Commentary; Posted: 3/19/03

ECFE programs not mandated, but needed

Don Heinzman

An Early Childhood Family Education program in public schools is being threatened by a 30 percent revenue cutback during the 2004-05 school year. This ECFE program, which is run through Community Education and heavily involves parents, is considered a model in the nation.

In Gov. Tim Pawlentyís budget, he not only reduces the aid from the state but he freezes the property tax levy so local districts cannot recapture the lost aid.

Moreover, itís highly unlikely in this time of tight budgets that the local school boards will divert K-12 operating funds to support this program.

Experts have the data that shows early intervention with parents and children on how to raise a child from birth to 5 years has a payoff in a child more ready for kindergarten and life in general. Communities benefit because better adjusted children do not require more expensive education later.

Gov. Pawlenty and his staff have targeted this program, because they believe parents should pay more of the costs. To make up for the loss in state aid ($65 instead of $120 per child birth to 5 years), however, a parent who pays $135 fees for a semester course would have to be pay $700 for the same class.

This would place a hardship on all families, particularly lower income ones, even though Pawlenty does propose no loss of aid for children based on the number of first graders in the free and reduced lunch programs. The governor maintains that ECFE is not a required program and that statewide fees in fiscal year 2001 comprised only 8 percent of the programís revenues.

ECFE understands that it must accept some of the reduction during tight money times, and raise its fees, but it maintains the reduction in aid should be less to avoid severe program cuts and staff layoffs. The cost per participant now ranges from $400 to $600.

ECFE already has been cutting back, because revenues have not kept pace with inflation. Most programs can sustain the lesser cut in state aid for the next school year. It is the year 2004-05 when the big reductions would strike, if the governorís budget were passed.

For example, in one district that serves 3400 children and parents, the loss would be $175,000 from a budget of $657,938. (Revenues are made up of a property tax levy, fees, grants and state aids.)

In the case of ISD 831 in Forest Lake, the proposal for 2004 would slash 40 percent or $150,000 of state funding for Early Childhood Family Education programs. Such a move would ìdramatically change the structure and quality of our ECFE program,î said Dan Poepard, director of community services during an interview.

That is a big time cut for a program that has been a state leader and model for other school districts. Somehow it doesnít seem right, but such are the consequences the public must come to accept under the current budget mindset that is running the state.

And the cuts usually hit home the hardest to those who need the programs and can not afford to pay for them. As Poepard puts it: ìThe people who get hurt from our district are the people who have so little.î

At the same time, it is clear that early childhood education is needed. In a recent study, done by the Minnesota Department of Children, Families and Learning, it was discovered that two-thirds of the children were proficient in physical development and less than half were as capable in language, math and social areas.

Some experts say that national assessments show that for every dollar spent on 4-year-olds, society gets a 12 to 16 percent return.

Early childhood advocates from every community need to show with very specific data and results, how the proposed reductions will restrict the early development of children.

Unless local legislators hear this message, they will go along with the governorís proposal, because it fits the Republicansí belief that as much can be done with less money.

Top of Page