Nevada committee hears bill to expand virtual early-childhood program, funds proposed

Assemblymember Danielle Monroe Moreno on behalf of the State Assembly presented Assembly Bill 212 on the virtual early childhood family engagement program and asked the Assembly Committee on Education to expand the pilot statewide and provide additional funding.

AB 212 would rename the existing pilot by dropping “pilot” from its title, extend reporting deadlines to 2027, and, as introduced, would appropriate $1,000,000 from the state general fund for fiscal year 2025–26 and an additional $1,000,000 for fiscal year 2026–27 to the Department of Health and Human Services to implement the program.

The bill sponsor said the program, delivered through Waterford UPSTART, provides at-home, 15-minutes-a-day lessons in reading, math and science and supports families with coaches and, where needed, laptops and internet service. Leslie Pittman of the Waterford Institute told the committee that a competitive state contract awarded in May 2024 led to a Nevada Virtual Early Childhood Pilot Project; she said 395 children were registered at the conclusion of the program’s first fiscal year and that, as of her testimony, 1,170 children were enrolled, 994 children had received laptops and 474 households had received internet service.

Kennard (Kenard) Jones, identified as a Waterford vice president, described family coaches who “are on call basically almost 24/7” to help caregivers keep children engaged and to tailor instruction. He and Pittman said the program is used where site-based pre‑K seats are unavailable or where families cannot access center-based programs because of transportation, language, waiting lists or other barriers.

Supporters who testified included the Charter School Association of Nevada and the University of Nevada’s College of Education, both urging the committee to expand access for children who otherwise lack preschool options. Lindsey Diamond of the University of Nevada described the pilot as a useful complement for families who lack in-person pre‑K.

Neutral and opposing witnesses raised concerns about screen time and whether virtual programs can substitute for hands-on, in-person early childhood education. Lianne McAllister, executive director of the Nevada chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, said the AAP recognizes both risks and learning opportunities related to media and urged that media not crowd out play or interpersonal time. Justice Forrest of the Nevada Association for the Education of Young Children said tactile, in-person early childhood experiences cannot be replicated by screens and the association therefore opposed treating virtual options as a full substitute for pre‑K.

A member of the public, Matthew Winterhawk, opposed the bill on grounds that removing or loosening screen‑time safeguards would expose young children to excessive digital time and questioned transparency around program spending. Committee testimony and the sponsor’s remarks also noted that an amendment was submitted that retains language limiting program screen time to amounts consistent with American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations; witnesses said the amendment addressed several stakeholder concerns.

Committee members asked about program demographics and devices. Pittman said the mandatory report required by Assembly Bill 348 (2023) provides demographic detail for the original cohort and said DHHS, which administers the program, collects further data; she said Waterford provides laptops and internet to families who need them and that families usually keep the laptop after program completion while subsidized internet is removed when the program ends.

Materials submitted to the committee included a combined cohort analysis of roughly 3,000 Nevada children who participated in Upstart from 2020–2024; the report, provided as an exhibit, showed learning gains for the combined cohort, the presenters said. The program materials also noted alignment to Nevada’s pre‑K standards and Head Start outcomes and that the Waterford curriculum has been used in multiple states since about 2009.

No formal action or vote occurred during the hearing. The committee closed the hearing on AB 212 after testimony and questions and recessed.

The committee record includes program usage figures, representations about device and internet provision, and the sponsor’s proposed appropriation; the bill’s amendment retained an AAP screen‑time recommendation and extended reporting deadlines.

Members, stakeholders and several advocacy organizations said they want continued monitoring of outcomes if the state enlarges the program, with preference expressed by multiple witnesses for in‑person pre‑K when it is available.