenient place to leave the babies - it was very much about teaching parenting skills and monitoring and mentoring young parents. Parenting is challenging under the very best of circumstances. Being very young, still in high school, unmarried, and poor adds immensely to those challenges. Teen parents, like all parents, want what is best for their children. Dropping the day care will make their lives much more difficult. I see absolutely no justification for doing so when the district is given extra resources for precisely that purpose. Particularly when the district maintains special benefits for adminstrators such a monthly mileage stipends, tax-deferred annuities, and golf outings for the superintendent. It's when money is tight that school districts reveal their true priorities and I'm afraid that in our district the priority does not seem to be students. I'd like to see that change.
ReplyDeleteSo if these girls cannot afford daycare and have to drop out of school - doesn't that reduce the amount of money the district would receive for them just being students?
ReplyDeleteYes - by at least $12,000.
ReplyDelete