Home child-care providers urge changes to S.119, warn degree mandate could reduce workforce

Heather Armelle, who runs a four‑star registered home child‑care in Moncton, Vermont, told the Senate Committee on Government Operations on April 4 that she and many home providers oppose making early childhood education a licensed profession tied to an associate degree because it could force experienced providers to close.

The testimony matters because Vermont and other states face a shortage of early childhood educators, and S.119 would change who must hold a portable professional credential. Committee members and advocates said they want to preserve the workforce while improving standards; providers urged alternatives such as competency‑based pathways, expanded continuing education and grandfathering for established home providers.

"Many of us are concerned that we will lose many dedicated providers who are not interested or able to go back to school to obtain an associate's degree," Armelle said. She described operating a home program for 15 years, working more than 50 hours a week and taking 40 to 60 hours of training a year, and argued that missing college general‑education credits (for example, algebra or English composition) would not make her a better caregiver.

Armelle and other witnesses told the committee that home providers perform multiple roles — director, teacher, business manager and cleaner — and that a uniform college requirement treats centers and family child care the same when their business models and supports differ. Armelle said many home providers already complete continuing professional development and that some would prefer stronger, more focused training tied to practice rather than a full college degree.

Committee members responded by describing provisions in the bill intended as a transition for current workers. Committee members said S.119 includes a multi‑year transitional license (described by witnesses in committee testimony as an up to six‑year on‑ramp) so current educators could continue working while completing any required coursework. Committee members also raised alternatives during the hearing: competency‑based assessments, prior‑learning portfolios through community college programs, additional targeted continuing education, and supports such as financial aid, tutoring and apprenticeship models.

Sharon Harrington, deputy director of Vermont AEYC, said portfolio and competency pathways already exist and were discussed in earlier outreach. "They already exist for early childhood. They are focused on portfolio pathways," Harrington said, and recommended that rulemaking and supports be developed with representatives of family child care.

Witnesses and some senators discussed the state's STARS system and the Community College of Vermont (CCV) prior‑learning assessments as existing tools for recognition and training. Armelle said she has college credits through CCV ("I've got So I have 36, I think, out of the 60 credits that I need") and that the flexibility of some workshops and CCV courses helps providers complete training during naps or off hours.

Providers and committee members flagged several practical concerns: the time and cost of returning to college for people with family or elder‑care responsibilities; lack of employer benefits for most home providers; and the risk that some providers would stop operating or move to unregulated care rather than comply. Armelle urged more outreach to home providers: she said many learned of the Office of Professional Regulation proposal only recently and asked that the committee involve home providers in shaping any transition.

The committee did not vote on S.119 at the hearing. Senators and witnesses encouraged continued engagement between the Office of Professional Regulation, the Agency of Education, community colleges and provider groups to design grandfathering, competency and support options before the bill is brought forward for a vote.

A number of committee members asked providers to submit specific suggestions the panel could use to refine the bill so it preserves access to care while creating a clearer pathway to professional recognition.