Universal Pre-K in Vermont: Access, Quality, and Choice

Universal pre-K has had a strong showing in the Democratic primaries. Most presidential candidates include early childhood investments as essential components of their platforms, and several have proposed or co-sponsored legislation to move us toward increased access and capacity. As they continue to strengthen their platforms and begin to develop policies that move beyond vision, candidates would be wise to familiarize themselves with places where universal pre-K has become the norm.

One of nine states and DC to offer universal or nearly-universal pre-K, Senator Sanders’ home state of Vermont signed the program into law in 2014. A recent Regional Educational Laboratory (REL) study of Vermont’s pre-K program indicates that most children enrolled in publicly-funded pre-K are in high-quality settings, though disparities in outcomes exist for children from families who are eligible to receive free or reduced price lunch and children whose families make above the eligibility threshold.

Vermont’s universal pre-K act gives all three-, four-, and five-year-old children in the state the right to attend free, publicly-funded pre-K. The state uses a mixed-delivery method, which includes public school programs, private providers, and family child care providers both in and out of the boundaries of the child’s local education agency (LEA) or district. Though LEAs are only required to provide 10 hours of pre-K each week over the 35 week school year, around 68 percent of providers provide full-day pre-K programming. Choice is a key element, as enrollment is voluntary, and families select from a list of pre-qualified pre-K providers.

Since the act was signed into law, access to early learning has expanded. According to Vermont’s profile in the National Institute for Early Education (NIEER) State of Preschool Yearbook, from 2014 to 2018, the number of three-year-olds in publicly-funded programs grew from 39 percent to 62 percent, while the number of four-year-olds in publicly-funded programs grew from 57 to 76 percent. This high rate of participation earned Vermont the number two and number three nationwide ranks in access to pre-K for three- and four-year-olds, respectively.

While access is baked into the law, so is the expectation of quality. State pre-K providers must receive accreditation from the National Association for the Education of Young Children or earn at least three out of five stars on the state’s quality improvement rating system. The higher the star rating, the stronger the learning environment, as measured by the Environmental Ratings Scale and the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS). The REL study examined enrollment rates in the 2016-2017 school year, the program’s first year of implementation. Of the 5,622 children in the sample group, 61 percent were enrolled in a five star program, 35 percent were enrolled in a four star program, and just three percent were enrolled in a three star program according to the state’s quality rating and improvement system.

Outcomes of the universal pre-K implementation remain to be seen. The Vermont Agency of Education’s Ready for Kindergarten! Survey measures incoming kindergarteners’ cognitive, physical, and social emotional development, as well as their communication skills and approaches to learning. Since 2015, the results of this study have remained fairly stable. In 2018-2019, 83 percent of those who attended publicly-funded pre-k and 83 percent those who did not attend publicly-funded pre-K were identified as ready for kindergarten, though non-public education participants may have been enrolled in private early learning facilities. Additionally, survey data reveals wide discrepancies in readiness between LEAs, ranging from 100 percent of pre-K participants in Grand Isle Supervisory Union labeled as ready, to 52 percent of pre-K attendees in Rutland City School District earning the same distinction.

A closer look at the data also exposes deep disparities in nearly all districts between children who are eligible for free or reduced priced lunch (FRPL), indicating that their families earn 185 percent or below of the federal poverty level or qualify for public assistance programs, and children whose families earn above that threshold. Across the state, around 74 percent of children who are eligible for FRPL are ready for kindergarten, compared to 89 percent of children who are not. This gap is as high as 75 points in Essex North Supervisory Union, where 25 percent of children who qualify for FRPL are labeled ready, compared to 100 percent of students who do not.

Given that the program is co-administered by the Agency of Education and the Agency of Human Services, recommendations to improve the program largely fall to the state. The Vermont Agency of Education should create guidelines that encourage uniform expectations for data sharing and collaboration to ease the transition for all children entering kindergarten, as they have done for students with disabilities. Paperwork requirements including invoicing, attendance, and pay schedules should be streamlined, with community input, to build greater efficiency in enrollment and funding distribution between LEAs and providers.

Finally, the implications of the program’s effectiveness need further research, as participation is not fully reflected in school readiness exams and the incongruity between districts and socioeconomic groups is immense. Research should be done into the degree to which Vermont’s early learning programs are fully serving children who qualify for FRPL, including whether they have access to full-day pre-K programs, and the degree to which the birth through pre-K landscape of early learning and care in the state is adequately reaching families with low incomes.

Vermont has successfully expanded pre-K access and affordability for many children and families, though progress is needed in full-day expansion, assessment data reflecting program’s performance, and consistency in student achievement. When our nation is at its best, we take the lessons from states and unite them into a coherent framework applicable to each of our unique contexts. Legislators at every level, and especially those running for President, should look for insights where universal pre-K has been implemented to strengthen the early learning systems we can one day provide nationwide.