Building Professional Development Systems for the Afterschool Field
September 2007

The Afterschool Investments Project

The Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) provides federal resources for child care that support both direct services and quality enhancements. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Child Care Bureau awards CCDF grants to states, territories, and tribes. With nearly half of the children receiving services being of school or kindergarten age, CCDF provides significant funding for afterschool care in a variety of settings. The majority of CCDF dollars are used to provide subsidies to eligible low-income children under age 13. A portion of CCDF funding is also used for quality improvement initiatives, such as professional development and technical assistance, with the goal of building the capacity of states to deliver quality services including programs before and afterschool, during summers, and on school holidays.

To support state efforts to provide quality afterschool opportunities, the Child Care Bureau awarded a technical assistance contract on out-of-school time to The Finance Project and its partner, The National Governors Association Center for Best Practices. The Afterschool Investments project provides technical assistance to Child Care and Development Fund grantees and other state and local leaders who support afterschool efforts. The goals of the project include:

• Identifying ways that states and communities are using Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) subsidy and quality dollars to support out-of-school time programs, and sharing these practices and approaches with other states;
  
• Identifying administrative and implementation issues related to CCDF investments in out-of-school time programs, and providing information and context (about barriers, problems, opportunities) as well as practical tools that will help CCDF administrators make decisions; and
  
• Identifying other major programs and sectors that are potential partners for CCDF in supporting out-of-school time programs, and providing models, strategies, and tools for coordination with other programs and sectors.

To meet these goals, the Afterschool Investments project is:

• Regularly updating and maintaining State profiles of afterschool resources, policies and issues;
  
• Creating tools and materials to support the development and sustainability of afterschool efforts; and
  
• Providing targeted technical assistance to state child care administrators and other state leaders around building partnerships and developing state policies that promote investments in highquality afterschool programs.

For more information about the project or to submit a request for technical assistance or information, contact The Finance Project at (202) 587-1000 or by email at afterschool@financeproject.org, or visit http://nccic.acf.hhs.gov/afterschool

Table of Contents

Introduction

Challenges in Building Afterschool Professional Development Systems

Approaches to Afterschool Professional Development System-Building Efforts

State and Local Efforts to Build Components of a Professional Development System

Lessons Learned

Conclusion

Acknowledgements

Resources

Endnotes

Introduction

The afterschool field evolved considerably during the past decade.¹ Demand for programs increased due, in part, to the rise in the number of working parents and the increased attention to academic success. A growing research base on the benefits of afterschool programs has highlighted their value, supporting further investment and program expansion. With this expansion has come heightened concern about quality.

Professional development plays a vital role in supporting quality afterschool programs.² Providers who have participated in education and training opportunities are more likely to deliver quality programs that contribute to positive youth outcomes.³ Moreover, studies in the education and early care and education field show that participation in professional development is associated with higher levels of worker retention and decreased turnover.⁴ Despite growing recognition of the importance of a trained afterschool workforce, the field lacks a fully developed professional development system. A professional development system not only includes comprehensive education and training to adequately prepare afterschool providers for their work, but also offers various supports to ensure the value, quality, alignment, and accessibility of the education and training offered.

Policymakers at the federal, state, and local levels are currently considering how best to support the professional development needs of those who work with children in afterschool programs.

Several factors are driving the heightened interest in developing professional development systems for school-age care workers, including:

• an increased focus on establishing a system of professional development for early care providers, particularly as a result of the Bush administration’s early childhood initiative Good Start, Grow Smart, which has highlighted the need for a similar focus on schoolage care;


• the success of statewide afterschool networks in raising awareness of what is needed to create a comprehensive system of support for afterschool programs, including a professional development system; and


• efforts to improve children’s academic achievement by providing afterschool academic and enrichment programs as well as the need to ensure program staff have the requisite skills and training to provide programs that will accomplish these objectives.

States and localities have taken a variety of approaches to building professional development systems for the afterschool field. This brief highlights challenges in building afterschool professional development systems and introduces three approaches for systems-building efforts. It then profiles a number of state and local efforts to build essential components of professional development systems and discusses lessons learned from creating effective professional development systems for afterschool.

Challenges in Building Afterschool Professional Development Systems

In many states and localities, training for afterschool providers is connected to the professional development system for early care and education. However, characteristics of the afterschool workforce and elements of the afterschool field pose unique challenges to creating a strong system. These challenges, and their implications for professional development systems, include the following.

• The nature of the workforce and of the job. Like early care and education, the field of afterschool is characterized by low wages and high turnover. In addition, the afterschool workforce tends to work part time. These factors can dampen workers’ ability and motivation to pursue professional development as well as the incentive for programs to provide professional development opportunities for workers in the field.


• A lack of identity as a profession. Many see afterschool care as supplemental or interim work. In this largely paraprofessional workforce, workers may not view themselves as professionals or see afterschool care as a career. In addition, many providers use volunteers heavily in program delivery. These issues may make providers less likely to invest in training.


• A lack of identity as a field. The term "afterschool" refers to a broad array of programs (arts, academics, recreation, youth development, etc.) that serve children of different ages. This diversity in program focus can make it difficult for professional development system leaders to design and provide training geared to the desired skill set for providers.


• Varying prior experiences and educational backgrounds. Recent studies have found that afterschool providers vary greatly in age, education, and prior experience.⁵ The various experiences and backgrounds of participants make it difficult to design a system and offer trainings that meet providers’ diverse needs and abilities.


• Different professional development goals. The desired duration and intensity of professional development offerings differ among members of the afterschool workforce, with some providers wanting single workshops and others interested in pursuing degrees. This highlights the likely need for different modes of delivery and entry points for an afterschool professional development system.

Approaches to Afterschool Professional Development System-Building Efforts

Most of the system-building activity is occurring at the state and local levels, though in many cases leaders are utilizing national organizations for technical assistance and guidance on professional development systems for the afterschool as well as the early care and education fields. These efforts reflect many similarities, but the exact strategy and approach undertaken in each state or locality varies depending on such factors as the presence of professional development systems for other fields (e.g., child care); the relationships with, and levels of support from, relevant agencies and leaders; and current afterschool training offerings. Approaches include building off the early childhood professional development system, connecting existing systems, and creating a new system.

• Building off the early childhood professional development system. Many states have strong early care and education professional development systems and have successfully expanded them to the school-age care field. For example, Illinois is building a professional development system based on an existing framework in the Gateways Initiative from the early care and education field.⁶


• Connecting existing systems. In other cases, state and local officials from many systems and agencies are collaborating to create a system for school-age care providers. Existing programs and operations are connected and built on. Responsibility for operating the system lies across agencies through the use of interagency agreements. These efforts typically involve several state agencies, including labor, education, child care, workforce development, and juvenile justice, which all have a stake in ensuring a qualified afterschool workforce.


• Creating a new system. Alternatively, some states may want to create a new system to address the specific needs of workers in the afterschool field. Modifying the system for early child care is not seen as viable or ideal. Instead of connecting existing systems, a new system is needed.

The leadership structure for an afterschool professional development system can vary, regardless of the approach utilized. In some cases, an agency such as child care assumes the lead role. In other cases, leadership is shared across agencies and organizations. Many have found that professional development for afterschool workers is not easily nested within one agency, because the scope of the system cuts across the mission of many programs.

In some cases, state legislation has provided the impetus for building a system. Washington STARS (State Training and Registry System), a career development system for the early care and education and afterschool fields, was established through statewide legislation. Components of Washington STARS include an online registry of trainings, scholarships for training participants, and a trainer approval system.⁷

Legislation also can promote system-building by creating a market for training and credentials. Leaders of state and local system-building efforts report that some colleges have designed courses focused on afterschool and youth development but have stopped offering them regularly because of a lack of enrollment. Similar problems existed for the early care field before Head Start legislation was passed requiring teachers to have a credential. The mandate for additional training created an influx of potential students and led to increased demand for the child development associate credential.

Yet legislation does not always ensure an operating system; in Florida, early care and afterschool program directors and administrators must have an administrator credential. However, only one county has leveraged this mandate into a professional development system (see "Making It Work in Florida’s Palm Beach County" on page 8). Even in instances of legislation, many leaders have spent time building public awareness of the need for a professional development system to gain support and partners.

Because of the diverse nature of afterschool programs, a wide variety of partners are needed to develop an afterschool professional development system. These include practitioners, intermediaries, state agencies (labor, justice, education, child care, youth development, etc.), resource and referral agencies, and higher education and community college systems. In many states, statewide afterschool networks have played an active role in establishing professional development systems.⁸ Since 2002, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation has provided core funding to statewide afterschool networks, with 32 of networks currently receiving funding.

Networks provide a vehicle for connecting various afterschool stakeholders to build partnerships and encourage policies that improve the quality, quantity, and sustainability of afterschool programs in their state.

State and Local Efforts to Build Components of a Professional Development System

Professional development systems have several interconnected components. The National Child Care Information Center (NCCIC), a service of the Child Care Bureau, has developed a framework that describes the essential components and connections of a professional development system.⁹ Although the framework was developed to help states and localities develop systems of professional development for early childhood, the components are relevant for states and localities aiming to build a system for the afterschool field or incorporate school-age care workers into their early childhood professional development systems.

The five interconnected components of this framework are:

• funding;


• core knowledge and core competencies;


• qualifications and credentials;


• quality assurances; and


• access and outreach.

Efforts to create professional development systems for the afterschool workforce are relatively new. While many states are taking a comprehensive approach, they tend to focus on building and implementing one or two of these components in their initial stages of work. The following section describes these components in detail and highlights examples of states and localities that are currently working to build and/or strengthen these system components.

Funding

Funding is the foundation of any system. Investment is needed to plan and implement professional development systems for afterschool programs and to make training financially feasible for participants. Financial support for the system can include funding; scholarships and financial incentives for trainings, courses, and degrees; compensation and retention initiatives; and tiered reimbursement or rewards for programs as part of a quality rating system.

The nature of the workforce and the lack of identity as a field make providers less likely to pursue professional development for school-age care workers, especially if trainings are costly. System-building leaders cite the need for funding to support the delivery of professional development and to provide scholarships for trainings, courses, and degrees.

Incentives and compensation plans reward workers who engage in professional development or attend trainings. For example, the T.E.A.C.H. Early Childhood Project, which includes operating programs in 24 states, provides scholarships to child care providers and rewards staff members who improve their education with a stipend or increased wages. Afterschool providers are able to be part of the program in seven states; however, T.E.A.C.H. programs are typically restricted to full-time employees. This limits how many afterschool providers are able to access the funding because of their typical part-time work schedule. However, expanding the program to all part-time employees—early care and school age—would dramatically increase the cost of the program to states.

Professional development accomplishments can also be tied to tiered quality rewards and reimbursement, including those that are part of a quality rating system (QRS).¹⁰ These systems were initially developed by the early care field and enable programs to be evaluated, typically on a voluntary basis, on meeting quality standards to earn a designation, such as a "star rating." As of November 2006, 13 states and the District of Columbia have implemented a statewide QRS, with many other states developing one.¹¹ In many instances, developing a QRS has served as a catalyst for building a statewide professional development system.

The national experts interviewed for this publication indicate that most funding for professional development system-building comes from the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF). According to state and territory CCDF plans for fiscal years 2006–07, 33 states and 2 territories use school-age child care set-aside funds for practitioner training.¹² Additional funding comes from foundations and state and local agencies (see "Afterschool Academies Initiative" on page 11).

• In Massachusetts, the Achieve Boston initiative received funding from various public and private sources for a pilot project to compile Boston’s professional development offerings in a training catalog and website and distribute training vouchers.¹³ Funding sources included the city of Boston, the Massachusetts Department of Education, the Boston Foundation, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Harvard University, and Verizon.


• Palm Beach County in Florida has devoted county funds to help school-age care workers pay for courses developed by Palm Beach Community College. Prime Time Palm Beach, a local nonprofit intermediary organization with funding from the county and various foundations, sponsors forums to support course design, provides trainings, and supports outreach efforts.

Core Knowledge and Core Competencies

A key component of a professional development system is identification of what every practitioner should know and be able to do to provide high-quality afterschool care, better known as core knowledge and competencies. Core knowledge is the basic set of information that providers are expected to know and core competencies are the interactions and observable skills of putting the core knowledge in action. Core knowledge and competencies can serve as an important basis for the other components of the professional development system (see "Core Content Areas" below). This component also includes creating a career lattice—a framework to recognize and track providers’ professional development.

The knowledge and competencies outlined must be broad enough to encompass the wide range of settings, types of programs, and ages of children served by afterschool programs. Competencies usually include steps or levels to reflect a continuum from basic skills to advanced levels of training and experience. Practitioners progress through the levels based on formal and informal training, education, responsibilities, and experience.

Many professional development systems create career lattices or career pathways to define levels of experience, education, and training for various positions and compensation levels. The lattice or pathway should be applicable for providers with entry-level skills as well as for those at an advanced professional level. These models differ from a typical career ladder by recognizing multiple points of entry into the professional development system and facilitating movement within the field and across settings, programs, and age groups.

Identifying or developing standards for core knowledge, core competencies, and content areas provides many benefits to a professional development system-building effort. The standards create a common language and shared expectations for those in the afterschool field. For example, clearly defined competencies help program leaders design job expectations, establish salary scales, and help develop professional development plans. They also enable a baseline of current levels of knowledge and skills to be evaluated; evaluation results can improve training delivery by identifying and targeting training needs. Core knowledge and competencies also create set standards that can lead to the development of professional credentials.

Many states have created core competencies, typically building on existing standards from other fields. The experience in Kansas and Missouri illustrates a collaborative effort to develop core competencies (see "Developing Bi-State Core Competencies in Kansas and Missouri" on page 14).

Qualifications and Credentials

Ideally, professional development trainings should follow a clear sequence, from basic knowledge and entry-level skills to advanced content. They should count toward a licensing requirement, credential, or degree or be valuable to the participant in some other way. A credential is defined as a certification "that recognizes an individual based on a set of defined skills and knowledge."¹⁴ Building off the core competencies, a credentialing program outlines the types of trainings, number of training hours, and demonstration of ability for certification and continuing education. While the credential plays a vital role in professionalizing the field and enabling afterschool workers to gain recognition for the training they receive, it must also be supported by other aspects of the system.

There is no national professional credential for school-age care providers similar to the child development associate (CDA) credential in the early care and education field. However, the military school-age credential,¹⁵ created by the U.S. Military Child Care Act, is a competency-based credential that follows the core competencies of the CDA and has served as a model for many of the school-age care credentials created at the state level. These credentials are often aligned with the National AfterSchool Association’s standards for quality school-age care.

At least 11 states—Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin—and 1 locality, Boston—have created a school-age care or youth worker credential, certificate, or associate degree.¹⁶

• Connecticut created a credential in afterschool education via a partnership among Charter Oak State College, the Connecticut School-Age Care Alliance, the Connecticut After School Network, and Connecticut Charts-a-Course. All of the required coursework is offered through the distance learning program at Charter Oak State College. Providers pursuing the credential must also compile a professional resource file and document 240 hours of experience working in the afterschool field, which can include a practicum. Connecticut Charts-a-Course, the statewide professional development system, has provided scholarships for the credential program.


• Missouri’s Youth Development Credential, developed by the Missouri School-Age Community Coalition, was piloted in Kansas City and St. Louis before becoming a statewide credential. Coursework is offered at Metropolitan Community College–Penn Valley in Kansas City and St. Louis Community College at Florissant Valley. The courses provide training opportunities to adults working with school-age children throughout the metropolitan areas. Kansas is considering adopting the same credential model.


• In Massachusetts, Achieve Boston recently developed a School-Age and Youth Development (SAYD) credential. The credential is modeled after the Indiana Youth Development Credential and requires a mix of college-level coursework and training as well as experience working with children and youth. Afterschool providers were recruited in fall 2006 to take part in the pilot phase of the project. Classes began in 2007 and were offered free of charge. Participants gain college credits and earn a $2,000 bonus for completing the community-based training program. Achieve Boston has worked with early care and education and other statewide professional development systems to ensure SAYD can be replicated throughout the state.

Quality Assurances

Establishing the core competencies and credential qualifications outlined above does not ensure training will be effective. Trainings and trainers must be monitored and evaluated to make sure the content and delivery of training meet quality standards. To do this, many states and afterschool leaders are creating approval systems and evaluations for educators and trainers who provide professional development and are monitoring training content to ensure quality. One quality assurance mechanism is to require individuals who provide training and professional development opportunities to be certified. Other ways to ascertain the quality of training are monitoring content by requiring training designs or lesson plans to be submitted for review and observing training delivery. Evaluations from participants can also be a tool for gauging quality.

• Pennsylvania’s quality assurance system (PQAS) provides a registry of certified instructors. As part of the certification process for instructors, the state teaches prospective instructors about the components of the professional development system, effective adult learning techniques, and how to align their courses with Pennsylvania’s core knowledge.


• In North Carolina, the School-Age Enhancement Project was started in 2004 to improve the quality of, and availability of training for, afterschool programs throughout the state. CCDF quality funding was used to create 20 school-age specialist positions to provide training and technical assistance. The project also developed a training evaluation tool that is completed by all training participants; participants are asked whether they will use what they have learned in the training and whether they would attend another training offered by this presenter. The current satisfaction rating approaches 99 percent. In addition, the statewide project manager visits each specialist quarterly and monitors the schedule of trainings offered, attendance rosters, and evaluations.

Access and Outreach

Afterschool providers must be aware of trainings and able to easily access them for the professional development system to be fully utilized. Having a listing of all professional development opportunities available in a centralized location such as an online database or catalog is a frequent technique. This training registry also can be used to document and quantify the professional development growth of providers and help them create professional development plans. Many states have taken a regional approach to improve the outreach and access of trainings as well as provide career development advising components.

• Ohio has developed various components of a professional development system, including a professional development registry. Piloted in 2003, the software for the professional development registry was used by the state’s quality rating system, Step Up to Quality, to gather information from the providers working in centers applying to be part of the Step Up to Quality pilot in 2005. The professional development registry provides a wide array of benefits.
  
  
  • Training participants can use the registry to access information on available training opportunities, link to scholarship information, and share their professional history with potential employers. They can also monitor their progress on Career Pathways, a six-level model based on education, experience, and training. The professional development registry is aligned with the state’s Career Pathways levels and, once participants register their training, they are immediately given points and can determine where they are on the pathways.
  
  
  • Trainers can advertise trainings, receive feedback from participants, monitor enrollment, and submit applications for specialized trainings. Programs can use the registry to verify staff qualifications, track employee training, post job announcements, access statewide and regional salary information, and gain assistance in applying for Step Up to Quality and other quality improvement efforts.
  
  
  • State officials can use the registry to easily verify the information required for licensing, thus reducing the administrative burden on licensing specialists.
  
  
• One of the goals of the School-Age Enhancement Project in North Carolina is to make sure trainings are available in all 100 of the state’s counties. To help ensure access, the project has 20 specialists, each of whom supports one of the 18 regions set up by the child care resource and referral agencies (CCRRAs); additional specialists support extremely rural areas. Specialists build on the resources within a community and engage local entities in training design and delivery. They develop partners to provide workshops, work with staff in the 50 local CCRRAs to provide training, and collaborate with the public school system to train those working in afterschool public school programs. In some cases, specialists work with community colleges to provide the seven-hour basic school-age care (BASC) training on licensing, child development, and quality practices, as a component of a youth development class offered at the community college. At the end of the class, students receive credit for the class and proof they have taken the BASC training, which is required for providers working in licensed programs.

Because of the unique characteristics of school-age care professionals, diversity in the types of trainings offered and in the ways they can be completed help define an accessible professional development system. Accomplishing this diversity may involve multiple methods of delivering training content, including classes, workshops, mentoring programs, and distance learning opportunities. Technology is playing an increasingly important role in making training more accessible for providers. For example, Arkansas State University Childhood Services plans to make its school-age specialist modules, an introductory training curriculum, available online.

It can be particularly challenging to engage family care providers in a professional development system. Family child care providers often are not part of the networks through which training opportunities are promoted. Additional barriers also can impede their access to trainings, such as geographical location and nontraditional work schedules. While most afterschool programs struggle to provide substitute teachers for those attending training during hours of operation or compensation for providers for the time they spend in trainings, providing accommodations or initiatives to enable family child care providers to participate in professional development can be even more difficult. The Oregon Center for Development in Childhood Care and Education has begun to address the professional development needs of family care providers by developing suggested quality practices for caring for school-age children in family child care settings that include younger children. The center also includes provider tips for implementing the suggested practices.

Infrastructure to Support a Professional Development System

A strong infrastructure is needed to help connect the various components of a professional development system and coordinate efforts to create a comprehensive system. This includes a stable governance structure, effective leadership, adequate planning, and technical assistance and expertise. Many leaders cite the system infrastructure as vital to the long-term success of a professional development system.

Building professional development systems for the afterschool field is a relatively new undertaking. Many efforts are young, with only certain components of these systems fully implemented. Pennsylvania provides an example of a state that has sought to build a comprehensive system, including a strong infrastructure (see "Pulling All the Pieces Together in Pennsylvania" below).

Lessons Learned

Despite the considerable diversity reflected in initial efforts to develop professional development systems in states and localities nationwide, many similarities in experience can inform the afterschool field and future efforts. Key lessons are to:

• build off and connect to existing systems where possible;


• understand the workforce and support workers’ needs;


• develop a broad base of support;


• nurture partnerships and collaboration; and


• incorporate incentives in system-building efforts.

Build Off and Connect to Existing Systems Where Possible

National experts and state and local system-building leaders note it is frequently easier to build off or connect to an existing system than to start from scratch. In some instances, states had recently worked on building a professional development system for the early care and education field and that effort used many of the same players being convened to work on a system for the afterschool field. These states took advantage of the resources and knowledge gathered to further a systembuilding effort for afterschool care. Linking to the efforts of another field can create efficiencies and make the task seem more manageable. However, it is important to be strategic about connecting to the other field and to make sure existing systems can be modified to adequately meet the needs of the afterschool workforce (see "Strategically Starting to Build a System in Georgia" on page 22).

Understand the Workforce and Support Workers’ Needs

The diversity within the afterschool workforce is one of the main challenges in designing a professional development system for the field. In addition to diversity of settings and of ages of children served, cultural diversity should be addressed in the professional development offerings. National experts note the importance of having available training meet the full range of needs of afterschool providers. To better understand those needs, some states, including Illinois and Massachusetts, have conducted afterschool workforce studies to inform their design of a professional development system. Evaluating the workforce and workers’ training needs at the program level can help providers select appropriate trainings through the adoption of professional development plans (see "Creating Agency-Specific Professional Development Plans in California’s Alameda County" on page 24).

Develop a Broad Base of Support

A lesson echoed by many national experts and state and local system-building leaders is the importance of developing a broad base of support. This includes getting buy-in from key people and making sure all the "right players" are involved from the beginning. The exact mix of stakeholders will vary from state to state, but it typically includes representatives from state agencies, intermediaries, higher education institutions, and community-based organizations. Including providers throughout the planning process also is essential. Early involvement of all relevant stakeholders will help avoid turf issues later.

• In Illinois, stakeholders from around the state gathered in October 2006 for a School-Age Credential Symposium. To support the development and systemic supports needed for a credential, four subcommittees (Core Knowledge, Quality Assurance, Access and Outreach, and Qualifications and Credentials) were formed as a result of the meeting with representatives from the education, child care, workforce development, and youth development fields.

Nurture Partnerships and Collaboration

Partnerships and collaboration play a critical role in successfully creating professional development systems (see "Building Strategic Partnerships in Vermont" on page 25). Although one agency may take the lead in developing a component of a system, all system-building efforts require collaboration, especially to ensure appropriate linkages to other parts of the system. The college and university systems have been important partners in many states’ efforts, particularly in helping develop qualifications and credentials. They have helped design for-credit courses and degree programs and created ways to capture work experience and community-based trainings in a credential program.

Incorporate Incentives in System-Building Efforts

For a system to be comprehensive and sustainable, the interests of all stakeholders must be represented, aligned, and met. Incentives at various points can ensure that the entire system is working together and pulling in the same direction. Legislation can help create incentives for programs and providers to pursue training, which in turns creates a larger market of training participants and compels higher education and training organizations to create and provide relevant training opportunities.

Moreover, compensation and incentives are necessary to make afterschool providers invest the time and energy to participate in the professional development system. Examples of mechanisms for providing incentives are presented in the T.E.A.C.H. model and states’ efforts to link professional development to QRS. The QRS system in Vermont, Vermont STARS (STep Ahead for Recognition System), offers built-in incentives in the state’s Child Care Subsidy Program for regulated child care programs linked to STARS achievement levels.¹⁷ Vermont also has a bonus payment system separate from subsidy payments that honors professional development achievement.

Conclusion

Professional development systems for the afterschool field can help ensure the quality of afterschool programs and a strong, stable afterschool workforce. This brief describes the various components of a professional development system and highlights examples from across the nation of states and localities implementing such systems. The lessons learned from these early efforts can inform the field as it matures and provide direction on how to create and strengthen professional development systems for the afterschool field.

Acknowledgements

This brief was prepared by Kate Sandel and Dionne Dobbins-Harper of the Finance Project, for the Afterschool Investments project, a multiyear technical assistance effort funded by the Child Care Bureau of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Administration for Children and Families. The authors would like to thank the many individuals who commented on earlier drafts, including Carol Cohen and Amanda Szekely of The Finance Project, Ellen Gannett of the National Institute on Out-of-School Time, and Judy Nee of the National Afterschool Association.

Many thanks also to the numerous national experts and leaders of state and local professional development system-building efforts who were willing to share their thoughts, challenges, successes, and lessons learned to educate the field. The authors are grateful to Leanne Cantu, Rockwood School District/MOSAC2; Carol Brunson Day, National Black Child Development Institute; Deb Elder, Kansas Enrichment Network; Jenn Faber, The Children’s Forum; Ellen Gannett, National Institute on Out-of-School Time; Pam Garza, National Collaboration for Youth; Rebecca Goldberg, California School-Age Consortium; Lori Jones, North Carolina School-Age Enhancement Project; Sarah Lemoine, National Child Care Information Center; Ruth Matthews, Vermont Child Care Services; Judy Nee; National Afterschool Association; Liz Nusken and Donna Ruhland, Ohio Child Care Resource and Referral Association; Jill Reimer, Georgia Afterschool Investment Council; Leslie Roesler, Rebecca Gomez, and Carmen Weachter-Gatti, Pennsylvania Key; Sheila Scott-Lupin, Palm Beach Community College; Vicki Stein, Francis Child Development Institute; and Nicole Yohalem, Forum for Youth Investment.

Resources

Bodilly, Susan, and Megan Beckett. Making Out-Of-School Time Matter: Evidence for an Action Agenda. Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corporation, 2005.

Bouffard, Suzanne, and Priscilla Little. "Promoting Quality Through Professional Development: A Framework for Evaluation." Issues and Opportunities in Out-Of-School Time Evaluation Number 8. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Family Research Project, August 2004.

Child Care Bureau, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. CCDF Plans for the States and Territories, 2006–2007. Washington, D.C., 2006.

Child Care Bureau, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Child Care Bulletin 32 (winter/spring 2007). Available at: http://nccic.acf.hhs.gov/ccb/issue32.pdf.

Child Care Bureau, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. A Look at School-Age Children in Regulated Family Child Care Settings. Washington, D.C., 2007.

Child Care Bureau, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Using a State Child Care Quality Rating System to Promote Quality in Afterschool. Washington, D.C., 2007.

Community Matters and Tracey Breslin. Workforce Development in Out-of-School Time: Lessons Learned & Innovative Strategies—A Literature Review. Providence, R.I.: Rhode Island KIDS COUNT, September 2003.

Dennehy, Julie, and Gil Noam. Evidence for Action: Strengthening After-School Programs for All Children and Youth: The Massachusetts Out-of-School Time Workforce. Boston, Mass.: Achieve Boston, 2005.

Dennehy, Julie, Ellen Gannett, and Rachel Robbins. Setting the Stage for a Youth Development Associate Credential: A National Review of Professional Development Credentials for the Out-of- School Time Workforce. Wellesley, Mass.: Wellesley Centers for Women, National Institute on Out-of-School Time, 2006. Available at: www.niost.org/youth_devel_Setting_606.pdf.

Hall, George, and Wendy Surr. Achieve Boston: The Story of a Planning Process for Building a Professional Development System for the Out-of-School Time Workforce. Wellesley, Mass.: Wellesley Centers for Women, National Institute on Out-of-School Time, 2005.

Kansas and Missouri Core Competencies for Youth Development Professionals. 1st. ed. [online], October 2006. Available at: www.openinitiative.org/SACC.htm and www.kansasenrichment.net.

Miller, Beth. Pathways to Success for Youth: What Counts in After School: Massachusetts After-School Research Study Report. Boston, Mass.: United Way of Massachusetts Bay, 2005. Available at: www.wcwonline.org/proj/mars/MARSfull.pdf.

National Child Care Information Center. "Elements of a Professional Development System for Early Care and Education: A Simplified Framework and Definitions." Fairfax, Va.: National Child Care Information Center, 2003. Available at: http://nccic.acf.hhs.gov/pubs/goodstart/pdsystem.pdf.

National Child Care Information Center. State School-Age Child Care Credentials. Fairfax, Va.: National Child Care Information Center, n.d.

National Collaboration for Youth. Capturing Promising Practices in Recruitment and Retention of Frontline Youth Workers. Washington, D.C.: Cornerstone for Kids, National Collaboration for Youth, 2005.

National Collaboration for Youth. Next Generation Youth Work Coalition Bulletin 4. Washington, D.C.: Next Generation Youth Work Coalition, National Collaboration for Youth, February 2007.

National Institute on Out-of-School Time. Youth Worker and SAC Credentials Matrix. Wellesley, Mass.: Wellesley Centers for Women, National Institute on Out-of-School Time, August 2006. Available at: www.niost.org/YDAMatrix0806.pdf.

Yohalem, Nicole, and Karen Pittman. Putting Youth Work on the Map. Washington, D.C.: Forum for Youth Investment on behalf of the Next Generation Youth Work Coalition, November 2006. Available at: www.forumfyi.org/Files/Putting_Youth_Work_on_the_Map.pdf.

Endnotes

¹ In this brief, the term "afterschool" is used to refer to the care of school-age children when they are not in school. This term includes programs that occur before and after school and during the summer and holidays. The term afterschool provider is used interchangeably with school-age care worker and youth workers.[Back]
² In this brief, the term "professional development" is used to refer to a variety of educational and training opportunities for afterschool providers.[Back]
³ Beth M Miller, Pathways to Success for Youth: What Counts in After School: Massachusetts After-School Research Study Report (Boston, Mass.: United Way of Massachusetts Bay, 2005), at: www.wcwonline.org/proj/mars/MARSfull.pdf; and Susan Bodilly and Megan Beckett, Making Out-Of-School Time Matter: Evidence for an Action Agenda (Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corporation, 2005).[Back]
⁴ Julie Dennehy, Ellen Gannett, and Rachel Robbins, Setting the Stage for a Youth Development Associate Credential: A National Review of Professional Development Credentials for the Out-of-School Time Workforce (Wellesley, Mass.: Wellesley Centers for Women, National Institute on Out-of-School Time, 2006), at: www.niost.org/youth_devel_Setting_606.pdf.[Back]
⁵ Nicole Yohalem and Karen Pittman, Putting Youth Work on the Map (Washington, D.C.: Forum for Youth Investment on behalf of the Next Generation Youth Work Coalition, November 2006), at: www.forumfyi.org/Files/Putting_Youth_Work_on_the_Map.pdf.[Back]
⁶ For more information about the Gateways Initiative, see www.ilgateways.com.[Back]
⁷ For more information about Washington STARS, see www.stars.dshs.wa.gov.[Back]
⁸ For more information about statewide afterschool networks, see www.statewideafterschoolnetworks.net.[Back]
⁹ See NCCIC’s one-page document, "Elements of a Professional Development System for Early Care and Education: A Simplified Framework and Definitions," at: http://nccic.acf.hhs.gov/pubs/goodstart/pdsystem.pdf.[Back]
¹⁰ For more information on QRS , see Child Care Bureau, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Using A State Child Care Quality Rating System to Promote Quality in Afterschool (Washington, D.C., 2007).[Back]
¹¹ Child Care Bulletin 32 (winter/spring 2007), at: http://nccic.acf.hhs.gov/ccb/issue32.pdf.[Back]
¹² Child Care Bureau, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, CCDF Plans for the States and Territories, 2006–2007 (Washington, D.C., 2006).[Back]
¹³ For more information on Achieve Boston, see www.achieveboston.org.[Back]
¹⁴ Dennehy, Gannett, and Robbins. [Back]
¹⁵ For more information on the military model, see www.cdacouncil.org/pro_mil.htm or www.pba.army.mil/cys/school_age_services.htm.[Back]
¹⁶ For more information on state- and local-level credentials, see www.niost.org/YDAMatrix0806.pdf.[Back]
¹⁷ For more information on Vermont STARS, visit www.STARSstepahead.org.[Back]

Download FREE Adobe Acrobat® Reader™ to view PDF files located on this site.