Report on Head Start Services in Jefferson County

April 16, 2003

On December 20, 2002, United States Senator Ron Wyden appointed an ad hoc committee to study the provision of Head Start services in Jefferson County, Oregon. The Senator asked the committee to evaluate “…whether everything is being done to ensure that the children of Jefferson County are receiving the best possible Head Start services…” and “…to consider whether opportunities exist for…providers in Jefferson County to co-ordinate…”.

The committee members appreciate the opportunity to serve Senator Wyden and other members of our legislative delegation. Our report is attached.

Executive Summary

Jefferson County is a culturally diverse community with a fast growing, youthful population.

The county is presently served by three Head Start programs. Oregon Child Development coalition serves the migrant population. Mid-Columbia and the children’s Learning Center serve the non-migrant population. The programs offer a valuable service to eligible children.

Based upon the rapid growth, youthful population and nature of employment opportunities in Jefferson County, we believe there will be an increasing need for Head Start services. Therefore, we support local plans by OCDC to construct a new facility and we support the CLC concept of a satellite facility in Culver. We believe the community, it’s taxpayers, and it’s families and children will be well served by developing a common campus service center. Presently, the programs engage in modest co-operation in facility design, transportation, food services, training, recreation, expert services and child program services. The “common campus” concept is discussed in our report.

While the ideal solution might be to locate upon a new parcel of land at a carefully selected location, the present location presents a more practical solution. Each alternative should be considered.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide input on these important issues.

I. RELEVANT COUNTY DATA

Jefferson County is located in northern Central Oregon. It is primarily rural in character. The main “industries” within the county are agriculture, manufacturing, education and government service.

The boundaries of Jefferson County overlap the boundaries of the Warm Springs Indian Reservation. The historic reliance upon agriculture and the presence of a major Indian reservation have led to a very diverse and young population base.

A. Diversity Data

Although the data is somewhat confusing, the most recent census statistics examined by the committee disclose the following county-wide cultural diversity: a) 64.9% Caucasian; b) 15.7% Native American; c) 17.7% Hispanic; and d) 1.7% Other. The major school district in the region (509J) discloses the following diversity statistics: 1) 39.2% Caucasian; b) 33.1% Native American c) 25.9% Hispanic; and d) 1.7% Other. The youth of the population bas is documented by the following statistics: a) 29.8% of the population is 18 or under; and b) 7.7% of the population is 5 or under. Demographic information from the census discloses 1,467 children under age 5 and 1,588 children between 5 to 9 live in Jefferson County.

B. Growth Data

Jefferson County is an area that is growing rapidly. Census statistics disclose that between 1990 and 2000 the population of the country grew by 39%. The growth pattern is expected to continue and will be significantly accelerated if the State of Oregon constructs a prison facility east of Madras. The construction of the facility was scheduled to begin in October of 2002, but the construction has been delayed. Department of Corrections staff planners have projected the facility will create 911 jobs during construction and 1,666 direct and indirect jobs when it is operational. The Department estimated Jefferson County could be reasonably expected to grow by 43% by 2007 if the new facility had been constructed on the original schedule. Notwithstanding the delay in the starting date, there is no indication the facility will not be commenced in the relatively near future.

C. Poverty and Need Data

Depending upon the source of information between 14.6% and 17.2% of Jefferson County residents fall within the federal poverty guidelines. Census data discloses 424 children 5 years old and under live in the county and are below the federal poverty guidelines. IN 1999 30.5% of Jefferson County households had an income of $25,000 or under. The records of school district 509-J give another indication of the breadth of poverty in Jefferson County because 68% of the students receive free or reduced cost meals. Against this factual background, a graph attached to this report demonstrates the number of children served by local Head Start each month.

II. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Jefferson County is served by three off reservation Head Start programs. The committee has not examined the Head Start program on the Warm Springs Indian Reservation because we do not believe that task was within Senator Wyden’s request. The programs serving the non-reservation portion of the Jefferson County are: 1) The Children’s Learning Center, Inc.; 2) The Oregon child Development Coalition; and 3) Mid-Columbia Head Start. Each program, its’ location and other factors associated with operation of the program are described below.

A. Mid-Columbia

Mid-Columbia Head Start is based in Hood River, Oregon and the Executive Director is Suzanne VanOrman. This program operates several Head Start Programs in different locations. In Jefferson County the program is located at 49 NE 12th Street, Madras, Oregon. The operational space is rented from the United Methodist Church and is filled to the capacity of the rented space. The program operates in the months of September through May each year. This program is funded for 20 children and serves 20 children. The program advised this committee:

“…We believe we will remain at 20 federally funded slots. In the past the Oregon Department of Education has encouraged our program to not expand…”

The program has a waiting list of 15 children but only 3 meet the income eligibility guidelines.

B. OCDC

The Oregon Child Development Coalition (OCDC) head offices are located in Wilsonville, Oregon. The Executive Director of the program is Juanita Santana and the local program is administered by David McCourtney. OCDC operates several different programs throughout the State of Oregon and the primary focus of OCDC is Migrant Head Start services. They are permitted to shift available migrant slots throughout the state as peak needs require. In Jefferson County the program is located at 231 SE 6th, Madras, Oregon. The present physical facility is owned by the Children’s Learning Center and is rented by OCDC. Due to the limited history in Jefferson County (start-up occurred in 2000) we have no material trend data for level of occupancy.

Presently, OCDC operates two programs: a) a seasonal program from January 27, 2003 through May 9, 2003, for pre-school children; and b) the Migrant Program from May 27 to October 31 for children 6 weeks through 5 years in age. The number of children served ranged from 10 to 37 (see graph). The building capacity at the present site will serve, depending upon the configuration population (i.e. infant, toddler, pre-school), 44 children. In the year 2000 during peak operation the facility was used at 80 to 85 percent of capacity. OCDC plans to construct a new facility with a capacity of serving 80 children. OCDC has purchased a two acre site directly across for the Children’s Learning Center and has secured zoning approval to use the site for the Head Start facility OCDC desires to construct and operate. The future operational size of the migrant Head Start program depends upon a myriad of factors. Some of the factors include:

a) the specialized criteria set for migrant and seasonal head start programs;
b) federal poverty guidelines;
c) how many spots are authorized, funded and dedicated to the county;
d) local growers survey and the projected farm capacity which may be impacted by weather, market conditions, crop projections and many other factors;
e) other economic factors such as manufacturing jobs and rental markets

OCDC is presently working upon a thorough community needs assessment.

C. CLC

The Children’s Learning Center (CLC) has its sole program in Madras, Oregon. The Executive Director is Duane Belvoir. The program is in a building located at 650 NE A Street in Madras, Oregon. The CLC owns the building and is often referred to by the name “Juniper Junction”. A portion of the building is rented to the Deschutes-Crook ESD. The portion of the building used by the ESD serves primarily Early Intervention/Early Children Special Education together with Speech and Articulation programs. Presently, CLC operates essential three programs: 1) Head Start – ages 3 through 5; 2) Private pre-school; and 3) Child care – ages 2 ½ to 8. The peak times of service delivery are September through May and through these months the facility is occupied at peak capacity (see graph). During June through August child care remains open and only a limited number of children attend.

CLC is evaluating the opening of a satellite site in Culver, Oregon. If that action is taken, some children that are presently transported to the Madras site would be served in Culver. However, the openings that would become available would quickly be filled and CLC estimates the Madras facility capacity would be exhausted in two to four years. CLC is presently going to undertake a thorough community needs assessment.

III. CO-OPERATION

The three programs do co-operate with one another in modest ways. The evidences of co-operation include: 1) CLC leases its older facility to OCDC; 2) CLC and OCDC currently provide co-operative service to 3 children; 3) CLC provided supportive service to 12 pre-school age children for OCDC; 4) CLC provides referrals to Mid-Columbia and OCDC when either it is in the families best interest or no Head Start positions are available. Likewise, OCDC provides referrals to CLC; 5) They have shared information so duplicate services such as physicals and screening would not be necessary; 6) They have shared technical equipment and professional trainings; 7) The parties are working on the body of an agreement designed to expand areas of co-operation.

IV. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

A. Values

After carefully considering Head Start services, our committee adopted the following core beliefs:

1. We believe research demonstrates children served by “Head Start” programs are more likely to succeed socially, and educationally, and less likely to engage in delinquent and criminal behavior.

2. We believe “Head Start” programs are an effective prevention tool and the programs are a benefit to the children of the nation and this community.

3. We believe “Head Start” programs must be equally available and accessible to all children of the community who qualify for services provided by the programs.

4. We believe “Head Start” programs must include appropriate services which reasonably meet the needs of all children who qualify for “Head Start” services.

5. While we believe “Head Start programs are an effective investment of taxpayer resources for the reasons described, we believe quality services at the local level must be delivered in a fiscally responsible manner.

B. Trend and Service Components

Jefferson County has a young population base with a high incidence of families impacted by incomes below the federal poverty guidelines. The agricultural base in Jefferson County creates the continual potential for families living and working within the country which will qualify for Head Start migrant services. While the term “migrant” has nothing to do with race, the practical fact is in Jefferson County most migrant laborers are Hispanic. We believe this trend will continue because Jefferson County has entry level agricultural and manufacturing employment and a large Hispanic population base. Stability of residence and employment commence as people transition into the manufacturing segment and the emerging Hispanic owned retail and service businesses. As people transition into more stable employment, others move in to fill the entry level employment. Likewise census data, 509-J student enrollment and reduced meal cost statistics demonstrate a significantly greater proportion of the younger population is diverse and more likely to need Head Start Support.

The migrant Head Start program is designed to meet specialized cultural and linguistic needs because it serves the entry level population. These needs are well served through the expertise of OCDC. CLC and Mid-Columbia, on the other hand, serve the segment of the population that has transitioned into a more stable employment environment.

C. Needs Survey

Over the last ten (10) years population growth in Jefferson County has almost doubled the state average and nearly tripled the national average. If the prison project is re-activated, the rapid growth rate will accelerate. The growth rate combined with the youthful population and relative poverty demonstrate a significant need for available Head Start and child care services in Jefferson County. Two Head Start providers have commenced a community needs survey. We believe all Head Start service providers should combine, not duplicate, efforts and the coordinated community needs survey should include a projection for potential growth.

D. Building and Program Expansion

We have found each Head Start provider is located in a facility where the capacity is nearly exhausted. We believe facility expansion is essential. We support CLC’s desire to develop satellite facilities and we believe satellite capacity would better serve families and children living in the Culver and Crooked River Ranch areas. The committee supports an OCDC building program. Any building program should give significant weight to the needs documented by a coordinated community needs survey (See IV. C. above). If after construction any excess facility capacity exists, we believe the excess capacity should be first used to cooperatively serve all forms of Head Start children. If Head Start needs do no exhaust remaining capacity, the programs should be encouraged to develop an affordable community-wide child care program to absorb the remaining excess capacity within the Head Start facilities. Hopefully, federal regulations would permit such flexibility for facility use, provided no Head Start or Migrant Head Start child would be displaced by the affordable community-wide child care program.

E. Co-operation Model

We have concluded the service providers have demonstrated a modest pattern of co-operation. We believe greater coordination and co-operation is necessary if the Head Start programs are to achieve an appropriate level of community support. We believe co-operation can be enhanced by the proximity of facility location (i.e. a common campus development). Building and grounds design, transportation, food services, expert services, training and child program services are only some of the essential benefits which can be derived. The benefit of co-operation for the taxpayers and the community is the more efficient use of public resources. The benefits for the children, their families and the community include, but are not limited to education, socialization, life skills and safety.

V. SUGGESTED ALTERNATIVES

There are two primary ways to address the issue of facility proximity.

Alternative 1

The first alternative is, perhaps, more cost effective. Under this approach the following would occur: 1) CLC would stay on its present facility; 2) CLC would continue with their plan to develop a satellite facility; 3) OCDC would construct upon the site they have acquired a facility that is adequate to meet the needs based upon the coordinated community needs survey; 4) The parties would acquire the remaining parcel of land east of the new OCDC facility; and 5) The parties would ask the city to vacate that portion of A Street between the facilities.

We believe the benefits derived from this concept are significant. Neither party would have to liquidate present assets. Co-operative programs would be developed for transportation, parking, food services, expert services, training, recreation and child program services. Facility design could be altered to eliminate several forms of duplication. Together the parties would own in excess of seven acres and the parcel of land would be large enough for building child care facilities in the future.

There are steps which must be taken to implement the plan. The city of Madras would have to allow the street to be vacated and a new conditional use permit may be required to build upon the newly acquired land. Traffic was a major concern to the neighbors and the vacation of A Street would move the traffic impact to B and Kincaide Streets and away from the neighbors. The parties would need to locate only modest resources to acquire the land.

Alternative 2

Locate a new site and construct two new buildings on a common campus or two wings in one building. Each building or wing would have a capacity design that is adequate and based upon the coordinated community needs assessment. The parcel of land for the new site must be of sufficient size to allow for future development of other buildings and related child services. CLC would continue a plan to develop a satellite site. The committee is aware adequate parcels of land are located within the community.

We acknowledge the delay and expense associated with a new location is problematic. Each program would need to dispose of current assets. Divestiture may present a challenge. Each program would have to search out substantial assets for new construction.

While there are many practical barriers to this fresh start, the committee believes the programs could fully implement the co-operative programs we have described and achieve significant operational savings.

VI. REQUESTS

Once again, we want to thank Senator Wyden for allowing this committee the opportunity to examine some of the issues created by the Head Start building proposal in Jefferson County. We respectfully request that Senator Wyden evaluate the following issues:

1. Encourage that an effort be made by federal and state Head Start authorities to study whether a “common campus” service plan is feasible.

2. If the “common campus” service plan is feasible, encourage proper authorities to identify and reduce any barriers to the implementation of the plan.

3. Request a specific response from the local providers to determine what forms of co-operation and co-ordination identified in this report can be implemented now and under a “common campus” concept.

4. Determine if an authorization presently exists for excess capacity within a Head Start facility to be used for the development of an affordable community-wide child care program provided no Head Start children are displaced.

5. Seek a review of the Head Start eligibility guidelines so that the guidelines will more accurately reflect the needs and broad composition of Jefferson County low income families.

Respectfully submitted,

Camille Harris, Co-chair
Father Jim Stephens, Co-chair
Mary Zemke
Mike Goss
Georgia Sosa
Barbara Ibrahim
Jodi Eagan
George Neilson

LINK TO GRAPH