How and why states are partnering with businesses on child care

A decade ago, during the Bakken oil boom in western North Dakota, then-Mayor Brent Sanford had a workforce challenge on his hands: employers in his hometown of Watford City, with a population of just 1,744 people at the time, were struggling to attract workers because little or no child care services were available.

Led by Sanford, the city collaborated with the local school district, county officials, the state and the business community to find a unique solution.

City officials identified land for a new child care facility and apartment complex for teachers and first-responders, and a mix of public dollars and business donations allowed construction to commence.

Within five years’ time, a facility with the capacity to serve up to 211 children had opened. Watford City has since grown to about 6,000 residents, and another child care center, with some financial backing from the county, is slated to open in 2024.

Today, Sanford is still immersed in addressing child care shortages, but now for the entire state as North Dakota’s lieutenant governor and Gov. Doug Burgum’s point person on the issue.

“The desire is there [to address the problem],” Sanford says. “It’s not like we have to get attention for it. It’s a matter of figuring out what’s going to be the best return on our investment.”

‘A real workforce crunch’

That task is, in part, up to the Early Childhood Council. Established by the legislature in 2021 (HB 1416), the group includes a mix of lawmakers, child care providers, stage agency heads and child care providers. Sanford serves as chair of the group.

In September, he and Burgum released a framework for 2023 legislative action to address the three obstacles that families typically face: affordability, accessibility and quality of services. While details are to be worked out, Sanford says, various elements of the plan would cost the state an estimated $70 million to $80 million over the next two years.

Ideas include expanding eligibility for families to get state assistance in paying for child care, establishing a state-level child care tax credit (similar to the existing federal credit) for low- and middle-income households, and increasing the rates paid by the state to qualifying child care providers.

Part of the plan also will focus on one of the lessons Sanford learned from his time as mayor and as council chair — the value of partnering with businesses to make work-based child care part of the solution to shortages.

“We’ve got a real workforce crunch with not having enough people for the jobs that are coming in,” Sanford says. “Having anything to offer in the way of child care is a good advantage, so for us to help narrow the gap is most effective.”

Part of North Dakota’s proposal envisions the state providing some kind of matching investment for employers who offer workers a child care benefit (a certain dollar amount to be spent on child care).

Additionally, Sanford says, new public-private partnerships with businesses need to be pursued, particularly to help parents and other wage-earners who work nontypical hours and need a nontraditional solution to their child care needs.

“There’s never enough day care,” Sanford says. “If employers are saying, ‘This is a problem for us,’ that makes a difference.”

North Dakota and many other states in the Midwest are looking for the broader business community to be part of the solution, with policy levers that include tax incentives and grants to build child care capacity.

‘Work that allows other work’

This year in Iowa, legislators established a nonrefundable state version of the federal Employer Provided Child Care Tax Credit.

The goal of the credit is to encourage businesses to establish and operate their own child care facilities, or to contract with existing providers to provide such services to workers.

Under HF 2564, which takes effect in 2023, businesses can get a credit of up to 25 percent for operating their own facility or up to 10 percent for contracting the services (same as the federal credit).

Iowa Rep. Jane Bloomingdale, who led legislative efforts on HF 2564, says mirroring the existing federal tax credit was a simple way to provide a state incentive because legislators didn’t have to re-invent the wheel.

“Right now, we have just a handful of businesses across the state that take advantage of the federal tax credit,” she adds. “I would love to see it make a difference quickly. I’m hoping that the state tax credit will get that to double in the first year and build from there.”

A total of $2 million will be made available to Iowa businesses.

Another strategy being used by Iowa: allocating state grants for individual businesses or employer consortia that commit to building onsite child care centers or providing the care via new partnerships with existing providers.

As of September, Iowa had awarded $75.6 million to 191 projects through the Child Care Business Incentive Grant. The result so far has been the addition of more than 10,700 new child care slots in Iowa.

In November 2021, Michigan launched what it has dubbed a “trishare” pilot program, with employers, qualifying workers and the state itself equally splitting the costs of building up child care capacity.

In different regions of the state, an organization has been tapped to serve as a “facilitator hub,” serving as an intermediary between employers, families and child care providers as well as providing overall management of the tri-share model.

In Kansas this year, lawmakers expanded the reach of a tax credit for employers: a credit equal to up to 50 percent of the costs of opening an onsite child care center, or 30 percent for providing a benefit for workers to access the care somewhere else in the community.

According to the group Kansas Action for Children, the credit previously had been available only to large corporations and financial institutions. This year’s HB 2237 opens up the tax incentive to small businesses as well. Up to $3 million in credits may be issued annually.

Illinois also offers businesses tax credits to offset the costs of starting up and operating a child care facility for workers, as well as a separate program for manufacturers that offer on-site services.

Wisconsin has been one of many states to direct additional federal funding from the American Rescue Plan Act to child care.

“[It’s] the work that allows all other work,” Wisconsin Department of Children and Families Secretary Emilie Amundson says.

A total of $10 million in ARP dollars has gone to Partner Up!, a grant program for Wisconsin businesses that buy slots at existing child care providers on behalf of their workers.

A ‘funding’ cliff ahead for state child care systems

Increasing the number of available child care slots is a central goal of these new state investments and public-private partnerships.

But states also need to be mindful of the need for more workers to provide the care for children, notes Cindy Lehnhoff, director of the National Child Care Association.

“Right now, we can’t find staff at the wages that providers can afford to pay,” she says. “If you don’t help providers directly, they can’t help their staff. The number one reason they can’t find staff, it’s a lot of hard work — physically and emotionally — for a little bit of money and no benefits or retirement.”

The ARP helped as it was the first federal support for wages in states that chose to use their funds for child care workers, but that assistance is coming to an end, Lehnhoff notes.

The Bipartisan Policy Center estimates the end of pandemic-related federal support for child care will leave states facing a $48 billion funding “cliff,” which, in the Midwest, ranges from $98.5 million in South Dakota to more than $1.6 billion in Illinois and Ohio.

Without sustained federal funding, Lehnhoff predicts, “we’ll probably go backwards.”

Across the country, child care traditionally has been viewed as a service to be delivered by the private market and paid for by individual families — as opposed to publicly funded K-12 schools or universities. As a result, child care subsidies for providers and parents have been limited or nonexistent.

In North Dakota, state involvement in child care will expand if legislators approve the plan unveiled by Burgum, Sanford and others.

Along with the tax credits and business partnership, that plan is likely to include scholarships and on-the-job training for future and current child care workers, along with new grants and quality-based incentives for providers.

But Sanford says there is an important distinction between child care and education: the latter is a constitutionally mandated function of state government, the former is a private-sector endeavor. A teacher gets paid by the state and a local school district; a child care worker does not. That won’t change in North Dakota, Sanford says.

Recently enacted changes in Michigan reflect rise in voters’ use of absentee ballots

In a bipartisan deal struck in advance of this year’s general election, Michigan legislators changed how some people can vote and when local election officials can begin processing absentee ballots.

The agreement came after protracted negotiations as well as disagreements over the future of Michigan’s election laws, including gubernatorial vetoes of bills previously passed by the Legislature. The governor and legislators ultimately found agreement on four bills: HB 4491, HB 6071, SB 311 and SB 8. Among the provisions in the law: allowing election clerks from counties with 10,000 or more people to begin some processing of absentee ballots two days prior to Election Day. Local officials have said pre-processing will help them manage big increases in the use of absentee ballots by Michigan voters; for example, more than half of the ballots cast in the state’s August 2022 primary were absentee.

Under the new law, clerks will be able to examine and verify the validity of ballots so that they are ready for tabulation, which still will occur on Election Day. According to the National Vote at Home Institute, most states in the Midwest, except for South Dakota and Wisconsin, allow for some pre-processing of absentee ballots, though how this is defined can vary considerably. The institute also notes that five states in the Midwest — Illinois, Kansas, Nebraska, Minnesota and Ohio — allow early ballots to be scanned into tabulators ahead of Election Day.

Other parts of Michigan’s new law aim to ensure the security of absentee-ballot drop boxes (an alternative to sending in the ballot by mail). Video monitoring and regular inspections of the drop boxes will be required, and new chain-of-custody rules are in place for the handling of ballots from these boxes.

In future elections, too, active-duty military members, who are stationed overseas, will have the opportunity to return their ballots electronically.

Lastly, for communities that struggle to find suitable polling locations, Michigan will allow in-person elections to be conducted at privately owned buildings.

CSG West Staff Connect With BLC Vice Chair in Baja California

CSG West Director, Edgar Ruiz, CSG West Director of Policy and International Programs, Martha Castaneda, and BLC Vice Chair, Diputado Roman Cota Muñoz.

Last month, CSG West staff attended a special event hosted by Border Legislative Conference (BLC) vice chair, Diputado Roman Cota Muñoz, in Tecate, Baja California, which is part of his legislative district in the Baja California Legislature.

The event was held at the University Theatre of the Autonomous University of Baja California Tecate campus where he presented his first year’s report to his community, highlighting his legislative efforts and accomplishments.

Diputado Cota Muñoz on stage at the theatre of the UABC speaking to his community of Tecate.

A video projected on large screens in the auditorium highlighted his nineteen bills, education scholarships, vision exams and free prescription glasses, as well as legal services for his community. Of his nineteen bills, eight were signed into law. He also talked about the incalculable potential the state of Baja California holds due to its geographic location along the U.S. – Mexico border in addition to its natural and cultural resources.

Diputado Cota Muñoz presenting the hard copy version of his first year’s legislative work to Diputada María del Rocío Adame, President of the Political Coordination Group in the Baja California state legislature.

Diputado Cota Muñoz currently serves as chair of the Committee on Migration & Border Affairs in the Baja California Legislature and was designated as vice chair to the BLC during the 2022 meeting in Riverside, California hosted by current chair, California Assemblymember Jose Medina. The visit also provided an opportunity for CSG West staff and Diputado Cota Muñoz to discuss plans for the fall 2023 BLC that will convene in Baja California. More details will follow.

Check out the introduction piece to Diputado Roman Cota Muñoz in the CSG West Regional Roundup this December, when he rotates to the position of chair of the BLC.

The post CSG West Staff Connect With BLC Vice Chair in Baja California appeared first on CSG West.

State Legislators and White House Officials Discuss Transition to 988 Crisis Line Services

White House officials recently convened a meeting with bipartisan state legislative leaders, discussing efforts to address what was described as a “national mental health crisis.” The meeting focused on joint federal and state actions to implement 988 crisis line services, part of a comprehensive strategy announced in May.

Dialogue included state-led initiatives to support call center operations, incorporating follow-up behavioral health care, and broadening accessibility to services. State legislators also discussed current challenges presented by mental health workforce shortages. 

Among the participating legislators was Utah State Senator Daniel Thatcher, who in 2014 initiated the idea for a three-digit crisis line in his state. After garnering support from a range of federal and state officials, legislative colleagues, and healthcare workers, Senator Thatcher’s proposal resulted in the creation of the national 988 hotline this year. 

The White House meeting was held in conjunction with Suicide Prevention Awareness Month, as suicides in the United States accounted for more than 45,000 deaths in 2020, and preliminary data suggest increased numbers in 2021.

A readout from the meeting, including western legislators in attendance, can be accessed here. For additional reading about Utah’s role in creating the 988 crisis line, click the story below. 

Utah’s Involvement in the Three-Digit Mental Health Hotline: The Origin Story of 988

The post State Legislators and White House Officials Discuss Transition to 988 Crisis Line Services appeared first on CSG West.

U.S. Supreme Court 2022-23 Term Preview

The U.S. Supreme Court convened Monday, Oct. 3 to begin its 2022-23 term. State policymakers are gearing up to hear several cases in which states are participants. In the coming weeks, CSG will provide further analyses of these and other disputes as they come before the court.

Case: Delaware v. Pennsylvania and Wisconsin

Background: MoneyGram Payment Systems is a national company incorporated in Delaware. The company markets what it calls “official checks” that can be used in financial transactions. Customers pay for the amount of the checks, plus a transaction fee. In 2016, MoneyGram gave unclaimed checks to the government of Delaware.

Legal Issue: The federal Disposition of Abandoned Money Orders and Traveler’s Checks Act requires that “…a money order, traveler’s check, or other similar written instrument (other than a third party bank check)…” that goes unclaimed is the property of the state in which the check was purchased. Pennsylvania and Wisconsin argue the checks are covered by the federal act so unclaimed checks purchased in their states are their property. MoneyGram and Delaware argue the checks at issue are “third party” checks and are Delaware property, according to state law. As much as $150 million in unclaimed checks is at stake. Are the checks subject to federal law?

State Participation: Twenty-seven states have joined Pennsylvania and Wisconsin as parties in the case.

Case: Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company

Background: Robert Mallory sued Norfolk Railway Company in Pennsylvania state court, claiming that he contracted cancer because he was exposed to toxic chemicals as an employee of the company. The company is headquartered in Virginia, but is registered to do business in Pennsylvania. Mallory is not a Pennsylvania resident and he does not allege his injury occurred in the state.

Legal Issue: Does a company consent to be accountable to a state court system when the company registers to do business in the state?

State Participation: Eight states have filed a legal brief supporting the company.

Case: Moore v. Harper

Background: The North Carolina state legislature adopted a new map for its federal congressional districts in November 2021. A group of officeholders and private organizations and individuals filed suit, claiming the map was a partisan gerrymander in violation of the state constitution. The North Carolina Supreme Court blocked the state from using the map and order the original trial court to adopt a new map. The trial court then adopted a map created by three people appointed by the court. The state legislature filed a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court requesting the original map be reinstated. The court declined to do so, but agreed to hear the case. The trial court-approved map is in place for the 2022 election cycle.

Legal Issue: The U.S. Constitution states: “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature.”The state legislature asserts this clause gives the branch exclusive authority on the drawing of maps. North Carolina state law says that state courts can hear “[a]ny action challenging the validity of any act of the General Assembly that apportions or redistricts State legislative or congressional districts.” Do state courts have a legal role to play in disputes over redistricting?

State Participation: Thirteen states have filed a legal brief supporting the North Carolina legislature.

Case: Merrill v. Milligan

Background: In 2021, the Alabama legislature designed the districts for the state’s seven seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. A group of private citizens sued, claiming the map is drawn to reduce the influence of Black voters in violation of the federal Voting Rights Act. A federal district court sided with the plaintiffs and ordered the map be redrawn. In February 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court put the district court’s order on hold and agreed to hear the case. The state legislature’s original map is in place for the 2022 election cycle.

Legal Issue: Does the legislative map violate the Voting Rights Act?

State Participation: Fourteen states have filed a legal brief supporting the Alabama legislature.

Case: National Pork Producers Council v. Ross

Background: In 2018, California voters approved a law that prohibits the sale of pork from pigs confined in ways that are inconsistent with California state regulations. The council sued, arguing that the California decision discriminates against pork producers in other states, where regulations on animal treatment differ.

Legal Issue: The U.S. Constitution states: “Congress shall have the power to regulate commerce among the several states.” Does the Constitution prohibit a state from passing laws that have a discriminatory economic impact in other states?

State Participation: Twenty-six states have filed a legal brief supporting the council. Fourteen states have filed a legal brief supporting California.

Case: Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency

Background: The Sacketts (private citizens) have been prevented from building a home in Idaho because the Environmental Protection Agency raised concerns about the impact of construction on wetlands on the property.

Legal Issue: The federal Clean Water Act gives the EPA the authority to regulate pollutants dumped into “navigable waters.” Neither the act nor the Supreme Court have clearly defined the term, leaving it to the EPA to determine the scope of its authority. The Sacketts argue that the EPA is abusing its power under the act. Are wetlands subject to EPA authority under the Clean Water Act?

State Participation: Twenty-six states collectively and Alaska individually have written a legal brief supporting the Sacketts. Seventeen states and Washington D.C. collectively and Colorado individually have filed legal briefs supporting the EPA.

Case: U.S. v. Texas

Background: In September 2021, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security issued a memo prioritizing the deportation of three groups of undocumented individuals: suspected terrorists, people who have committed serious crimes and people caught at the border. Texas and Louisiana sued the federal government, claiming that the Biden administration was selectively enforcing federal immigration law in violation of federal administrative requirements. A district court blocked the administration from enforcing the new policy. The administration requested the U.S. Supreme Court intervene and lift the district court order. The Supreme Court declined to do so but agreed to hear the case.

Legal Issue: Does the Department of Homeland Security have discretion to prioritize particular individuals and groups in the application of federal immigration law? State Participation: Nineteen states filed a legal brief supporting Texas and Louisiana. Sixteen state and Washington D.C. and 21 local government entities filed a legal brief supporting the Department of Homeland Security.

The Council of State Governments Announces its 2022 20 Under 40 Leadership Award Recipients

Oct. 4, 2022

Contact:
The Council of State Governments
[email protected]

FOR RELEASE ON TUESDAY, OCT. 4 AT 11 A.M. ET

The Council of State Governments Announces its 2022 20 Under 40 Leadership Award Recipients

Lexington, KY — The Council of State Governments is excited to announce the 2022 recipients of the CSG 20 Under 40 Leadership Award. This annual honor recognizes the outstanding work of 20 up-and-coming elected and appointed officials from across the country who not only exemplify strong leadership skills but have also demonstrated a true commitment to serving the citizens of their states.

“The state officials recognized this year come from diverse backgrounds, different political parties, different branches of state government and from every region of our country, but they share a singular commitment to make a difference for those they serve,” said David Adkins, CSG executive director/CEO. “They are hard-working leaders who have demonstrated the ability to productively collaborate to achieve consensus and produce results, and their public service honors the oldest and best values of our democracy.”

Congratulations to these 20 leaders:

Sen. Raumesh Akbari, Senate Democratic Caucus Chairwoman, Tennessee

Rep. Liz Berry, Washington

Assemblymember Sabrina Cervantes, California

Rep. Jordan Harris, Pennsylvania

Rep. Greggor Ilagan, Hawaii

Rep. Iman Jodeh, Colorado

Assemblymember Alex Lee, California

Rep. Susan Manchester, Ohio

Sen. Zellnor Myrie, New York

Rep. David Nelson, Alaska

Rep. Daniel Pae, Oklahoma

Sen. Marie Pinkney, Delaware

Sen. John Michael Montgomery, Oklahoma

Sen. Michael Rohl, South Dakota

Franklin Perry II, Chief of Staff, General Assembly House Democrats, Connecticut

Sen. James Sturch, Arkansas

Rep. Jordan Teuscher, Utah

Rep. Landon Brown, Wyoming

Rep. Daniel Elliott, Kentucky

Rep. Demi Busatta, Florida

Recipients of the 20 Under 40 Leadership Award are selected from a competitive pool of applicants from across the country and all three branches of state government.

“The CSG 20 Under 40 Leadership Award Class of 2022 winners are a testament to the tremendous efforts our state officials contribute each and every day to making their states better,” said Lorna Patches, CSG deputy director of membership engagement and leadership development.

Award recipients will be honored at the 2022 CSG National Conference in Honolulu, Hawaii, in December.


To learn more about the CSG 20 Under 40 Leadership Award, visit web.csg.org/20-40. Discover more resources from The Council of State Governments, the nation’s only nonpartisan organization serving all three branches of state government, at csg.org.

About The Council of State Governments

Founded in 1933, The Council of State Governments is the nation’s only organization serving all three branches of state government. CSG is a region-based forum that fosters the exchange of insights and ideas to help state officials shape public policy. This offers unparalleled regional, national and international opportunities to network, develop leaders, collaborate and create problem-solving partnerships. Learn more at csg.org.

###

The Farm Bill Title I: Commodities

Aja Croteau

The Farm Bill Title I: Commodities

The Federal Farm Bill is developed and enacted into law roughly every five years. This bill establishes U.S. agricultural policy and is divided by topic into 12 titles. Title I of the bill covers commodities and assistance programs for the farmers that grow them. Added to the bill in 2014, the title sets “effective reference prices” for major commodity crops such as corn, soybeans and wheat. These reference prices are designed to respond to the movement of market prices for crops and provide the basis for two federal programs—Price Loss Coverage and Agriculture Risk Coverage-County—which are sources of additional income for producers to offset declines in crop prices or revenue. Each commodity crop has its own set effective reference price, which is set based on the average of previous prices for each commodity or the reference price in the 2014 Farm Bill.

Title I also includes the Market Assistance Loan Program, which provides loans to producers at a statutorily fixed rate and allows them to use eligible commodity crops as collateral. Assistance programs like these have existed in various forms since the 1930s and provide much needed income stability to producers across the U.S.

Title 1 also includes provisions around sugar, dairy and disaster assistance programs for commodities not eligible for crop insurance.

Why it matters….

Title I covers programs administrated at the federal level, but its contents can have a significant impact on producers across states. The stability of agricultural operations is a key component in state economies, especially for states like California, Iowa and others that lead the country in agricultural production. These programs are crucial to midwestern states that are major producers of food. In 2021, midwestern states had 155,000,000 enrolled base acres across both the Price Loss Coverage and Agriculture Risk Coverage-County programs.[1] Base acres are defined as the crop-specific acreage on a farm that are eligible for enrollment in these assistance programs. Full eligibility requirements can be found on the USDA Farm Service Agency website.

Commodity prices have been strong recently, but producers across the globe are facing drastically increased production costs for necessities like fertilizer, machinery and labor. Some of these costs may decrease in the future, but there is a possibility of commodity prices shifting first, given their variable nature. Supply and demand for commodity crops can change quickly and are influenced by a multitude of factors including consumer behavior, international trade disputes, extreme weather and the markets for related industries. For example, a spike in fossil fuel costs can cause the demand for corn to increase drastically due to an increased demand for ethanol, which is produced from corn. A steep decline in commodity prices can impact overall farm revenues, which can increase farmers’ reliance on these assistance programs to survive. Staying up to date on the programs covered by this title can be invaluable to estimating the impact of shifting commodity prices on a state’s agricultural economy.

What changes can we expect to see in the next Farm Bill?

As with each iteration of the farm bill, the statutory reference prices for commodities will be reviewed and may be adjusted if Congress determines it necessary. Changes may also occur to the assistance programs as Congress accounts for climate change and the severe weather patterns that come with it. These patterns can significantly impact agricultural production, as well as increase reliance on assistance programs, particularly those aimed at disaster relief. An increased focus on small farms and ranches may also come into play as the next farm bill is developed. Current House Agriculture Chairman David Scott has indicated this as a priority issue for him with his introduction of the Small Family Farmer and Rancher Relief Act earlier this year.[2] Supporting small businesses has long been a priority for Chairman Scott, and as Chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, it is unsurprising to see this priority extend into farming.

Title I will impact communities in every state and affect farm policy decisions at the state level. The U.S. Senate and House encourage producers, consumers and other stakeholders to provide input by attending field hearings and submitting thoughts through their websites.

Senate Farm Bill Input Form

House Farm Bill Input Form

Resources

Farm Bill Primer: What is the Farm Bill? (Congressional Research Service, 6/28/2022)

Preparing for the Next Farm Bill (Congressional Research Service, 3/31/2022)

The National Agricultural Law Center

Title I: Crop Commodity Program Provisions After Enactment of the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (USDA Economic Research Service, 9/7/2022)

Senate Hearings Schedule

House Hearings Schedule

ARC/PLC Definitions (USDA Farm Service Agency)


[1] https://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs-and-services/arcplc_program/arcplc-program-data/index

[2] https://agriculture.house.gov/uploadedfiles/h.r._8590.pdf

CSG Launches New Initiative to Expand Civic Sector Apprenticeship Programs in the States

By: Mary Wurtz

The Council of State Governments (CSG) and the Urban Institute have earned funding from Ascendium Education Group to expand civic sector apprenticeship programs focused on low-income rural learners in Idaho and Maine. CSG and Urban will provide resources, guidance, technical assistance and incentive funding to support state and local agencies in developing apprenticeships to meet their workforce needs, and in recruiting, enrolling and supporting low-income rural apprentices.

CSG will support these states in developing apprenticeships to address growing workforce shortages in the civic sector. State and local governments are struggling to fill open positions and retain employees long-term. The sharpest monthly decline on record in state and local government employment took place in early 2020. This decline was a continuation of existing trends in the public sector.

The “silver tsunami,” or the increasing percentage of state workers reaching retirement age, has led to a massive wave of departures from the public sector, including 28.6 million workers alone in the third quarter of 2020. Civic sector apprenticeships will continue to be a key strategy for state and local governments to address these workforce gaps because apprenticeship opportunities lead to increased retention of employees, ensure workers have the right skills and reduce liability costs through appropriate training of workers.

Apprenticeships combine paid on-the-job training with classroom instruction to prepare workers for highly skilled careers in a variety of occupations in addition to the traditional trades. State and local governments are beginning to use apprenticeships to fill civic sector positions in health care, information technology and human resources in addition to construction and electrical technician roles. Federal, state and local government agencies can administer these programs as apprenticeship sponsors, taking responsibility for the recruitment and on-the-job training of apprentices. Sponsors then partner with local community colleges and other education centers to offer coursework to supplement on-the-job apprentice learning.

Apprenticeships can be a useful tool for government agencies to hire members of historically underserved populations. This is especially true for low-income individuals with fewer avenues to economic mobility since apprentices pay little or nothing for training and earn wages throughout the apprenticeship. This project focuses on low-income learners in Idaho and Maine living in rural areas where state and local governments report high workforce needs.

In 2021, CSG and Urban convened the Public Sector Apprenticeship Consortium with California, Colorado, Idaho, Maine, Michigan and Virginia to equip and empower policymakers to develop and implement apprenticeships in their state agencies. The initiative brought together legislators and executive branch officials to discuss existing apprenticeship efforts in their states and create an action plan for developing public sector apprenticeships. Through this civic sector apprenticeship expansion, CSG will extend its consortium efforts to include workforces in Idaho and Maine to support states’ initiatives to use apprenticeships to fill public sector positions.

Over the next three years, CSG and Urban will collaborate with apprenticeship stakeholders in Idaho and Maine to:

  • Assemble state teams focused on developing new civic sector apprenticeships. Teams will consist of sponsor agencies and organizations providing related instruction and support to apprentices.
  • Train and guide state team members in overcoming key challenges in developing and operating apprenticeships, including aligning registered apprenticeship and civil service requirements.
  • Identify localities and positions for apprenticeships, including locations with high concentrations of low-income rural learners and high-quality jobs
  • Develop and register 3-4 new civic sector apprenticeship programs in each state.
  • Enroll and support 20-25 low-income rural apprentices in newly created programs in each state.

For more information, please contact Elise Gurney ([email protected]), Dina Klimkina ([email protected]) or Mary Wurtz ([email protected]).

About Our Partners

Founded in 1933, The Council of State Governments (CSG) is the nation’s largest nonpartisan organization serving state elected and appointed officials in all three branches. The mission of CSG is to champion excellence in state government and the organization executes that mission through four major platforms: the CSG National Office, CSG Regional Offices, the CSG Justice Center and affiliated organizations.

The Urban Institute is a nonprofit research organization that provides data and evidence to help advance upward mobility and equity. Urban is a trusted source for changemakers who seek to strengthen decision-making, create inclusive economic growth and improve the well-being of families and communities. For more than 50 years, Urban has delivered facts that inspire solutions.

Ascendium Education Group is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization committed to helping people reach the education and career goals that matter to them. Ascendium invests in initiatives designed to increase the number of students from low-income backgrounds who complete postsecondary degrees, certificates and workforce training programs, with an emphasis on first-generation students, incarcerated adults, rural community members, students of color and veterans. Ascendium’s work identifies, validates and expands best practices to promote large-scale change at the institutional, system and state levels, with the intention of elevating opportunity for all.

Increasing Early Childhood Education Training and Credentialing

By Andrew Johnson

Research shows that “investments in quality preschool programs bolster student success.” Preschool programs prepare students for success in elementary grades, specifically in areas such as literacy and math. A 2020 policy brief further outlines the impact of quality preschool programs, including positive generational gains, enhanced social and emotional learning skills and spillover effects to students who did not participate.

A recent study also shows that additional training for educators and caregivers further strengthens the impact of those learning experiences. State policymakers across the country are working to implement policies that expand and enhance training and credentialing opportunities for in-service and pre-service early childhood educators in a variety of ways. The study argues for sufficient funding for services and training for teachers and mentors.

Specific, Relevant Professional Development Training

Many state policies focus on specific instruction. For policymakers and educators, there is a major emphasis on improving literacy outcomes. Early childhood education is especially important, as it provides the foundation for future literacy development. As a result, policymakers are working to better equip early childhood education and child care practitioners in establishing a foundation of literacy.

  • Arizona and Delaware require specific literacy instruction in line with the science of reading.  
  • Connecticut directs the Department of Education Center for Literacy Research and Reading Success to develop a plan to improve reading, including research-based literacy training for providers of early child care and other instructors working with children under five.

Other states are adding specific literacy instruction to pre-service courses and programs for early childhood educators.

  • Kentucky requires pre-service early childhood teachers to receive training in reading instruction in phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency and vocabulary. The state further requires that pre-service teachers complete an assessment on reading instruction knowledge and skills. 
  • Minnesota and Oregon require pre-service teachers to receive instruction on dyslexia and reading difficulties generally.  

While most research does not specify the time requirements necessary to ensure high-quality professional development, some states are striving to ensure in-depth literacy training for early childhood educators.

  • Arizona requires either 45 classroom hours or three college credit hours of literacy training within three years of obtaining a teaching certificate.
  • Florida requires in-service pre-kindergarten teachers complete three emergent literacy training courses, then complete one course every five years.  

Numeracy—the practice of applying mathematic skills and ability—is a topic not commonly observed in pre-K training policies. However, Alabama established a task force to provide guidance for higher education institutions in training early childhood educators, based on current research in mathematics.

Another topic of emphasis is social-emotional learning. This is used to teach and practice interpersonal skills and self-awareness/regulation. Several states have enacted policies to support professional development training in social-emotional learning.

  • Colorado created the early childhood mental health consultation initiative to expand and enhance practices throughout the state.
  • Florida requires training in social-emotional behavior intervention models.
  • Maine makes available a voluntary early childhood consultation program to provide support, guidance and training to early childhood educators in social and emotional learning strategies.
  • Oklahoma provides trauma-informed care training to child care providers.

Funding Opportunities for Training

Many states are funding various opportunities to expand and enhance the training for early childhood educators. Some policies provide opportunities for professional development and credentialing training for early childhood educators.

  • Minnesota uses grant funds to provide economically disadvantaged individuals job skills training and other career assistance to help them obtain a Child Development Associate credential.
  • Utah uses available appropriations to provide scholarships to early childhood education teachers seeking a Child Development Associate credential.
  • Washington provides scholarships to underqualified staff to earn credentials or stackable certificates from state community and technical colleges.  

Other policies fund scholarship opportunities for students pursuing a degree in early childhood education. For example, Washington established a pipeline for paraeducators conditional scholarship program for non-certified teaching assistants without a college degree and recently expanded eligibility from requiring three years of experience to one, while giving more time to complete the degree.

States are also funding financial and career incentives for early childhood educators and child care workers who pursue further education and credentials.

  • California requires preschool/child development programs to have a career ladder that allows employees to increase their salary as they earn additional education.
  • Texas provides stipends for early childhood professionals seeking additional education. 
  • Washington’s child care collaborative task force incentivizes advancements in higher education credentials and other equivalencies (as well as experience and training) through increased compensation. The state’s Department of Education provides support for implementing trauma-informed training, including additional compensation for staff who have an infant and early childhood mental health or other specialty credential.

Coaching and Mentoring Provisions

Some states focus on teacher coaching/mentorship.

  • Colorado provides payments to child care providers to promote teachers to coaching and mentorship roles. 
  • Connecticut provides scholarships for early childhood educator training, including the training of mentor teachers. 
  • Washington, D.C. requires child development centers/homes to partner with child development hubs to create and implement a quality improvement plan, including aligning program policies and procedures to support on-site coaching and professional development.

While state policymakers are working to expand and enhance training and credentialing opportunities for early childhood educators, states are also implementing a variety of other policy measures to support early child care beyond supporting educators. As states continue to look for ways to support early childhood education, policymakers can compare methods across the states to support their own education workforce improvement policies. 

Colorado River Basin States and Tribal Leaders Begin Historic Negotiations

For the first time, the four Upper Colorado River Basin states of Wyoming, Utah, Colorado and New Mexico recently began formal meetings with six tribes to jointly negotiate water management of the Colorado River.

The thirty federally recognized tribes along the Basin hold rights to roughly 25% of its water supply. Historically, the river’s water management decisions have been led by federal and state governments without formal input from tribal leaders.

State and tribal negotiations will seek to establish a framework for future river operations, which are currently shaped by the 2007 Interim Guidelines set to expire in 2026. This becomes increasingly relevant as significant conservation measures have been implemented to combat the region’s drought crisis, which tribal leaders assert they have not been adequately consulted.

Click below to learn more about the historic negotiations and their potential impact on water policy in the Basin.

Learn More

The post Colorado River Basin States and Tribal Leaders Begin Historic Negotiations appeared first on CSG West.