Providers warn S206’s degree and fee requirements could shrink Vermont’s child‑care workforce

Sheri James, a registered home child‑care provider from Waterbury Center, told the House Human Services committee she opposes S206, a bill that would create a new credentialing structure for early childhood educators. "Creating a second separate board of early childhood educators doesn't add safety. It adds bureaucracy," James said, and warned the measure would impose a $175 initial fee and a $250 renewal fee every two years on a workforce she described as already underpaid.

James also criticized proposed college‑degree requirements, saying they would bar many people — including stay‑at‑home parents considering opening registered home programs — from entering or remaining in the field. "A degree doesn't help me teach a room of toddlers or support a child's emotional growth," she said, and cited Washington, D.C.'s 2018 rules as a cautionary example: she said licensed child‑care centers there dropped by about 9% in two years after stricter requirements were implemented.

"We already have a child‑care crisis in Vermont. We do not need to pass legislation that will exacerbate it," James said, adding that closures and reduced supply would push costs higher for families and cited a figure she gave that the state "already loses $344 million annually due to child care shortages." She urged the committee to "vote no on S206 and focus on ways to support us, not push us out."

Andrew Proutton, director of the Education Approvals Division at Vermont's Agency of Education, told the committee the agency shares an interest in recognizing and supporting early childhood practitioners but raised technical and interstate‑reciprocity concerns. Proutton said national educator‑licensure standards generally require a bachelor's degree plus a teacher‑preparation program, and that labeling a credential "early childhood educator license" for people who do not meet those national standards risks confusing families and employers and could create compliance problems with reciprocity.

"A professional licensed educator needs to have the minimum of a bachelor's degree and specific program requirements around student teaching," Proutton said, warning that other states might scrutinize Vermont licenses more closely or decline to accept them for interstate transfer if the terminology mismatches national definitions.

Proutton urged lawmakers to consider alternative terminology or a distinct credential that recognizes experience and practice rather than using the same statutory language reserved for nationally defined educator licenses. Both Proutton and James acknowledged the desire to professionalize early childhood work; their testimony differed on the means: James emphasized retaining accessible pathways for home providers and new entrants, while Proutton emphasized preserving interstate license reciprocity and clear statutory definitions.

The committee followed the testimony with questions about outreach, legacy provisions that would exempt current providers from new education requirements, and practical supports for providers. Lawmakers asked whether early‑stage outreach had adequately involved family home providers; James said many learned about the proposal only later in the process, through peer networks and social media. The hearing record showed no formal decision on S206 during this session; committee members discussed amendments and technical language changes to address the concerns raised.