Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Staff Qualifications topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
DCYF work group outlines experience pathway and PACE improvements to meet HB 1648 goals
Summary
The staff qualifications work group reported draft recommendations including clearer navigation resources, an experience‑based pathway (allowing five cumulative years of experience by 08/01/2030 to meet certain qualifications), improvements to PACE, and simplified recognition of out‑of‑state training; implementation details, Merit verification timelines and supervisor communication remain concerns.
DCYF staff and the work group convened under House Bill 1648 presented draft recommendations intended to make staff qualification pathways clearer and more accessible for early childhood education professionals.
Susie (staff qualifications coordinator) and Brett Skinner (child care policy manager) described the group’s process: monthly meetings, advisory feedback, executive review and a legislatively required report due by December. The recommendations focus on three priorities: clarity and navigation (decision trees, multilingual materials, improved verification timelines), the experience pathway, and training/credential recognition improvements.
Under the proposed experience pathway, eligible professionals may meet staff qualification requirements via five cumulative years of documented experience by August 1, 2030, with experience calculated from Merit employment records. The work group discussed role groupings so experience can count across similar responsibilities (teaching roles vs leadership roles). Brett said the recommendation would permit up to two of the five years for center leadership to be teaching or licensed family‑home owner experience, with the remaining three years in leadership roles for center leadership positions.
PACE (the current equivalency/competency pathway) is under review. The work group discussed short‑term improvements (access, cultural relevance, alignment with competencies) and the possibility of future expansion or replacement, but did not reach consensus; options ranged from continued investment with changes to phased discontinuation. DCYF will gather implementation data during the contract cycle and report back.
Providers raised operational concerns: Merit’s education and employment verification timelines still lag, supervisors often lack timely visibility into staff verification status, out‑of‑state and military experience verification needs more streamlined processes, and clarity is needed on how role changes near the 2030 deadline will be handled.
DCYF said it will continue refining language, work with Merit to improve processing communications (including notifying supervisors), increase PACE offerings where feasible, and include implementation guidance in the final report.
