Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Chair Matthew Birong]: Alright. Welcome back, everyone. 11:15, Thursday morning, April second. We are doing our first slug of work on s two zero six, an act relating to licensure of early childhood educators by the Office of Professional Regulation. We're starting off with senator Gulen, who is the reporter of the bill. Senator, good to see you.

[Senator Martine Gulick]: Good to see you, Chair Birong. Thank you for having me, and thank you, committee, I for letting me introduce this fantastic started off on the Senate floor by saying that since we all had childhoods, we all have an opinion about what this should look like, and a lot of anecdotes and stories and experiences. But what is great about S206 is it's really grounded in data and evidence and research. And I have to shout out my praise for the Sunrise review assessment that was done by the Office of Professional Regulation, because it is wonderful. And I recommend, if any of you have time to look it over, I highly recommend it. It is a great document and was extremely helpful as I was working on this, crafting this report. I will start by just saying this is S206. It's an act relating to licensure of early childhood educators by the Office of Professional Regulation. I'll give you a little bit of background and a little bit of history. OPR only regulates professions when there is a risk of harm. And when they do so, they do so at the most minimally invasive way. That could be registration, it could be certification, or it could be licensure. And obviously, when it comes to early childhood education, there certainly is a risk of harm. And that is why they are highly involved in crafting this legislation. So in May 2024, seeing deficiencies in areas for growth in our early childhood landscape, Vermont Association for the Education of Young Children submitted to the Vermont Office of Professional Regulation an application for preliminary sunrise review assessment recognizing early childhood education as a licensed profession in Vermont. The application triggered the OPR regulatory review to assess whether Vermont should regulate early childhood education as a standalone profession. OPR concluded that early childhood education in non public settings should be a regulated profession in Vermont. A uniform regulatory system of early childhood educators in non public settings would ensure public protections by improving quality care, reducing harms to children, and establishing streamlined preparation pathways for early educators. So this legislation does not contemplate those early childhood educators who are working in the public system. They are overseen by the agency of education. So that's a different It's not something that we're contemplating here. What problem are we trying to solve with this bill? Let's set the table a little bit. The importance of early childhood education, I found to be really awesome on page 27 of the report. So if you will humor me, I will mute a little bit.

[Chair Matthew Birong]: Consider yourself humored.

[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Thank you.

[Senator Martine Gulick]: Because there were a lot of people asking questions about, well, why is early childhood education? Why is it important?

[Dr. Morgan Crossman, Executive Director, Building Bright Futures]: And

[Senator Martine Gulick]: what is it about being a child that is an important time of life and etcetera, etcetera? And is there any data, etcetera? So the period of human growth and development between the ages of zero to eight includes the most rapid brain development for children, establishing foundations of emotional processing and regulation, language skills and cognitive development. Harvard University's Center on the Developing Child has extensively researched the architectural development of the human brain and determined, in the first few years of life, more than 1,000,000 new neural connections form every second. Brain architecture is compromised of billions of connections between individual neurons across different areas of the brain. Cognitive and behavioral foundations are formed in these years and will influence the individual's lifelong development and learning. So it's a critical phase of human growth, and it needs to be properly nurtured and properly taken care of. So in terms of finances, which was obviously something we're all very interested in always, A $1 investment in early childhood Ed yields a savings of anywhere from $4 to $16 So it is just an extremely good investment. The investments that Vermont has already made are Act 166, Act 58, Act 45, Act 76, which was supports for education. And these laws laid bare the issues at hand and gave us tools to begin the work of improvement. This bill is one of those tools. So the problem that we're trying to solve with this bill is reducing the harm, as I said before, that could have lasting impacts and effects, and also improve a lack of transparency and individual accountability that currently exists in Vermont. CDB investigates claims and goes through a process, but it is on the facility and not on the individual. So if there was a complaint filed, technically an individual could remain in the system because that person's not licensed and can travel around. A person who caused harm can move to a different facility. This bill will allow OPR to investigate individuals and suspend a license if need be. Everyone working currently in early childhood education does have to follow certain CDD requirements, but they don't have the benefit of licensure. A robust, organized continuum of learning and improvement, that's what licensure would give us. You may remember this bill from last year. Yes, I see some nods. My understanding is that it passed out of the Senate and it came here, but you ran out of time and it got removed from the OPR bill. It was in the OPR bill. So, yeah, we heard from a lot of folks. I'm just not going to run through the list, but it was a very substantial list of witnesses.

[Dr. Morgan Crossman, Executive Director, Building Bright Futures]: And we passed the bill out of the Health and Welfare Committee on a five-zero-zero vote.

[Senator Martine Gulick]: Yeah, and I think I can answer questions if you would like, and I know that council will go through the bill with you.

[Chair Matthew Birong]: Any questions for the reporter of the bill before we move to council? Seeing finance, thank you very much for the primer. Appreciate it.

[Senator Martine Gulick]: Thank you so much for having me.

[Chair Matthew Birong]: Who's the vote on the floor? Voice vote? Or as a roll?

[Senator Martine Gulick]: Should have had that ready. Someone in the room might have a list opposition. Yeah, that sounds right. Also, I think you might see that there was also an amendment that will, I'm sure, will come up in your discussions with Ledge Council.

[Chair Matthew Birong]: Okay.

[Senator Martine Gulick]: Thank you. Thank you. Might hang out for a few minutes. It's yours.

[Jennifer Cohen, Director, Office of Professional Regulation]: Good

[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: morning. Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Council. Nice to see you.

[Dr. Morgan Crossman, Executive Director, Building Bright Futures]: Oops.

[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: I'm not sharing capacity. Okay. Here we go.

[Dr. Morgan Crossman, Executive Director, Building Bright Futures]: So

[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: this bill has already been teed up for you, and I know that you looked at a version of this topic, a bill on this topic last year. So you may see some familiar elements here. This bill starts off with section one. In title three, there is a section that lists all of the professions that are regulated by OPR and number 55, early childhood educators, is added to that list. Section two is in Title 26, which as you know, is the title that is specific to professional regulations. In this section, we are creating a new chapter on early childhood educators and programs regulated by CDD. Just to give you a sense of the mechanics of how this is organized, The board would be set up first before the licensure process takes place. So all of the language around the board is in section two, and that would allow that section to take effect earlier than section three. Section three takes effect at a later date and fills in the rest of the chapter with all of the specifications around how the licensure works. So, with regard to the board, this creates the Vermont Board of Early Childhood Educators. At the top of page two, the board shall consist of nine members appointed for five year terms by the governor, two public members, two each individuals licensed as an ECE one, Early Childhood Educator one, ECE two, ECE three, and one Family Child Care Provider. So those are all different license types. All members shall be Vermont residents, and the members who are early childhood educators shall have been in active practice in Vermont for not less than the preceding three years, and shall be in active practice during their incumbency. The public members shall be individuals with no financial interest personally or for a spouse, parent or child or sibling, and the activities regulated under this chapter, so no conflict, other than as a consumer or a possible consumer of its services. Appointments shall be made without regard to political affiliation and on the basis of integrity and demonstrated ability. Vacancies on the board are filled in the same manner of initial appointments, and board members shall not serve more than two consecutive terms. Then we go on to the board procedures. Annually, the board is to meet to elect a chair, vice chair, secretary. Meetings are warned in accordance with one BSA chapter five. Top of page three, a majority of the members of the board shall constitute a quorum. Of section d, all business shall be transacted by a majority vote of the members present and voting unless otherwise provided in statute. And then we get into what are the powers and duties of the board. So, subdivision A1, the board is to adopt rules that are necessary for the performance of its duties in accordance with its chapter, including activities that must be completed by an applicant in order to fulfill the educational and experiential requirements established in the chapter. The board has to provide general information to applicants for licensure as early childhood educators. It must explain appeal procedures to licensees and applicants and complaint procedures to the public. And it must use the administrative and legal services of OPR. In subsection B, the board may conduct hearings and exercise its authority as provided in title three. Okay. So now, at the top of page four, we're moving into section three, and we're amending the chapter that we just created in happening to. So this amendment is happening at a later date, all of sort of the substance of what's happening with licensure is being added at this later date. So first we have our definitions. We already went over what it means, what the board means. An early childhood educator is defined to mean an individual providing care and educational instruction to children from birth through eight years of age in a program regulated by CDD, including planning and implementing intentional developmentally appropriate learning experiences that promote the physical, health and social, emotional, linguistic and cognitive growth of children establishing and maintaining safe, caring, inclusive and healthy learning environment observing, documenting, and assessing children's learning and development developing culturally responsive relationships with families and communities engaging in reflexive practice and continuous learning.

[Chair Matthew Birong]: Well done.

[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Thank you. Page five is where we have definitions of ECE one, two, and three in the family child care provider. So ECE one means an individual who practices early childhood education as an assistant educator in a program under the supervision of an ECE two or three, or a teacher who is exempt from this chapter and is licensed by AOE, with endorsements in either early childhood education, early childhood special education, or elementary education. Next, ECE two is an individual who practices early childhood education as the lead or primary educator in a program, supervises the practice of individuals licensed as an early childhood educator one, and receives guidance from individuals licensed as an ECE three. Early Childhood Educator three means an individual who practices early childhood education as the lead or primary educator in a program, supervises the practice of individuals licensed as an ECE one, and provides guidance to individuals licensed as an ECE two. Family child care provider is an individual who provides developmentally appropriate care, education, protection, supervision of children from birth through eight years of age and is authorized by CDD to operate a family child care home. And then we have definition of guidance and supervision in subdivisions seven and nine. As we went through EC one, two, and three, sometimes there was supervision that was required, sometimes there's guidance that is required, so that distinction is set out in those definitions. And then we have a definition of program or program regulated by CDD. It means a program or facility approved by CDD as a licensed or registered family childcare home or a licensed center based child care and preschool program that is not operated by a public school. Those are our definitions. We have some prohibitions. An individual shall not hold themselves out as an early childhood educator in the state unless they are licensed under this chapter or exempt. In subsection B, an individual shall not use in connection with the individual's name any letters, words, or insignia indicating that the individual is an early childhood educator unless that person is licensed under this chapter or exempt? That brings us to the top of page seven, exemptions. I have a hand up from.

[Jennifer Cohen, Director, Office of Professional Regulation]: I was just wondering

[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: on line 14 what hold themselves out means. I would read that to mean that they are indicating in some way to

[Chair Matthew Birong]: a family that they have a license under this chapter when they don't. So I don't know if that is verbally in their communication or in writing, but giving the impression that they have a license that they don't hold. It strikes me

[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: as colloquial for Bill, I guess.

[Chair Matthew Birong]: Oh. It's certainly language that we can play with if there's a concern. Yeah. Okay. Exemptions. Page seven.

[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to the following persons acting within the scope of their respective professional practices. So, a teacher licensed under Title 16 with the endorsements that we already read through, and then an individual who provides care in an after school childcare program that's regulated by CDD, or any other childcare program that is exempt from regulation by CDD, and an individual who works exclusively in a public school. So those folks are exempt from the licensure requirements in this chapter. In subsection B, a chapter shall not be construed to alter or amend the requirements for UPK. And then C, the chapter shall not be construed to limit or restrict in any manner the right of a practitioner of another profession or occupation from carrying on in the usual manner of their profession or occupations. So then we have the creation of subchapter two, and you'll see these ellipses. This is just saying this is the mechanics part. There's already language here and we're not changing it. So that would be the language in section two that was adopted first, or that would be enacted first, as this is currently written. And then we move down to subchapter three, which

[Dr. Morgan Crossman, Executive Director, Building Bright Futures]: is the

[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: licensure requirements. So eligibility and qualifications. To be eligible for licensure under this chapter, an applicant shall have attained the age of majority, achieved a high school diploma, a GED or an approved equivalent credential, and completed field experience in early childhood education as required by rule. So that is sort of the baseline before we get into specifics for each of the license types. I'll just flag that again. And then we go into the license types. So ECE one shall have received a certificate from an approved credential program in early childhood education requiring a minimum of one hundred and twenty hours of training and instruction. ECE two shall have an associate's degree program in early childhood education or a related field requiring a minimum of 60 college credits, or any unrelated field in a minimum of 21 approved college credits in the core early childhood education competency areas identified by role. ECE three, bachelor's degree from an approved program in early childhood education or related field with a minimum of 120 college credits, or any unrelated field and a minimum of 21 college credits in the core early childhood education competency areas identified by role. Fourth type, family childcare provider. She'll be qualified for licensure if authorized by the CDD to operate a family child care home in good standing with the division as of 01/01/2029. The board shall not accept applications after 01/01/2029. So if a person is a family child care provider now and up through 01/01/2029, they could get a license as a family child care provider, and they could continue to hold that license after 01/01/2029, unless they leave for a certain period of time and want to come back into the profession, in which case they would have to come back in as an ECE one, two or three.

[Chair Matthew Birong]: Okay, there you go.

[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: So the family child care provider licensure will go away. It will go away. It will be, I guess the term I've heard used is it's a legacy path. So if people are currently practicing as a family child care provider, they can continue to do so as long as they don't take a break for a certain number of years and then decide to return. Subsection C, approved educational programs may offer college credit based upon assessment of the individual's competencies acquired through experience working in the profession. And in subsection D, in addition to the requirements of A and B of this section, applicants shall pass any examination that may be required by rule. Next, we have language about license renewal.

[Chair Matthew Birong]: One moment, got a

[Jennifer Cohen, Director, Office of Professional Regulation]: note.

[Dr. Morgan Crossman, Executive Director, Building Bright Futures]: Sorry, the reason for the examination being required by rule is there's no current national examination.

[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Is that That's my understanding, but you should ask the field that question. I'm not the best person to ask. I mean, obviously you see that. Only if it is required by rule. So there is a path forward where it is never required by rule.

[Senator Martine Gulick]: Okay, thanks.

[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: License renewal. Licenses shall be renewed every two years upon application and payment of a required fee. Failure to comply with the provisions of this section shall result in suspension of all privileges granted by the license beginning on the expiration date of the license. A license that has lapsed shall be reinstated upon payment of the biennial renewal fee and the late renewal penalty pursuant to Title III, except that a family childcare provider license shall not be renewed after a lapse of two or more years. So that's the time period that I was referring to. Your family childcare provider, you have the legacy license, you leave practice, the profession for two years. And then after that period, you decide to again be an early childhood educator, you would come back under one of the other license types. Subsection B, the board is authorized to adopt rules necessary for the protection of the public to assure the board that an applicant whose license has lapsed for more than five years is professionally qualified before reinstatement may occur. Conditions imposed under this subsection shall be in addition to the requirements of subsection A of this section. Subsection C. In addition to the provisions of A, an applicant for renewal should have satisfactorily completed continuing education required by the board. And for the purposes of this subsection, the board may require, by rule, not more than twenty four hours of approved continuing education as a condition of renewal. And then we have the fees section. I won't read all of these to you, but you can see that it's broken down into category, license category type. For each, there's an application for initial license and a biennial renewal fee.

[Chair Matthew Birong]: And then we move

[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: to our section on unprofessional conduct. As used here, it means conduct that's prohibited by previous A129A or by any other statutes relating to early childhood education, whether that conduct is by a licensee, applicant, or individual who later becomes an applicant conduct that results in a licensee applicant or an individual who later becomes an applicant being placed on the Child Protection Registry or conduct that is not in accordance with the professional standards and competencies for early childhood educators published by the National Association of the Education of Young Children. Next, we move into a section on variances. There are three variance paths that I'll walk through with you. Two of them go away at a certain period in time. The last one is a permanent variance. So that would stay in the statute on an ongoing basis. And her article, like, off, she mentioned it in a floor amendment. So that permanent variance is the floor amendment. It had some other pieces, but that was sort of the most significant piece. So first, the board shall issue a transitional early childhood educator two or three license to a teacher or director of a program who does not meet the educational and experiential licensure in this chapter. Transitional licenses shall be valid for a two year period and shall be renewed by the board for an otherwise qualified applicant for an additional two year period with satisfactory supporting documentation of the individual's ongoing work to obtain the required educational and experiential qualifications under the chapter. At the conclusion of three two year transitional licensure periods, or up to six years, the board at its discretion may issue one final, a two year transitional license for an otherwise qualified applicant if the licensee can demonstrate extenuating circumstances for not having attained the educational experiential requirements of this chapter. So up to eight years variance on that subsection A. Moving to subsection B. In addition to the transitional licensure available pursuant to A, the board shall also issue an ECE two license for individuals who have completed the eligibility requirements set forth in six twenty two-1A and D of this chapter. So remember when I paused and said this is sort of the baseline requirements, so that, and then D is a reference to any exam. And completed one of the following. So they would have 21 college credits in the core early childhood education competency areas identified by the board and role, or prior experiential learning that is assessed by an appropriately accredited institution of higher learning to the equivalent of 21 college credits in the core early childhood education competence areas identified by the board in rural. Oh, okay. I had myself turned around for a minute. I promised you a third variance. It's there. It's further down. So we will get to it. Page 13, disclosure by licensees, an early childhood educator licensed pursuant to this chapter shall post and provide to current and prospective families the following information. I'll walk through these, but the concept behind this section is that there are different entities responsible for regulating different aspects of a child care program. So this section is designed to provide information to families about what regulatory authorities are involved, because for the program itself, it would still be CDD. A pre K teacher, the licensure would be through AOE potentially. And then we have OPR responsible for the regulation of this chapter. So to walk through this, all available license types regulated by OPR. And subdivision two, a description of OPR's regulatory authority over programs regulated by CDD and how to make complaints, a description of AOE's regulatory authority over teachers who provide pre K education pursuant to UPK statutes and how to make complaints. And subdivision four, a description of CDD's regulatory authority over regulated childcare programs and how to make complaints. Section four, as promised, the next variance. So this amends the section we were just looking at at a later date. The idea is that this third variance wouldn't come online until the family childcare provider license type is no longer available. So after the 07/01/2029 date. And at that time, you'll see this new subsection C that the board shall issue a transitional ECE two license to a provider operating a family child care home who does not meet the educational and experiential licensure requirements of an ECE two, but does meet the educational and experiential licensure requirements of an ECE one pursuant to this chapter. Transitional licenses under this subsection shall be valid for a two year period, renewable for two additional two year periods, while the licensee completes ongoing work to obtain the required educational experiential qualifications for an ECE two licensure. And then the section has to be amended again because the first two variances go away at a certain point. So, you'll see that we're striking through A and B, and all that's left is that third variance, and that would be the permanent variance. Section five is a report. On 11/01/2031, OPR in consultation with CDD is to submit a written report to various policy committees regarding the implementation of the chapter, including the number of licensees by type, the state resources necessary to implement the chapter, the number and nature of any complaints or enforcement actions against a licensee, the qualifications required for each license type, any changes in number of registered and licensed family child care homes, recommendations to encourage the opening of additional family child care homes, and any other issues the office deems appropriate. Section six, is appropriations and positions for fiscal year twenty seven. So one full time classified executive officer of the Vermont Board of Early Childhood Educators. Remember, even though the programmatic piece itself isn't taking effect initially, there is a period of time when the board is getting itself organized to get the rules in place for the program. And then one full time exempt staff attorney this year. In fiscal year twenty seven, $2.62 is appropriated from the general fund to OPR to be used for licensure. But then we have this contingency funding language that was added by Senator Probes, a duty to implement section six, which is the decisions and the money, The duty to implement this act oh, that's the title. Is contingent upon appropriation of funds in fiscal year twenty seven from the general fund to OPR for the campus. So you could, as drafted now, if this were enacted in this form, the legislation could be enacted, but there would be no obligation to carry out to hire the positions if it's not funded in the fiscal year twenty seven budget. Effective dates. This is important in this act. So section one is just the list of professions, section two, which is the board, section five, which is the report, section six, which is the appropriations, and six a, which is the contingency on the appropriations. Those pieces take effect 07/01/2026. Section three, which is the programmatic piece itself, takes effect 07/01/2028. Section four, when the new variance takes place, or the third variance takes place, 01/01/2029, when the family child care provider license falls off. And then Section 4A, which is the removal of the top two variances, A and B, those are removed as of 07/01/2036.

[Chair Matthew Birong]: All right. There we go. We plan on doing notable work on this. So, what I would like request of the committee sentences, try and complete them, is we hold off on questions right now because we're butting up hard against lunch. We have bunch of people still to come up. So, if that works for everyone. Thank you so much, counsel.

[Senator Martine Gulick]: Yes.

[Chair Matthew Birong]: Up next, we have our friends from the Secretary of State's office. Would you like to come together or?

[Dr. Morgan Crossman, Executive Director, Building Bright Futures]: Would it be possible to talk to Doctor. Pinsonault? Because we're here all the time.

[Senator Martine Gulick]: Yeah, yeah, feel free.

[Chair Matthew Birong]: Or hold on. I see it.

[Senator Martine Gulick]: Oh, no, I'm fine with that.

[Dr. Morgan Crossman, Executive Director, Building Bright Futures]: Just wanted to know where this is.

[Senator Martine Gulick]: Hi, do you want to go? Sure.

[Chair Matthew Birong]: Hi. Juggling the lineup. All good. How are you?

[Senator Martine Gulick]: I'm well. How are you?

[Chair Matthew Birong]: I'm wonderful. Please join us. Is this your first

[Jennifer Cohen, Director, Office of Professional Regulation]: time here in a formal? It is.

[Chair Matthew Birong]: Welcome. So many conversations, but not recorded.

[Dr. Morgan Crossman, Executive Director, Building Bright Futures]: I know, not

[Senator Martine Gulick]: in person. Alright,

[Dr. Morgan Crossman, Executive Director, Building Bright Futures]: let me just text my team who was going to screen share for me that we're hanging. Oh, I know. Great.

[Senator Martine Gulick]: What a beautiful thing.

[Chair Matthew Birong]: Action ready.

[Dr. Morgan Crossman, Executive Director, Building Bright Futures]: Okay. Good morning. For the record, I'm Doctor. Morgan Frostman. I'm the executive director of Building Bright Futures, which is Vermont's Early Childhood State Advisory Council. I don't usually get to hang with your committee, so this is very exciting to be able to spend a little time. But in terms of our role in the system, we are the primary advisor to the governor and legislature on children and families in the state, prenatal to age eight. So as we think about legislation or any sort of implementation of programs and services for kids and families, we are generally in that space to come in and say, okay, what data do you need? What do you need to understand from the voices of those most impacted? And then bring it into a space to say, here's how that maps with the broader vision that we've set for kids and families in the state. We are a nonpartisan public private partnership, and that is very complicated, as you can imagine. But we bring together all of the different agency leaders, legislators. So Senator Gulick is actually the Senate seat on our board. Representative Gary Fano holds a House seat on our board. And we are bringing those partners together to say, Okay, what is the vision and strategy for the next five years of how we support kids and families of this state? So what you're seeing is our formal charge in state and federal statute as that advisor primarily. Then also to really convene and elevate the voice of families, providers, the entire field to say, how do we make sure their experience is informing your decision making? We are also responsible for holding the vision and strategic plan just outside of state government, so no one legislature or governor or administration can drive a brand new vision based on the work that's been done for the past ten years. So it's amazing we've just published the next five year strategic plan and vision. I have copies and can send that to you all. One of the most important roles that we have that supports our advisement is monitoring the system. So how do we know whether the data and families and providers are getting what they need? And how are we turning that research and data into clear, actual guidance for you all? In law, we are also responsible for accountability. So how do we know if the laws that we're making are actually impacting people in the way that we intend them to? And how do we strengthen the system and bring together capacity across agencies, departments and divisions? So on an annual basis, we spend something like two fifty to 300 touch points with the legislature providing guidance or with the administration. So I apologize for being late, because I was on the phone with the administration. Lots of touch points, tripling advisement in the past few years. Most important thing I can say to you is I am not a lobbyist. I am not a lobbyist entity. I serve in a very similar capacity to the Joint Fiscal Office, where anything that is supporting kids and families, data, research, strategy, whatever you need, we are here to support that effort. So it's really about making informed decisions. Michelle, if you want to go to the next slide. Quick overview on the network. I won't spend a lot of time here, but just to know that this actually has nothing to do with me sitting in front of you. It's a network of over 500 partners that are coming together in every region of the state to do this work and understand the system. We have strategic plan committees, who are public and private partners, who are monitoring progress towards the goals in the decision we set. But then we also have a state advisory council, and that's the 23 governor appointed board. Michelle, I'm going have you switch to the board really quick. This is a really important visual for you to see. This is every agency department has a vision that is supporting the State Advisory Council that's serving kids and families on the left hand side. We also have nonvoting members, so that we have representation of some that aren't holding those voting seats, as well as the governor's office, our two legislative leaders, and then a range of partners and family leaders who are the ones doing work with kids and families across every area. It might be health, mental health, education, supporting kids and families. So just naming that. Our job is to bring all of those people together to set the vision and strategy. It's not done by any one specific person. Next,

[Jennifer Cohen, Director, Office of Professional Regulation]: please.

[Dr. Morgan Crossman, Executive Director, Building Bright Futures]: Alright. I mentioned the strategic plan, new five year vision. It's not actually new. It's the next steps that we need to take as a state to support kids and families. This is supposed to be a plan of plans. It's the roadmap for the next five years that we are all working on. I'm not going to talk a lot about it today, bless you. But just wanted to name that this was a multi year process, Over two hundred partners engaged at different points. A ton of mixed methods work, both qualitative information, but also evidence to inform what we had prioritized in this plan. So we looked at all of the statewide reports, recommendations, data, and family voice over the past five years to determine what the next steps are. Slide,

[Chair Matthew Birong]: please.

[Dr. Morgan Crossman, Executive Director, Building Bright Futures]: So what does that strategic plan say about the early childhood education workforce? That is what I'm here to talk very briefly about today. But also to name that we not only have information in the strategic plan about workforce, but also through the policy recs that come on behalf of that entire network every single year. Again, not only saying I'm not a lobbyist, I also am not here to say, please support or oppose any bill or language that's in those bills. Instead, I want to just draw your attention to where at least there's alignment between the goals of S206 and the strategic plan, but also the policy recommendations. So what we know is that for decades, our early childhood educators have been working towards formal recognition and valuing their expertise for the role they play working with kids in our system. And they have felt that licensure is that meaningful step towards recognition and is reflecting practice in quality early childhood education. This committee, I think, knows, having talked about this last year, that there are tensions and challenges associated with this. I'm not going go through every one of those, but I do want to show you where there's consensus. First, children should be served in safe, high quality settings. There needs to be clear expectations and professional recognition. There needs to be individual accountability and clarity for families. Michelle, if can go to the next slide. Transparent and a consistent system with quality benchmarks. One of the things that we heard the most discussed this year is maintaining and protecting access and stability of the existing system and workforce. So there's been so much discussion about how improving or making changes in licensure regulation impacts the existing workforce. And that has been a shared value. How do we maintain and protect while we are also moving towards high quality? So next slide, Michelle. In terms of the State Advisory Council Network and what you need to hear from that group, what we have determined, at least through all of our research and data and the strategic plan, is that this is an important step. People really are looking for the pursuit of licensure and really thinking about how we build quality in the system, and that the biggest points of tension from our perspective are implementation and transition. And that we have to be very careful and thoughtful about what that looks like. So in terms of what we would ask the committee to really think deeply about in this next few weeks, or however long you are tackling this piece of legislation, is one, prioritize direct testimony from early childhood educators. You need to hear from the field. Yes, you are hearing from all of us in this space. We have compiled information from all of them. And they are the ones working directly with kids and families and can talk to you about the nuance of how this proposal might affect them, and how some of the tweaks that have been made in the last couple of weeks also impact them. And the field changes so fast. I have an eight year old now. It is drastically different than when I was a parent of a young child in that system. So just naming that you really need to hear from people in the field at this moment. And then at a higher level, my encouragement for this committee would be whatever changes we make, to prioritize early childhood educators and their resources and their time to be able to make change and make a transition successfully. So even if we as a state are so committed to what high quality early childhood education looks like and moving in that direction, how do we do it in a way that supports the existing workforce and gives them what they need to be able to do that well? I would also say we need to be looking at having consistent standards across settings. It should not be that the quality of care a child receives depends on whether or not they are in X setting versus Y setting. And as we think about transition support in particular, how a different setting may have different resources. So for example, if we're thinking about a setting like a center that employs so many different staff, they may be more positioned to more quickly make a transition. They have additional capacity, and they may require a different level of support across its workforce. Whereas our family child care homes might be a single individual adapting to the same piece. So again, our guidance here is there are different impacts. It doesn't mean that we shouldn't be moving that direction, but how do we support each group with what they need so that everybody can be successful, that we are maintaining slots and we're maintaining educators. Big picture, I would say the State Advisory Council Network and that strategic plan is saying licensure will strengthen our ability to provide high quality child care. And the gaps that we have in supply and demand are still there. So we need to be really mindful of that as we're making this transition. So in terms of thinking about implementation, that's where I would love this committee, and our colleagues will talk about this with you as well, to be really intentional about not adding strain, really thinking about what this transition looks like, especially for infant care, our youngest and most vulnerable children. And to make sure that we are tackling some of these existing barriers. We do have some lead times. We have barriers and challenges around fingerprinting and background checks that need to be done at the same time. So again, just that reminder that this is an integrated system, and impacts from one thing will impact the other. They need to be done in tandem and together. Questions? Anything you would like to hear from me?

[Chair Matthew Birong]: Questions for right now? I anticipate actually having you back as we do some more work on this. So, just being conscious of time right now. Think I want to move on to the next witnesses.

[Senator Martine Gulick]: Thank you. And

[Chair Matthew Birong]: then we also have Sharon Harrington. That's okay with you. Just wanted to

[Sharon Harrington, Executive Director, Vermont Association for the Education of Young Children (VTAEYC)]: make sure all that stuff went in here.

[Senator Martine Gulick]: Okay, great. Thank you. Thank you.

[Sharon Harrington, Executive Director, Vermont Association for the Education of Young Children (VTAEYC)]: So today, I want to introduce myself again. I'm Sharon Ferryton, the Executive Director for the Vermont Association for the Education of Young Children. And I am so grateful for your time and interest in the work that we do and the educators that we work with. We are tight on time, so I submitted full testimony. But I'll just hit a few key points today, and then you can go back and read the other details so that you can get to lunch. Because there's nothing worse than being the person between lunch. So so I wanna I wanna be respectful of that. So, thank you for this opportunity to, provide introductory testimony on s two zero six. I just wanna begin by saying that Vermont AEYC fully supports this legislation as the necessary step to strengthen our early childhood educator workforce. And we know a strong workforce is what we need to ensure that every child and family can access quality childcare. Our organization is a nonprofit that is the largest membership and advocacy organization for early childhood educators here in Vermont. And we are the state affiliate of the National Association for the Education of Young Children in NACI, which is one of the country's leading early childhood education organizations. And you heard reference to that earlier already today. So we're connected to early childhood educators as an organization with our team in every corner of the state and in every type of childcare program, working to make sure that everyone in the workforce has the resources that they need. And I'm here today because early childhood educators have asked for this bill. Early childhood educators in all regions of the state, including our rural communities and in all roles support this, from family child care providers to center directors to classroom teachers. And I completely agree with Doctor. Crossman that hearing from those most impacted by this bill is really an important priority. So our role at Vermont AUIC has been to support workforce leadership and engagement that resulted in the recommendations and the request for regulation that led to S206. We convened a task force representing early childhood educators, across all settings who led several years of workforce outreach. And this bill reflects the input from over 1,000 early childhood educators. And so you heard earlier that Vermont AUIC submitted the request to the Office of Professional Regulation for the Sunrise Review. And that was based on its many, many years of work. As you probably know, or you will learn quickly, that the early childhood education system is incredibly complex. And I have to say OPR did an amazing job during their unbiased research. And we agree with their conclusion that early childhood educators working in CDD programs should have a license to practice. Act 76 stabilized childcare in Vermont, and S206 is actually the next step. Creating accountability for that public investment and ensuring that we have the workforce to deliver the childcare our state needs. A strong, supported workforce means reliable access to quality childcare for families so that they can work and know their children are thriving. And that's why early childhood educators themselves support this bill. And we all know, ultimately, this is what's best for young children. We also know that it will strengthen our workforce because people want good careers in early childhood education. We partner with the Child Development Division to administer scholarship programs and services for early childhood educators. So, we have our own data. BBF can share incredible amounts of data, but we also have some data of the programs that we administer. And some of the highlights that I quickly want cover today, and we can dig into this more if I am able to come back. Since Act 'seventy six, the regulated child care workforce has increased by 8.5%. We recognize there was a workforce crisis across all different industries. So this is really excellent news. It's now over 8,000, our workforce, and about 7,000 of them would be impacted by this bill. And since Act 76, the number of people working in this workforce with a degree has grown by more than 22%. In 2025, our TEACH scholarship recipients, that is one of the scholarship programs that we administer at Vermont AUIC, represented all 14 Vermont counties. And half of those were first generation college students. Our apprenticeship enrollment is growing. We also administer a youth apprenticeship program through Career and Technical Education Centers, which was so popular that the legislature expanded funding last session to prevent a waitlist. Enrollment in early childhood education certificate and degree programs, is very strong at CCV and in our other higher ed institutions. Childcare programs seek to improve. In 2025, our team provided support and coaching to 95 family child care homes and 122 center based programs exceeding our goal by 22%. Since F-seventy six, more family child care homes are opening than closing, which is really in contrast to what is happening in other states. And this is in spite of what we know the Vermont housing pressures and aging demographics. So that's a snapshot of our current and future workforce. And so we're excited to be so close to a system that will deliver what we've been asking for. Individual licensure to practice protects the public, it supports children, and it strengthens the early childhood educator workforce. In Vermont, there are more than 8,000 early childhood educators working in those non public child care programs regulated by the Child Development Division. That means most of Vermont's youngest children and all of the infants and toddlers in regulated care attend these programs. There is not currently a system of individual regulation that supports aligned qualifications and accountability for these educators. So I'll start off by saying I urge you to support this bill. I look forward to representing our early childhood education workforce in continued testimony. And I'd love to come back with the lead coordinator of our Advancing Early Childhood Educators as a profession, Susan Chittenden, who together we can share a more in-depth background on how this was workforce led over those many years leading to the recommendations and elevate why we believe this is what's best for Vermont's children. And it's ultimately going to be best for childcare businesses who are trying to hire employees and increase access to childcare. So, thank you for your time. There's more content in my submitted written testimony, but I want to make sure that you can continue on with your day. Any questions in this quick overview that you would like me to come back with if I have the opportunity?

[Dr. Morgan Crossman, Executive Director, Building Bright Futures]: Any questions?

[Senator Martine Gulick]: Thank you.

[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Thank you.

[Chair Matthew Birong]: But not least, for a close. Hey, you know, we do enjoy duets here. I've said that time and time again, and it is a heartfelt sentiment. Let me take this one. Oh, okay.

[Lauren Hibbert, Deputy Secretary of State]: Thank you so much for having us. Lauren Hibbert, Deputy Secretary of State, and

[Jennifer Cohen, Director, Office of Professional Regulation]: I have with me Jennifer Cohen, Director of the Office of Professional Regulation.

[Lauren Hibbert, Deputy Secretary of State]: And I was just chatting with the chair about possibly we could come back tomorrow, if possible. But I said I didn't know your calendar. Great. Yes. So anyway, so we'll get started and get as far

[Senator Martine Gulick]: as we

[Lauren Hibbert, Deputy Secretary of State]: can get.

[Senator Martine Gulick]: And if we can come back

[Lauren Hibbert, Deputy Secretary of State]: tomorrow, awesome. But if not I'm

[Chair Matthew Birong]: little ambitious with the schedule. Do know that The launch, that was a misfire on my I

[Lauren Hibbert, Deputy Secretary of State]: just need the piece that I wasn't Well, anyway, we would hope to be able to be here tomorrow, but we will need to confer on schedule.

[Jennifer Cohen, Director, Office of Professional Regulation]: And may I ask, how much time do we have? Because that's going to impact where we go. Do we have four minutes? Or do we have

[Chair Matthew Birong]: much time would you Four minutes?

[Jennifer Cohen, Director, Office of Professional Regulation]: Well, I mean, we could talk

[Chair Matthew Birong]: about How

[Lauren Hibbert, Deputy Secretary of State]: 10 sound?

[Jennifer Cohen, Director, Office of Professional Regulation]: And before we start, I printed up a copy of this for y'all, I would love, if possible, to leave it in the committee room just in case anybody wants to pick it up. This is our 86 page Sunrise Report that not only has all of the foundational work that went into this legislation, but we also included in there every single public comment, a synopsis that we received in our outreach with the public. We had public hearings. We had an email inbox with public comments. So we provided all of that, the good, the bad, the ugly. So it's all in here for you to read, and I'm just going to leave that here for you, if that's Okay.

[Chair Matthew Birong]: Thank you.

[Dr. Morgan Crossman, Executive Director, Building Bright Futures]: We also have it on our web page under Reports and Resources, if anybody listening wants to read it.

[Lauren Hibbert, Deputy Secretary of State]: Of us are analog and like paper.

[Senator Martine Gulick]: That's why. That's why I brought it, because I am that.

[Lauren Hibbert, Deputy Secretary of State]: So I do recommend reading that, in large part because Director Collins spent considerable time doing it. But the ultimate finding and the important thing for this committee to remember is the high goal of the Office of Professional Regulation is to protect the public. And that analysis was done under Chapter 57, which is in Title 26, a beautiful set of statute which really requires that our state, before we regulate a profession, do an analysis, a concrete analysis, based on data and findings and stakeholder participation and public outreach to assess whether a profession needs to be regulated and whether it's necessary to protect the public, whether there's evidence of harm. And if there is evidence of harm, then the state is then instructed to figure out which level of government intrusion on the marketplace should there be. It's a very libertarian statute. And there's three different layers of licensure. We've talked to you in this committee quite a bit about it. But there's registration, which means mandatory for all without qualifications certification, which means voluntary with qualifications and licensure, which means mandatory for all with qualifications. And I'm going to let Jen talk about the harms that were potentially found if the state does not move into regulation of this space. But the big highlight is we found harm and we found that licensure mandatory for all in the field with specific carve outs, and we'll talk about those, is necessary and that there should be qualifications for this space. I think a really important piece, before I turn it to Jen about the harm that we found, is that there already are some qualifications in this space. I don't want you to think that there's none. And CDD plays a really important piece in the regulation of child care. They regulate the facilities. And the facilities have requirements about who's allowed to work in their facilities. And there's requirements on the people who are required to work in the facilities. So as you're thinking about this bill, it is not going from no requirements to huge requirements. You'll hear us talk a lot about what's currently required for someone who works in a CDD regulated facility now and the difference of what this bill proposes. And there is a qualifications increase, but you'll also hear us talk a lot about the strategic way that we've outlined how to get there. First of all, this bill wouldn't be effective for a couple of years so that we could get the program up and running. And then the ultimate qualifications, of which we've made a lot of modifications to from this report. Our initial recommendations are in this report, but what is sitting before you has gone through a robust Senate process, has been passed out of the Senate now twice, weirdly, with a lot different pathways. So we really look forward to diving into all of those things. But maybe you could just speak to the harms that we

[Dr. Morgan Crossman, Executive Director, Building Bright Futures]: found, because I think that's a good

[Jennifer Cohen, Director, Office of Professional Regulation]: Happy to do that. And we can just leave it there after we're done. Also, to preview for you, the testimony that I prepared is 17 pages, but there's two appendices and beautiful little one pagers for y'all to take a look at that have the information kind of at a glance. And then the second appendix is about our summarized process, the childcare crisis in the state, and our findings, our detailed findings about risk of harm to young children. So if you want to really dive in further about what's the risk of harm to kids if we don't do this, the second appendix, Appendix B, starting on page three, kind of dives in for a few pages about this. But OKR recognized two types of public harm in its report. And those are: one, physical and emotional abuse maltreatment in neglected children. And unfortunately, we know that that happens. And two, four, educational, developmental, and health outcomes for children that are caused by low quality care and lack of access to high quality care. So just to dive into those two different types of harm a little bit, we know that young children ages zero to eight are Vermont's most vulnerable population. They may be subject to physical, emotional abuse and maltreatment or neglect by staff at regulated childcare facilities. And I just want to say, we see news stories about the worst of the worst, But the impacts of even neglect, not responding to an infant that's crying, leaving them there, that has impacts on how their brain develops. And it has impacts on how their body responds to the stress of not receiving care when they are crying and need attention. And then that impacts, if that happens often, if they are not responded to often, if

[Senator Martine Gulick]: they are

[Jennifer Cohen, Director, Office of Professional Regulation]: neglected, that has long term health consequences, including cardiovascular disease, diabetes, increased rates of mental health issues, increased rates of addiction. So children that are coming out of environments, even when there's neglect, are having increased rates of these kind of poor outcomes. So in the Appendix B, I highlighted a few cases that we've seen in Vermont in the last couple of years. A Rutland childcare facility that was shut down in October '5 after CDD determined physical abuse of children occurred, as well as staff cursing and making threats of harm to the children. A Hyde Park childcare facility that was also closed in October '5, after CDD determined maltreatment of children, including covering the faces of sleeping infants. In 2023, a Barrytown childcare facility was shut down after CBD found many violations, including that young children were shaken, that an infant was tossed onto a changing table hitting the baby's head, pinching a baby's nose to make it drink out of a bottle, denying infant sleep time, cursing at children, and waiting significant time before attending to crying infants. News report of that abuse noted that the perpetrator, the director of the infant room at that facility, had been in child care for two decades. That just got me. That just got me. Sorry. I want you

[Lauren Hibbert, Deputy Secretary of State]: to know that this is a topic that we both feel really passionate about. We both obviously needed to use early childhood education in order to advance our careers. And this is just something with Jen's deep research, she just feels really passionate about. So I'll stop crying and move

[Senator Martine Gulick]: on to the next point.

[Jennifer Cohen, Director, Office of Professional Regulation]: So individual regulation through OPR with respect to that first type of harm will allow the removal of individual bad actors from the marketplace through a well established disciplinary process that includes investigation, prosecution, and adjudication. We have that in all of our professions. And we see that, we see in mental health professions, practitioners sleeping with their clients. We see physical abuse happening to clients in other types of professions, such as nursing, neglect, maltreatment, that sort of So it's a similar thing here. We'll be able to take those people pretty immediately out of the marketplace in a public way, so that when we have an order suspending someone's license, that's on our website. So then if that person wanted to provide care that's not regulated in the state, for example, trusted family care providers who are taking care of children from two or one family, they're not regulated at all. CDD does not regulate them. And will not make, S206 will not make them regulated. So in other words, that would mean that as a parent, if you want your kid to be watched by your neighbor, who is not regulated by the state, you could go onto our website and just make sure that they haven't been suspended or disciplined for maltreatment of children by our office. That's a huge gap that exists right now. So we're gonna close that. And individual regulation through OPR is going to permit families and the public to know the education and training of regulated individuals, as well as when regulated individuals have been disciplined for violating conduct or practice standards. And you can look up any one of our regulated professions.

[Senator Martine Gulick]: You can look

[Jennifer Cohen, Director, Office of Professional Regulation]: up individuals and see if they've been disciplined. So we love that. The second kind of harm, and we're rounding the corner to me almost being done. The second kind of harm is a lack of provider competency in early childhood education standards that results in a lower quality of childcare outcomes. And that lower quality impacts young children into adulthood. So studies have shown, and I dive into this in our Sunrise report, studies have shown that young children who do not have access to high quality early education have a twenty five percent higher rate of dropping out of school and not graduating high school. Special needs and early indicators of learning disabilities are not assessed in low quality childcare environments because providers don't have adequate education and training. That means children go without early interventions that reduce the long term impacts of those special needs. Infants, toddlers, and young children who do not have access to high quality early education have higher rates of law enforcement involvement, mental health issues, and addiction. So when you heard testimony earlier that high quality early education has a substantial return on investment. That's why, because for every dollar you invest in early education now, you're gonna see a return on your investment of $4 to $13 because people are gonna need less medical care. They're gonna need less interventions in school for special needs. They're gonna have less law enforcement intervention. So that's saving the government money, which is a fantastic thing. We love that. So as to that second kind of harm, individual regulation through OPR will ensure education and training based on the science of brain development. It will establish the National Association for the Education of Young Children, the NACE standards. Those are the standards that are used in public schools. So when kids hit pre K or kindergarten, those are the standards that those teachers follow. We're going to have the same standards on the early educators to align them across settings. Individual regulation will require competency in observing, documenting, and assessing children's learning and development, so that they will have eyes on from an early age and things can be addressed sooner rather than later. And then requiring competency in curriculum development and implementation so that kids receive high quality education that promotes cognitive, linguistic, social and emotional growth. And that means the skills young children gain in literacy, mathematics, self regulation, and behavior makes them more prepared to enter public school. So they're going to be better prepared for that. So those are the harms that we found in our report. And I encourage any questions at any point, even if you want to email me, happy to provide more information.

[Chair Matthew Birong]: Refstone, and I think my ultimate goal is to have you back in to go over this in much greater depth and much deeper Q and A.

[Jennifer Cohen, Director, Office of Professional Regulation]: Our testimony goes section by section. So we're prepared to do that. Yeah.

[Chair Matthew Birong]: And I really want to pay your respects to the amount of work that he put into this and not feel rushed right now. Thank you. Yeah.

[Dr. Morgan Crossman, Executive Director, Building Bright Futures]: Was my question. I had to make sure that we're going be back in to do a section Yes, by

[Senator Martine Gulick]: we really want to.

[Lauren Hibbert, Deputy Secretary of State]: And I think we need to not only do the section by section, but really break down the provisional pathways so that Because what we heard on the Senate side and what we responded to on the Senate side was, we're going to lose providers. And that is the most common concern about this bill. And we have worked very hard to ensure that we don't lose providers. And so we'd really like to talk about that. And generally, when we have the opportunity to talk to someone who is personally concerned that they're going to be out of business, once they understand the pathways and it's really a problem with legal language, which is what statutory language is. Once you understand the pathways, there is a pathway for almost every single person who's currently working in the field while increasing their education and qualifications. So we'd really like to dive not only section by section, but what each pathway means and how long it will be and how we'll get people to the level that we're working towards.

[Jennifer Cohen, Director, Office of Professional Regulation]: And one other thing that I just wanted to clarify, and Representative Hango, this goes to your question earlier. So I just want to be clear. There will always be family childcare providers in Vermont, and that is critical because we're a rural state. So this bill doesn't get rid of the family childcare homes. What it does is makes the quality kind of streamlined across settings so that lead teachers are at an ECE two or three level. So those family childcare home providers will continue to provide care, and their educational requirements will increase, that there's plenty of time and support and resources to help them do that, as well as variances so that they can do that. So I just wanted to be clear about that. That's not going away, and this bill doesn't get rid of that setting.

[Dr. Morgan Crossman, Executive Director, Building Bright Futures]: Thank you. I have seven questions. I'll hold them till tomorrow or

[Jennifer Cohen, Director, Office of Professional Regulation]: next week. Great. Thank you so much.

[Chair Matthew Birong]: Yeah, no, no. We will have you back as soon as possible to go over this in greater depth. I appreciate it.