Speaker numbers apply only to this recording.
On October 15, 2026, the Prince George's County Child Care Provider Work Group met virtually to review draft, action-oriented recommendations on child care access, affordability, and quality. Staff presented state legislative updates and eight recommendations, and work group members offered feedback and clarifications. No formal vote was taken; the recommendations remain draft. No written agenda or minutes were available; this summary is based on the transcript. Note: the transcript's adjournment motion says October 14th, 2:46 p.m., which conflicts with the supplied meeting date of October 15, 2026; this summary uses the supplied date.
State legislative updates
Draft recommendations presented Dr. Parakin presented eight draft recommendations:
No 13 1321. So this is essentially looking at the co-payment aspects of this bill. And so what this bill is establishing is that co-payments will not be required for households that have an income that is at below at or below the federal poverty uh line. And the hope with this is that by requiring co-payments for households who have uh who are at or above the federal poverty line, that these higher co-payments will essentially pay for um or cover more families that are below that poverty line. And so what they estimate MSDE estimated is that this will serve an additional uh 1,000 children a year. So and then next, we also wanted to highlight some of the ongoing state level reports, and so just through some of the bills that were passed either. So HB 0447 was actually passed last year in 2025's legislative session. And so this is requiring similar to um a bill that Chair Oriada has passed uh earlier this year requiring merit. So it's basically on a state level of what we are already doing, going to be doing on a county level, uh, but analyzing Maryland's uh framework for child care centers, including staff requirements um and facility standards and operational regulations and comparing them with other states. Um and so the goal of this is to be able to highlight any barriers uh that we see that are a common theme. Uh we're looking at providers and the steps they have to obtain a licensure and things of that nature, and also looking at HB 1321. This is requiring MSDE to report on the system of co-payments for the scholarship scholarship program, excuse me. Um, and so this is expanding upon what was presented on the last slide, looking at uh that House Bill 1321 and just uh ensuring uh having a reporting system for that co-payment. Um yeah, I will turn it back over to Dr. Parakin. Thank you very much, Mr. Calendar. Uh so if it's okay, if we can just keep going through uh because I really wanted to save time uh for discussion for for this. If you do have any comments or questions, please feel free uh to put them in the chat. But I would love for us to just sketch, you know, just go straight through. So uh so just as a reminder. Last week we presented kind of more policy focused recommendations within certain themes, and the goal today was from that feedback to make them more action-oriented, uh, to more clearly identify the categories of our recommendations, and then to um have some you know more direct action. Now, one thing that uh, you know, uh a lot of this is is geared towards you know, the Maryland State Department of Education, not everything, just keep that in mind too. But in terms of language, you know, these are all feedback of things that are important for us in terms of how we're you know, stating these recommendations and and and um and noting those. So please get feel free to give any feedback and we'll discuss them after. So the first recommendation is to strengthen funding adequacy and administration of the child scholarship program. So we know there's significant demand for scholarships, and one of the key questions is whether we can more clearly identify that demand, the funding needed to meet it, and then any projected wait lists or funding shortfalls. Um, one thing, and I we actually met with uh separately met with uh MSTE, and the state is doing a lot of reporting and it helped to learn that. So state already produces scholarship reporting, including monthly and quarterly reports, but we're recommending that uh building on that existing information so that there's a clearer picture of protected needs and how the data informs state funding decisions. Uh, sometimes those reports can be on state webs on the you know, a state website, and it's difficult to find, or you're not necessarily looking for it there, but that's more clearly uh projected. The other component is the administration of the program. Providers have raised concerns about payment corrections and disputes and documentation and another related processing. So the formal recommendation is to strengthen and clearly communicate uh with appropriate transparency about how long cases take to resolve. So ultimately, uh scholarship program uh that is not only adequately funded, but it's easier for providers and families to navigate. Uh and and that would be the the ask. Next slide. The second recommendation is matching child care investments to actual family demand. So it's not just understanding child care ability, actually understand child care availability, not just license capacity. So the state already collects very important information in this area, but we're asking for better coordination and reporting so that state and local partners can understand available spaces by age or geography, provider type, scholarship participation. We haven't seen that level of kind of transparent reporting. Next slide.