House Human Services reviews draft Pre-K statute; asks JFO contractor to recommend funding approach

The House Human Services Committee on an in-session markup reviewed draft 6.2 of proposed Pre-K statutory language, with legislative counsel walking members through changes to pre-qualification, teacher-licensing standards and background-check coordination and flagging staged effective dates through 2033. Committee members asked the Joint Fiscal Office (JFO) to contract for analysis of funding mechanisms and to return recommendations by January 15, 2027.

Legislative counsel Katie Mcllin told members the draft opens with new intent language stressing that "the intent of the general assembly to ensure that prek education is included as an integral part of Vermont's education system," and then proceeds to amend section 829 with phased effective dates and new pre-qualification rules for providers. The draft calls for agencies to "jointly determine whether a private or public provider of prek education is qualified" and to maintain a publicly accessible database of pre-qualified providers on agency websites.

Why it matters: the draft reshapes standards for who may teach in public and private Pre-K, how background checks are recognized, and how districts and private providers are paid—changes that affect access, workforce requirements and district budgets statewide.

Key provisions and member concerns

Teacher licensing and timing: The draft retains a distinction for private providers in the near term but makes public-provider teacher licensure (licensed and endorsed in early childhood education or early childhood special education under chapter 51) the long-term standard. Counsel explained a sequence of amendments taking effect on different dates, including provisions keyed to July 1, 2026 (as written in the draft) and transitional standards culminating in July 1, 2033.

Background checks: Counsel described a provision intended to avoid duplicate checks for public-school employees: "If the employees of a pre-K education program operated by a school district have completed a background check pursuant to this title, DCF shall deem any requirement for a separate background check for the purpose of pre-qualification pursuant to this section to have been met," the draft states. Members asked DCF to review whether existing provisions in Title 16 (statute cited in discussion) already address the issue and requested that Janet Mclofflin (deputy commissioner) join by Zoom to clarify implementation concerns.

District roles and capacity: The draft requires school districts, when local Pre-K supply is insufficient, to begin or expand programs and to collaborate with the Agency of Education (AOE), Agency of Human Services (AHS) and Building Bright Futures (BBF) to develop regional plans and consider provisional or emergency licenses. Members emphasized sequencing—encouraging collaboration (including UPK coordinators where present) before ordering districts to expand capacity.

Tuition and rate setting: The proposal retains the average daily membership concept and calls for a statewide tuition rate that may be adjusted regionally and that AHS and AOE will propose annually to the General Assembly as part of their budget presentations. Counsel and members discussed removing district-specific calendar language in favor of 'academic calendar' to align with a possible statewide school calendar.

In-kind arrangements: The draft clarifies that where a district provides space or a licensed teacher to a private provider (an "in-kind" arrangement), students would count equivalently for enrollment purposes, but district payments to private providers may be adjusted to reflect in-kind services rather than a full tuition transfer.

JFO contractor study and appropriation: The committee agreed to ask JFO to contract with a specialist in Vermont education funding to recommend how to account for Pre-K in the foundation formula, aligning with prior foundation-formula reports where possible. The draft specifies a JFO report due January 15, 2027, and notes a $50,000 appropriation from the General Fund to JFO to hire the contractor. Members worked to draft four to five specific goals for the contractor (see below).

Goals for the JFO contractor (as framed by the committee): support a mixed-delivery system for 3– and 4‑year‑olds; identify a funding mechanism (categorical payment, weighted average daily membership, or other) that meets stated goals; recommend equal payments and educational standards across public and private providers; ensure full-cost accounting within the foundation formula (including administrative costs); and propose ways to increase access and participation in areas with limited capacity or low participation (for example, the Northeast Kingdom, Franklin and Grand Isle counties).

Next steps: Members asked counsel to refine language (including background-check cross-references) and planned a straw poll on the Pre-K language after Janet Mclofflin participates by Zoom. A vote in committee was discussed for the next day if edits can be completed. The JFO contractor scope and the $50,000 appropriation will travel with the policy language into the education bill process.

Ending

The committee paused Pre-K markup to take up S.210 (access to autopsy reports). For the Pre-K work, the immediate next procedural steps are editorial revisions by legislative counsel, a DCF clarification on background checks, and a JFO contractor scope to be finalized and funded through the stated appropriation.