MSDH and Interested Parties Invoke Child Care Emergency Rules Citing Rising Covid-19 Spread


A Proper Economic Impact Statement Should be Required. To Act Otherwise is Irresponsible.

A Proper Economic Impact Statement Should be Required. To Act Otherwise is Irresponsible.                                   

“Whenever I walk in a room, everyone ignores me.”

(Click here.)  See page 15 of 23 of the Administrative Procedures Law (APL).

§ 25-43-3.109. Contents, style and form of rule.

(3) An agency may incorporate, by reference in its rules and without publishing the incorporated matter in full, all or any part of a code, standard, rule or regulation that has been adopted by an agency of the United States if incorporation of its text in agency rules would be unduly cumbersome, expensive or otherwise inexpedient. The reference in the agency rules must fully identify the incorporated matter with an appropriate citation.

Because HHS does not require Standard and Comprehensive Centers, SECAC/MDHS should include 658G(a)(2), the code that is available in the federal statute mandating the choice of 1 out of 10 quality activities from which SECAC/MDHS were to have allowed a proper (and not manipulated) Mississippi needs assessment to determine:

  • Training and professional development.
  • Improvement of early learning guidelines.
  • Implementation of a quality rating system.
  • Improving the supply and quality of infant and toddler care.
  • Expanding resource and referral services.
  • Facilitating state licensing compliance.
  • Evaluating child care programs’ effectiveness, including positive impacts on children.
  • Supporting voluntary accreditation.
  • Supporting quality health, physical activity and nutrition standards in child care settings.
  • Any other quality improvement activity that can be measured.

The quality determined by SECAC, is written to allow for the annual elimination of small business service providers (most of whom are members of a protected class – the other elephant in the room) who do not demonstrate ongoing and ever more…and still more…costly national standards over time without mention of the fact that those to be most impacted receive only 75% of 2015 market rates enacted in 2018 – the first increase in as much as 15 years and possibly the last one for 15 years more.

Regardless, all are expected to transition from a Standard Center to a Comprehensive Center which SECAC has recommended be staffed with caregivers who hold Master’s degrees – a huge investment for any small business that will likely be passed on in increased child care fees to young, middle income parents who are just starting to build careers but do not qualify for state subsidy

SECAC/MDHS implemented this CCDF State Plan without identifying or providing the rules by which centers will be determined eligible to continue to serve low-income children.

Further attempts to redress this again would likely not be any less exhausting or any less heated than it was when I first raised this primary concern with policymakers.

In fact, it would likely just be said, as it is usually said by state actors, academia and others when we dare to question, that self-employed child care providers do not care about children.  We are only interested in making money.

“I can rise from the ashes like a phoenix only so many times.”

After five years of effectively defunding the Program through no new enrollment for low-income parents entering the work force and other SECAC/MDHS patterns and practices, (coupled with heavy-handed adoptions by the Mississippi State Department of Health Child Care Licensing/BOH),  I liken the needed child care provider ”buy in” of this CCDF State Plan as nothing short of a suicide pact. 

Demoralizing child care providers while financially defeating small businesses providing LICENSED child care services will NEVER sufficiently serve the needs of work force development or bring about quality child care or school readiness in Mississippi and has not justified any one competing early learning model, quality grant, technical assistance team, or agency as ”THE most worthy of CCDF quality funding” or as ”THE leading edge of leadership”.

More than two years in, I have not seen that this leadership can administrate a cost prohibitive quality rating system with any more expertise and success than the QRIS previously in place. Costs to low-income providers are still costs! Unstable CCPP funding is still unstable! More bias, prejudice and contempt for self-employed providers serving low-income children is, no less, bias, prejudice and contempt whatever the reigning early learning model!

What I have seen is that such conduct and conflict has driven state actor personal agenda and ambition, fostered a hostile and disruptive work environment for CCPP providers and low-income families, violated the privacy rights of private citizens working for private companies and prevented any meaningful discussion of reasonable policies and assurances needed for expanding quality resources in the existing small business infrastructure developed by the CCDF to provide LICENSED child care services to low-income children.

Just weeks ago, SECAC asked a legislator to sponsor a bill to abolish the SECAC and replace it with a Children’s Cabinet which would remove child care representatives completely from the policy making ROOM and thus, take away all Program ownership – a quest I see as more so for power than for vested quality and improvement.

Fortunately, it died on the calendar.

Given the level of contempt and disrespect all leadership has demonstrated for CCPP child care providers and small businesses over the years, it is no wonder that costs and sustainability of QRIS activities and the huge burden to providers and economic impact QRIS causes them to realize has always been the elephant in the room!

For state actors to continue to ignore costs and consequences without regard for those who are to be adversely impacted and to implement underfunded national standards/SECAC mandates without proper adoption and without a proper economic impact statement – without the tools and input needed to make sound decisions – is reckless to the stability, availability, and affordability of ALL LICENSED child care, reckless to an industry embedded in small businesses, and reckless to work force development in rural communities.

These facts are why national standards were NOT adopted when the CCDFBG was enacted. 

”Houston! We’ve got a problem! What have we got on the spacecraft that’s good?  We just lost the moon.”                                                                                                                                               Apollo 13

Click here to see the number of facilities (24) in Mississippi that pass muster in the accreditation of NAEYC standards which are embedded as the child care center evaluation in the SECAC/MDHS Standard Application. Ten percent, (10%) of child care programs across the nation hold NAEYC accreditation. Note that most have more stable funding sources other than the CCDF. Further note that providers accepting Mississippi Certificate’s of Payment receive less than 1/3 the funding of a comparable Head Start Program.

Also see QRIS Rating Systems Do Not Improve Learning or Social Development of Children.


Aug. 10th Debbie Ellis vs. Mississippi Department of Health Jackson, MS

Aug. 10th   Debbie Ellis vs. Mississippi Department of Health   

Petition for Restraining Order halting unlawfully assessed fines regarding the Maximum Capacity of a Classroom

Ms. Ellis sues on behalf of herself and ALL similarly situated child care providers.

 

Friday

August 10, 2018

9:00 A.M.

Before the Honorable Denise Owens

Hinds County Chancery Court

316 S. President St.

Jackson, MS 39201

 

Your support is greatly appreciated!

Please make plans to attend in a show of solidarity!

 

Please like and share on your Facebook page!

Follow and Like Delta Licensed Providers!

 

 

 

 


FOUR INSPECTIONS IN DELTA STOPPED!

FOUR INSPECTIONS IN DELTA STOPPED!

Jim Craig, Director of the Office of Health Protection with the Mississippi State Department of Health has announced that four inspections of licensed child care facilities in the Delta has stopped!

The Department of Human Services recently increased funding to the Department of Health for the operation of the child care licensure program from 1 million to 2 million dollars annually.

In the sub-grantee plan submitted by the Health Department to DHS, the first order of business was to use the additional funding to create many new state agency jobs (very similar to those formally held by QRIS monitors and EYN staff) up to one MSDH employee for every 50 licensed child care facilities (until it had reached a total of 30 strong and all, of whom would need “training”)!

Next, MSDH proposed to conduct 4 compliance inspections of licensed child care facilities per year (which also increases the opportunity/odds for an even greater number of fines to be assessed and still greater revenue for the agency. At the October, 2014 meeting of the Mississippi Board of Health attended by child care providers, State Health Officer Dr. Mary Currier reported a “significant” portion of the operating budget of the Mississippi State Department of Health was funded and supported by fines the agency levied against individuals and businesses.)

Mississippi Code requires just one compliance inspection per year, but the rule also already allows for as many inspections as needed and justified by probable cause!

Likewise, the CCDFBG requires one compliance inspection per year.

In a letter sent tonight, Mr. Craig explained he had some questions and concerns about the recent four inspections “pilot” in the Delta and that he now wishes for the agency to review other approaches to protect the health and safety of our state’s most precious resource.

Please be advised, on July 11, 2013, a report from the inspector general of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services says Mississippi is violating federal rules by failing to enforce health and safety standards for home-based centers receiving federal subsidies. The report singles out Mississippi, saying it does nothing to comply. (Click here.)

Under new rules, the federal government is requiring unannounced inspections, a fuller background check, increased first aid and health training and a better definition of “physical safety” for In-Home child care sites.

In light of this, we ask Mr. Craig for his consideration of a what would be a much more responsible plan at this time. That is to say, first expend additional funds to implement a plan for monitoring the required health and safety standards for approximately twelve hundred home-based centers in Mississippi currently operating without regulation.

Mississippi State University has estimated that more than half of the state’s children are in unlicensed settings. Using CCDF funds to comply with the federal requirement to monitor home-based child care settings serving the majority of Mississippi’s young children would be a noble cause.

In the meantime, we thank him for his thoughtful leadership.

 

 

 


Trump Signs Executive Action On Small Business Regulations – “One in, Two Out”

Trump Signs Executive Action On Small Business Regulations

The Washington Post and CNN

January 30, 2017 10:28 AM ESTPresident Trump signed an executive order reducing regulations on small businesses, on Jan. 30 at the White House.  (The Washington Post)

“One in, Two Out”

“If you have a regulation you want, …the only way you have a chance (to adopt a new rule) is to knock out two (current) regulations for every new regulation.”

 This action includes Child Care Small Businesses.

 

 


The Hechinger Report Supports MSDH Unlawful, Discriminatory Rule-Making as Experimental

The Hechinger Report Supports MSDH Unlawful, Discriminatory Rule-Making as Experimental

The Hechinger Report is sponsored by the Kellogg Foundation and partners with the Clarion Ledger.

The Hechinger Report has explained everything. (Click here.)

The MSDH licensing staff created undue burden and disparate impact racial discrimination on a disproportionate number of providers in a protected class as an “experiment”!

Disparate Impact racial discrimination and undue burden in Mississippi may be normalized as nothing more than an “experiment” by Jackie Mader and Sarah Butrymowicz, but for the vast majority of Mississippi Delta residents who are not white, it is demoralizing, terrorizing and oppressive.

Perhaps that is why, in order to show provider support of Violation of Mississippi Code, Violation of Administrative Procedures Law, Violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution and Violation of the Civil Rights Act, through increased frequency of inspections in the Delta only, the duo took to interviewing a child care provider just east of Jackson and one in Flowood!

We appreciate the attorneys, early learning professionals, Collaboratives and policy makers who have spoken with Delta child care providers, who do not support such arbitrary enforcement, for expressing concern for the development of a licensing police state when it is really uncalled for.

We agree, already, the Mississippi State Department of Health has the authority to inspect a licensed facility more than once a year if there is probable cause to do so.

Licensed providers, in turn, may lawfully require licensing officials to present an administrative inspection warrant for any regulatory inspection.

However, in this case, additional fines have been assessed and substantive and procedural rights have been affected without lawfully required adherence to fair rule-making.

We concur with all who are alarmed that fines collected by MSDH may support agency salaries in times of highly visible budget cuts.

We also question why MSDH did not just first seek the provider support Hechinger now so desperately attempts to do by presenting the new rule to the Child Care Advisory Council and holding a public hearing.

Why does MSDH (Jim Craig) communicate its intent and conduct through the media while making no formal announcement to those affected?

The blatant hostility and disrespect noted for licensed child care providers in this Hechinger series article and this MSDH misconduct is in direct defiance of DHS’s intent for increasing CCDF funding to MSDH for the purpose of meeting the new federal requirement to monitor unlicensed, In-Home providers.

Bottom line – The Mississippi Department of Human Services will determine how MSDH uses CCDF funding, hopefully, beginning today.

CCDF funding simply cannot be exhausted in violation of federal and state law, no matter how you spin it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


On this MLK Day of Service, Stand with Us!

On this MLK Day of Service, Stand with Us!

“Surely, on MLK day, you can find it in your heart to say that a disproportionate number of Black owned and operated child care programs should not be chosen to be treated “worse” than you “until further notice”!

These are some things you can do: write to the HHS Office of Civil Rights in Atlanta; write to the Mississippi Board of Health; write to the Office of the Governor; contact your legislators; express regret that 48 years after the death of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., redress of blatant racial discrimination is still necessary.”
To read this full discussion on Facebook, click here:  See full comments for Discriminatory MSDH Rule-Making through Unbridled Power.
Also follow us on twitter: Delta Providers @DeltaProviders         

Discriminatory MSDH Rule-Making through Unbridled Power

Discriminatory MSDH Rule-Making through Unbridled Power

Dear Delta Providers:

I am sorry I could not take all calls yesterday from so many asking, “What is happening?”

I do hope this open letter of explanation will suffice.

It is true the Mississippi State Department of Health conducts two known inspections of licensed child care facilities per year.

In addition, the Mississippi State Department of Health has the right to inspect you at any time at its discretion following anonymous complaints or fines (probable cause) in order to ensure a safe environment.

But please do not think for one minute that you have done something wrong to trigger another child care inspection.

There has not been an anonymous complaint levied against you.

The children’s breakfast and classroom activities were not disrupted and made chaotic and stressful because you have willingly not complied with the child care rules.

MSDH licensing staff just up and amended the rule.

I believe the character and nature reflected in this agency conduct is mostly primal.

You are being treated the way you are simply because you are licensed.

It’s like shooting fish in a barrel – some may enjoy a great rush of euphoria given such a powerful advantage and position over you.

Such unbridled power may make others feel more relevant in the scheme of early childhood.

However, I also agree with you that it is reasonable to suspect that Delta counties only may have been selected for increased scrutiny and undue burden (more excessive fines) because we represent the highest concentration of Black owned and operated child care programs in the poorest region in the nation.  Given the failure to adhere to Administrative Procedures Law, coupled with no statewide rollout date for all counties, along with the identification of new Child Care Advisory Council members, it very well could be that this licensing agency conduct is the new replacement for the former QRIS racial discrimination noted by the U. S. Commission on Civil Rights and as such, would likely not have survived proper APL processes with input of reasonable persons.

Here are the facts:

Administrative procedures establish the legitimacy of management action by ensuring the application of management rules and decisions is done in an objective, fair, and consistent manner.

A rule is an agency statement of general applicability of law or policy that describes the procedure and practice requirements of an agency.

An amendment to a rule or a change in agency pattern and practice affecting private rights (frequency of inspections schedule and the assessment of fines ) requires notice of the intended action, a description of the subjects and issues involved, and the manner in which interested persons may present their views thereon. The notice must be filed with the Secretary of State.

  • MSDH child care licensing did not provide public access to this administrative rule making, promote consensus among interested parties, or solicit comments from the public on increasing the frequency of known inspections only in Attala, Bolivar, Carroll, Holmes, Humphreys, Leflore, Montgomery, Sunflower and Washington counties…until further notice.
  • The Child Care Advisory Council, established by the Mississippi Legislature to advise the licensing agency on policy, was not informed or consulted on any change in agency pattern and practice.
  • Festus Simkins provided less than 24 hours notice framed only as “important information” embedded into a 22 page newsletter attached to an Email with a brief note from him to “read carefully”.
  • CHILD CARE LICENSURE INFORMATION MEMORANDUM , Number 3 January, February & March Volume FY 2017, page 1, number 2 announces four (4) known inspections per year has been initiated in Public Health District III.

We are in Public Health District III.

That is what is happening.
 
Check your Email.
 
Debbie

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Administrative Procedures Law: Substantive Rights are Human Rights

Administrative Procedures Law: Substantive Rights are Human Rights

By request

Administrative Procedures Law

Policies of internal management of any regulatory agency do not require public notice and APL processes if they do not affect the Substantive Rights of a group of citizens.

Policies of internal management that do affect the Substantive Rights of a group of citizens do require proper APL processes such as public notice of a change in agency pattern and practice and the right of those affected to be heard. (Government of the people…)

Substantive Rights are Human Rights

In its body of work on Human Rights, Part III of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, some on the United Nations lists of Substantive Human Rights include the:

human-rights

  • Freedom from inhumane or degrading treatment;
  • Right to liberty and security;
  • Freedom from arbitrary deprivation of property;
  • Right to a fair trial;
  • Non-retroactive application of law;
  • Right of recognition as a person before the law;
  • Right to privacy, family, home or correspondence;
  • Equality before the law;
  • Rights of minorities.

Equality Before the Law

Article 7 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) states that “All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law.”

The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prohibits states from denying any person within its territory the equal protection of the laws.  This means that a state must treat an individual in the same manner as others in similar conditions and circumstances… throughout the state.

Civil Rights

The equal protection clause is crucial to the protection of civil rights.”

A problem arises when a law or policy is facially neutral, but has a disparate impact on a particular group or selected group of people.

A state cannot arbitrarily announce and impose an undue burden (such as double the excessive fines imposed on disadvantaged/rural small businesses, double the harm to future earnings through the public humiliation of being labeled as a “possibly unsafe” environment on agency websites regardless of even minor infractions and without free access to the full record, etc.) on only a sample of similarly situated individuals in the state and by simply invoking the convenient “internal management exception” to Administrative Procedures Law processes  -particularly in matters where uniformity is necessary in accomplishing a stated purpose.

(In fact, a state cannot circumvent proper Administrative Procedures Law processes – or deny the right of its citizens to be heard – for any policy or amendment to any rules that affect Substantive Rights simply by invoking the APL “internal management” exception.)

Such policy would be invalid.

Example:

CHILD CARE LICENSURE INFORMATION MEMORANDUM
Number 3 January, February & March Volume FY 2017
2. The Child Care Facilities Licensure Division is in the process of expanding the inspection schedule to meet the national benchmark that recommends four (4) inspections a year for licensed child care programs. Therefore, beginning in January 2017, a pilot program was started in Public Health District III to initiate four (4) inspections a year in that area.
 
District 3

Members of state advisory councils, regulatory boards and regulatory agencies have a duty to fellow Mississippians to study and adhere to Mississippi Administrative Procedures Law.

 


Stay Calm! Just More Lobbying! (Hechinger Does Not Announce Adopted Policy or Rules!)

by request:

Stay Calm! Just More Lobbying! (Hechinger Does Not Announce Adopted Policy or Rules!)

Once again, The Hechinger Report used information gained from Child Care Inspection Reports to announce possible upcoming legislation to embed National Department of Defense requirements into child care licensing.

Hechinger reports, “Details of the proposal were shared by several sources who asked to remain anonymous (also, see new Child Care Advisory Council Membership) because they were not authorized to announce these changes. If Mississippi were to write into law its new policy of four inspections per year and decrease licensing officials’ caseload to 50 centers, it would join Tennessee and the Department of Defense as the only child care systems that meet both the caseload and inspection frequency benchmarks recommendations, according to the data from Child Care Aware.” ( Click here.)

Jackie Mader reports violations lifted from public records Hechinger requested through the Freedom of Information Act in support of such legislation – a clear violation of the permitted use of such information. ( U.S. Department of Justice – FOIA Exemption 6: It is not enough that the information might aid the requester in lobbying efforts. Hypothetical public benefits cannot outweigh significant invasion of privacy.)

She does not speak to the additional funding more likely needed and provided to meet the new federal requirement to monitor the now more than 1,100 non-licensed, non-regulated In-Home providers in Mississippi!

She does not share information demonstrating that the agency was or was not properly functioning when conducting child care inspections.

She does not report information she has personally gathered or documentation that Hechinger currently has in its possession demonstrating the agency’s pattern and practice (of Equal Protection violation/Alleged Favoritism) in support of at least one child care operation that has been allowed to operate without a license (as defined and required by MSDH regulation) which has allegedly placed children at risks of serious harm.

She simply conveys how bad she thinks some Mississippi licensed child care programs are and how her unidentified sources intend to improve them, and of course, Hechinger’s support of the proposed action and/or legislation.

If that is not lobbying, I don’t know what is!

If you feel you have been personally identified and harmed by such use of your inspection reports and would like to file a FOIA violation complaint against Hechinger and its partners, contact your legislators and/or the U.S. Department of Justice at:

Office of Information Policy (OIP)
U.S. Department of Justice
Suite 11050
1425 New York Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20530
Fax: (202) 514-1009
E-mail: DOJ.OIP.FOIA@usdoj.gov