Pay for Success Pre-K Feasibility Study, Albemarle County and Charlottesville, Virginia

Pay for Success Feasibility Assessment of Expanding High-Quality Three-Year-Old Preschool in the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County, Virginia William Henagan, Master of Commerce 17’ Adam Jones, Bachelor of Arts, Economics 18’ Kylie LeBlanc, Master of Public Policy /Ph.D., Education Policy Candidate Joshua Ogburn, Director, University of Virginia Pay for Success Lab Madeleine Shaw, Master of Public Policy 17’ The University of Virginia Pay for Success Lab is financially supported by The Frank Batten School of Leadership and Public Policy and Social Entrepreneurship at the University of Virginia, a cross-disciplinary, pan-university initiative aimed at researching and advancing innovative partnerships across the government, nonprofit, and private sectors. About the University of Virginia Pay for Success Lab The mission of the UVa PFS Lab is to research and efficiently advance viable Pay for Success (PFS) project models. The UVa PFS Lab works with local stakeholders during Project Exploration and Project Development stages to determine whether PFS will benefit their communities. The following pages describe the components that the lab evaluates while engaging with local community members. Joshua Ogburn Joshua Ogburn is the Director of the University of Virginia Pay for Success Lab. Over the past two years, Joshua worked intensively with the Virginia Department of Health and Virginia Pay for Success Council to undertake a feasibility study of expanding maternal home visiting in the state with PFS. As part of that effort, Joshua is leading a first-in-the-state home visitation outcome analysis strategy, which connected datasets from three state agencies and two home visitation services providers. Prior to this work, Joshua was a staff member for U.S. Senator Mark R. Warner. Joshua holds a Master of Public Policy from the University of Virginia’s Frank Batten School of Leadership and Public Policy, and a Bachelor of Arts in Public and Urban Affairs from Virginia Polytechnic and State Institute (Virginia Tech). Christine Mahoney Dr. Christine Mahoney is an Associate Professor of Public Policy and Politics at the Frank Batten School of Leadership and Public Policy, and Director of Social Entrepreneurship at the University of Virginia (SE@UVA). Over the past four years, SE@UVA has introduced new courses on social entrepreneurship, a minor, a concept competition, scholarships to work with social enterprises, and a myriad of student activities providing hands-on experience in social innovation. Dr. Mahoney has taught statistics and research methods and oversees a dozen hands-on research projects providing practitioners and public-private partnerships critical support each year. She has been awarded major grants from the National Science Foundation, the Department of Education, the European Union, the Department of State, and a Fulbright from the Institute of International Education. Contact Joshua Ogburn, UVa Pay for Success Lab Director, at Josh.Ogburn@virginia.edu Visit the UVa Pay for Success Lab webpage at www.seatuva.org/pfslab 1 Table of Contents About the University of Virginia Pay for Success Lab ................................................................................................. 1 Executive Summary............................................................................................................................................................3 Pay for Success Overview.................................................................................................................................................. 4 Benefits of Pay for Success ............................................................................................................................................... 4 Background of Pay for Success ........................................................................................................................................ 4 University of Virginia Pay for Success Lab..................................................................................................................... 5 UVa PFS Lab Project Exploration Phase Components...............................................................................................5 Pay for Success Project Development and Launch Phase Components ................................................................... 6 Benefits of Early Childhood Health and Education Programs...................................................................................7 Local Early Childhood Health and Education Services ............................................................................................... 7 Expanding High-Quality Three-Year-Old Preschool in the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County....... 8 Community Engagement.......................................................................................................................................... 9 Target Population & Geography........................................................................................................................... 10 Data Availability.......................................................................................................................................................11 Summary............................................................................................................................................................................. 11 Recommended Next Steps .............................................................................................................................................. 12 Works Cited ....................................................................................................................................................................... 13 2 Executive Summary This report is a Pay for Success (PFS) feasibility assessment of expanding three-year-old preschool in the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County, Virginia. The University of Virginia Pay for Success Lab (UVa PFS Lab) performed substantive research and stakeholder engagement from August 2016 to January 2017 to explore this topic. Expanding high-quality preschool for low-income three-year-olds would improve educational, economic, and social outcomes for children, families, and the community at-large. The UVa PFS Lab recommends that the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County begin to formalize a birth-to-five continuum of early childhood health and education services while considering whether PFS is a feasible approach for expanding the number of three-year-old preschool slots. Through PFS, an investor funds a policy solution while an end payor, such as a local government, agrees to repay the investment based upon successful outcome achievement. PFS generates social value and monetary savings to government, allows community-oriented organizations to pay for tangible and valuable outcomes, and transfers risk of outcome achievement to external funders. The UVa PFS Lab works with local stakeholders during Project Exploration and Project Development stages to determine whether PFS will benefit their communities. The purpose of Project Exploration stage is to identify a public issue that is a priority for the community to address, research the social and financial benefits that an intervention could provide, and engage with local stakeholders to develop a results-based policy solution. There is substantial evidence demonstrating that children who receive two years of preschool, as compared to one year, experience significant additional benefits in a variety of areas that extend into adulthood.1 Improved outcomes can include reading and math scores, on-time grade completion, social skills, vocabulary, working memory, and cognitive ability.2 Moreover, programs that provide low-income families pre and postnatal home visiting to promote healthy births and parental skills, and high-quality preschool into kindergarten have even greater effects. In fact, a recent study noted, “Every dollar spent on high quality, birth-to-five programs for disadvantaged children delivers a 13% per annum return on investment.”3 Over the past six months, the UVa PFS Lab found that the city and county have a strong commitment to early childhood health and education. About 250 low-income families with children age zero to four receive home visiting per locality. Almost 90 percent of low-income four-year-olds have access to preschool in the city, and 70 percent have access in the county. Only 30 percent of low-income three-year-olds have access to preschool in the city and the county currently does not fund any slots. Notably, about 40 percent of funding for early childhood education programs come from local public sources. To fully realize the benefits of birth-to-five programs, and to further the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County’s leadership for early childhood health and education, the UVa PFS Lab recommends that the city and county begin to formalize a birth-to-five continuum of services. Once completed, the continuum would consist of a governing board to promote alignment of home visiting and preschool program curricula into kindergarten, effectively refer families through the program continuum, and utilize an evaluation framework that will allow the local community to understand the child, family, and community benefits of the continuum model. City and county leaders should also consider partnering with a PFS advisory firm to explore the feasibility of expanding three-year-old preschool with a PFS approach. This report assesses the feasibility of expanding high-quality preschool, explains the rationale behind the continuum of services approach, and recommends next steps for continuation of PFS Project Exploration. The UVa PFS Lab thanks everyone who contributed to this report. 3 Pay for Success Overview Pay for Success (PFS) generates social value and cashable savings to government and other community organizations while driving financial resources towards serving local needs and measurably improving lives. Through the structure, a private investor pays upfront for an intervention and an end payor agrees to repay that investment should the intervention meet or exceed its predetermined target outcome measures. Pay for Success allows community-oriented organizations to pay for tangible benefits, transfers the risk of outcome achievement to external funders, and aligns a community towards achieving beneficial outcomes. Benefits of Pay for Success ● Focuses community resources on programs and outcomes that measurably improve lives ● Builds a culture of evidence and accountability into community-focused spending decisions ● Transfers the risk of a program not meeting its intended outcomes to risk-oriented funders ● Shifts community spending towards paying for beneficial outcomes instead of inputs or outputs ● More closely aligns the payment of social outcomes to when the outcomes occur ● Provides a framework for multiple community payors to contribute to outcomes of their importance ● Affords service providers upfront long-term funding so that they can strategically plan and adapt Background of Pay for Success A bipartisan coalition of political leaders has endorsed the strategy, including Governor Nicki Haley (R, SC), Mayor Ben McAdams (D, UT), Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R, WI), and President Barack Obama. Since 2010, when the concept first started spreading across the country, 15 projects have launched and at least 75 localities are currently considering projects in a variety of areas including early childhood education, criminal justice, health care, homelessness, workforce development, foster care, and green infrastructure. PFS is most effective when community leaders have the will to address an issue but current strategies: ● Lack preventative investments that would provide long-term benefits, ● Fund local interventions but concerns exist about program performance, ● Provide limited resources to effective local programs that are ready for scaling-up, or ● Could improve by adopting promising interventions or programs from other localities. Pay for Success Structure Pay for Success (PFS) projects can take-on several structures. Through the traditional PFS structure – shown in Figure 1 – an investor provides sufficient capital to fully fund project implementation and will receive repayment based upon successful project achievement. An end payor, generally a state or local government, agrees to repay that full investment along with interest based upon project achievement. See below for a description of other similar outcomes-based project structures: ● Partial Pay for Success Project o An investor provides a portion of project capital and will receive repayment based upon successful project achievement. A different upfront payor, such as a philanthropy, provides the other portion of project capital but does not expect repayment. ○ An end payor repays the investor based upon project achievement, similar to a traditional PFS project. It is possible for the upfront payor and end payor to be the same entity. ○ This structure is a combination of traditional government payment structures. It follows the traditional PFS model, but reduces the amount of investment capital the project requires. 4 ● Social Impact Guarantee ○ An upfront payor, such as a state or local government, provides sufficient capital to fully fund project implementation and also pays insurance premium to an investor. ○ An investor or other risk bearing agrees to repay the upfront payor a portion of project capital if the project does not meet its intended performance measures. ● Performance-Based Contract ○ An upfront payor, such as a state or local government, provides the full amount of project capital upfront. The same upfront payor agrees to provide incentive payments to the service provider according to the success of project. ○ This structure does not require investors. While the upfront payor has traditionally been a state or local government in the projects developed to-date, it is possible for other entities, such as community foundations or other organizations, to serve this role. In all project formats, a program evaluator establishes whether the project meets its performance objectives. For each community, local stakeholders should consider the pros and cons of each format and be creative in designing a structure that meets local needs while maintaining a commitment to measurably improving lives. Figure 1 – Traditional Pay for Success Project Mechanics University of Virginia Pay for Success Lab The mission of the UVa PFS Lab is to identify and advance impactful Pay for Success (PFS) project models in localities across the nation. The UVa PFS Lab works with local stakeholders during Project Exploration and Project Development to determine whether PFS will benefit their communities. The following section describes the components that the UVa PFS Lab evaluates while working with local communities. UVa PFS Lab Project Exploration Phase Components The UVa PFS Lab works with a local community to assist them with understanding whether: Community Engagement ● A specific issue area receives significant attention and support from key community leaders ● Broad interest exists to address the specific issue area across levels of government ● Community leadership understands the importance of defining and valuing outcomes 5 ● Community leadership can clearly articulate key outcomes of importance ● Potential end payor organizations are willing to explore a Pay for Success opportunity Target Population & Geography ● There is a definable target population and geography in the region ● There are current negative outcomes that lead to persistent high costs to social systems ● The local community is devoting significant funds and effort to address the specific issue area ● There is research supporting that there are social and financial benefits to achieve Data Availability ● Strong data systems are present for tracking and driving the key outcomes of importance and, if necessary, o There is a viable path for connecting additional data sources o Data holding entities are willing to establish additional data sharing agreements ● Commitment exists from all key partners to undertake rigorous program evaluation Pay for Success Project Development and Launch Phase Components After the Exploration Phase, the local community will be prepared to engage in more comprehensive program development. To complete the Project Development process, described below, the PFS Lab can either assist the local community with these aspects or provide connections to external technical assistance. Project Development ● Accounting of how much the community is currently spending to address the issue ● Description of specifically how an intervention will achieve the desired outcome(s) in the locality ● Accounting of the budgetary, social, and other benefits the intervention will provide and to whom ● Identification of the service provider(s) that will provide the intervention ● Development of an evaluation methodology that will determine achievement of target outcome(s) ● Determination of the specific end payor organization(s) that will pay for the intervention outcome(s) ● Discussion among all key project stakeholders about whether to move forward with Project Launch Project Launch ● Determination of the project outcomes, the price for each, and the expected level of achievement ● Negotiation of a capital structure and engagement with investors to raise funds for the project costs ● Finalization of the process for collecting data, including negotiation of data sharing agreements ● Ramping up of program evaluation components including training service providers ● Development of a contract document that describes the roles and responsibilities of all parties Project Execution During the final stage, Project Execution, the service provider implements the intervention, a program evaluator monitors the intended outcomes, and all other parties meet their obligations. At certain predetermined intervals, the program evaluator will report the outcomes of the project to all partners. The outcome payor will then repay investors according to the reported outcomes as outlined in the agreement. 6 Benefits of Early Childhood Health and Education Programs For several decades, rigorous research has demonstrated that high-quality early childhood health and education programs improve short and long-term life prospects for children and their families. Investing early in the lives of the most at-risk children has the greatest benefit, especially when tailored services for the child and family begin during pregnancy and continue into primary school. Moreover, a large body of research shows that absent these programs, at-risk children are likely to experience slower brain development that can result in life-long learning and achievement delays, emotional and behavioral disorders, and unemployment.4 Early childhood education researchers generally study child outcomes in five domains: 1.) approaches toward learning (executive functioning, creativity, etc.), 2.) cognition and general knowledge, 3.) language development, 4.) physical wellbeing and motor development, and 5.) social and emotional development. A large body of evidence shows that high-quality preschool programs can improve short- and long-term outcomes in all of these areas. The most substantiated short-term outcome improvements are in the areas of grade school math and reading scores. Longer term demonstrated school-based outcomes include on-time grade advancement, years of schooling, high school graduation, and reduced need for special education.5 While high-quality preschool programs can be relatively expensive, the benefits to the child, family, and to society at-large exceed these costs. For example, slots under the Virginia Preschool Initiative four-year-old preschool program are about $12,000 per child per year, split 50:50 between the state and local government.6 One recent study by Nobel prize winning James Heckman found, “Every dollar spent on high quality, birth- to-five programs for disadvantaged children delivers a 13% per annum return on investment. These economically significant returns account for the welfare costs of taxation to finance the program and survive a battery of sensitivity analyses.”7 These findings suggest a continuum of services birth-to-five health and education approach is not only beneficial for the child and family, but is an astute economic strategy as well. Local Early Childhood Health and Education Services Below is a brief description of the current early childhood health and education services offered locally. ● There are approximately 216 low-income four-year-olds in the city, 366 low-income four-year-olds in the county, and about the same number of low-income three-year-olds in each locality. ● There are about 233 families with children aged zero to four who are receiving home visiting in the city and 273 families in the county. The largest home visiting programs are Jefferson Area CHIP and ReadyKids/Healthy Families. ● The city offers 60 preschool slots to low-income three-year-olds, leaving an unmet need of about 156 children. Charlottesville City Schools is the primary program provider. The county does not provide any three-year-old slots, leaving an unmet need of about 366 low-income three-year-olds. ● There are 193 preschool slots for low-income four-year-olds in the city, leaving an unmet need of about 23 children. Charlottesville City Schools is the primary program provider. The are 251 four- year-old preschool slots in the county, leaving an unmet need of about 155 low-income four-year- olds. The County is primary program provider through the Bright Stars program. ● In addition, low-income families receive a variety of other services, including sponsored childcare and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC). Below is a table that shows the met and unmet need of low-income three- and four-year-olds in the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County. As shown, a large percentage of four-year-olds in each locality receive preschool. However, most low-income three-year-olds do not receive preschool in the city or county. 7 Number of Low-Income Children Receiving Preschool Services in the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County, 2015 Service Category City of Charlottesville Albemarle County Served Unserved Served Unserved Three-Year-Old Preschool* 60 156 0 366 Four-Year-Old Preschool* 193 23 251 115 Source: Morgan, J. (2016). Analysis of fiscal resources and issues impacting early childhood development and school readiness in Charlottesville and Albemarle County, Virginia (Rep.). Richmond, VA: Virginia Early Childhood Foundation. * The cited report only provides a figure for the number of four-year-olds. The stated number of three-year- olds above is based upon the assumption that there is likely the same number of the three-year-olds. PALS-K is a measure of children’s knowledge of important literacy fundamentals: phonological awareness, alphabet recognition, concept of words, knowledge of letter sounds, and spelling. Despite the noteworthy local focus on early childhood health and education, a larger percentage of local kindergartens fall below kindergarten readiness levels, compared to state averages. Kindergarteners Whose Fall PALS-K Scores Are Below Kindergarten Readiness Levels AY 2011-12 AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 AY 2015-16 Virginia 12.5% 13.0% 12.5% 12.9% 13.8% Albemarle 11.2% 14.1% 14.8% 13.8% 16.2% Charlottesville 10.9% 16.0% 14.3% 14.8% 14.2% Expanding High-Quality Three-Year-Old Preschool in the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County This section describes the findings of the UVa PFS Lab’s feasibility assessment of expanding high-quality three-year-old preschool for low-income (<200% Federal Poverty Level) families in the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County, Virginia. The UVa PFS Lab conducted interviews across the stakeholder landscape in the city and county, including with school board members, the City Council and County Board of Supervisors, state policy leaders, local preschool provider administrators and staff, the business community, philanthropies, advocacy organizations, and university researchers. According to the Project Exploration Phase Components described earlier in this report, the UVa PFS Lab evaluated the feasibility of expanding three-year-old preschool for low-income children in three main areas: 1.) Community Engagement, 2.) Target Population & Geography, and 3.) Data Availability. If a community is able to demonstrate favorable ratings in these three areas, there is a high likelihood that it is feasible to develop a PFS project. 8 Project Feasibility Scale The UVa PFS Lab rated the feasibility of each component according to this scale: Not Determined: The feasibility of this component is unclear at this time Unfavorable: There are significant roadblocks to achieving this project component Encouraging: It is likely possible to establish this component with additional effort Favorable: There are few to no additional steps to establish this component Project Readiness Components Below is the UVa PFS Lab’s evaluation of the feasibility for each Project Feasibility component. Community Engagement Favorable The local community can clearly articulate a specific issue area and outcomes of importance: The majority of local stakeholders agree that preschool for low-income three-year-olds is crucial to the overall success of a child’s lifetime success. They also agree that the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County lack affordable preschool options for low-income three-year-olds. Local stakeholders stated that a project should take into account outcomes for both the child and his or her parents. They expressed interest in child-focused outcomes including the Phonological Awareness Literacy Screening (PALS) assessment, kindergarten readiness, third grade reading levels, and on-time grade advancement; and parent- focused outcomes such as employment status and earnings. The issue area receives significant attention and support from key community leaders: In coordination with the Virginia Early Childhood Foundation, the United Way Thomas Jefferson Area (UWTJA) Early Education Task Force recently conducted an analysis of fiscal resources and issues impacting early childhood development and school readiness in the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County, Virginia. The report noted, “early childhood services in Charlottesville and Albemarle enjoy an unusually strong level of fiscal support from local government. More than 42 percent of total early childhood funding comes from local government, making it the largest single source of support. Early childhood leaders express confidence that this commitment will be sustained.” Broad interest exists to address the issue across levels of government and the community: The UWTJA is a central coordinating body for developing local policy on early childhood education and health initiatives. Members of the UWTJA’s Early Education Task Force represent the highest levels of relevant stakeholder communities including public schools, philanthropy, the business community, Head Start, local government, academia, and state government. The existence of this task force and regular participation by its members demonstrates that broad interest exists to improve early childhood education. Conversations with community uniformly demonstrated that the community is interested in investing early in the life of the local children. In addition, as previously stated, the local community self-funds a large portion of early childhood health and education program costs. 9 Potential payor organizations are willing to explore a Pay for Success opportunity: There are a number of local and state organizations who may be interested in funding an expansion of three-year-old preschool. The UVa PFS Lab has had conversations with many of the organizations, all of which were interested in continuing discussions and learning more. Interest from community leadership to define, measure, and value outcomes: In the UVa PFS Lab’s discussions with local community leaders, the concept of aligning an expansion of three-year-old preschool with specific outcomes was well received. The local community already monitors many program outcomes, such as on-time grade advancement and PALS scores. Moreover, the UWTJA’s Outcome Collaborative, described below, will monitor many relevant child outcomes through high school. Target Population & Geography Favorable A definition of a target population and geography that would benefit from an intervention: The target population for this project would be low-income (<200% Federal Poverty Level) three-year-old children. Under a continuum of services model, low-income families who received some home visiting would be given priority to receive three- and then four-year-old preschool. There are about 216 low-income four-year-olds in the city, and 366 low-income four-year-olds in the county, and about the same number of low-income three-year-olds in each locality. About 250 families with young children receive home visiting in each locality. The city currently offers 60 preschool slots to low-income three-year-olds, leaving an unmet need of about 156 children. The county does not provide any slots, leaving an unmet need of about 366 low-income three-year-olds. While the city has fairly compact population density, much of the county is quite rural. While it is likely feasible to transport most low-income three-year-olds in the city by bus to preschool, it may only be feasible to do so for the children in the county who live in the urban ring. Research supporting that there are social and financial benefits an intervention could provide: There is important evidence demonstrating that children who receive two years vs one year of preschool experience significant additional benefits in a variety of areas that extend into adulthood.8 Improved child outcomes include: reading at first grade; math at first and second grade; receptive vocabulary at first, second and third grade; working memory at first and second grade; set-shifting at first, second and third grade; school readiness at kindergarten that continued into third-grade on reading and receptive vocabulary; higher working memory and set-shifting at first grade which maintained over time; reduced likelihood of membership in low performing trajectories on receptive vocabulary, math, working memory and set- shifting; less need for additional services in elementary school; and reduced retention in special education.9 Awareness of how much the local community is currently spending to address the issue area: Private and public sources invest more than $13.6 million per year to support early childhood education in Charlottesville and Albemarle. These sources fund the budgets of both school districts, the Departments of Social Services, two home visiting organizations, and other community organizations. More than 41 percent of the funds are public, local sources of funding. Federal funds account for 29 percent, state funding makes up 20 percent, and private sources make up the remaining 10 percent.10 10 Understanding of current negative outcomes that lead to persistent high costs to social systems: Among other outcomes, there is an opportunity to improve current Phonological Awareness and Literacy Screening Test for Kindergarten (PALS-K) test scores in the city and county. The PALS-K was designed to identify children at risk for early reading difficulties. According to this metric, Charlottesville and Albemarle consistently report lower Kindergarten readiness than the Virginia state average.11 Children who are not prepared at kindergarten may not advance through on-time through each grade level and require intensive teacher assistance, which are both costly to the local school systems. Because these issues often persist, the school systems will continue to accrue additional higher costs for many years. Data Availability Favorable Availability of strong data systems for tracking the community outcomes of importance: United Way Thomas Jefferson Area recently began an Outcome Collaborative that has the potential to be a critical resource for a PFS project. According to Barbara Hutchinson, Vice President of Community Impact Programs, “The purpose is to connect early educational experiences with school data to determine their individual and combined impact on later school achievement.”12 Under this system, data collection will begin when children enroll in various early childhood services, including home visiting and preschool, and continue tracking outcomes through high school. Data elements will include child and family demographics, information on the services children receive, and a variety of educational outcomes. The system would allow a program evaluator to understand the difference in outcomes between children who receive various packages of early childhood services. Readiness from all partners to establish data sharing agreements and connect data systems: The United Way Thomas Jefferson Area Outcome Collaborative has established a framework for the data sharing agreements needed to connect the necessary datasets and track various outcomes of importance. Additional discussions will be necessary with all data providing entities to determine whether they would support using the Outcome Collaborative for the proposed PFS project. Willingness from all partners to undertake rigorous program evaluation: Through the Outcome Collaborative and other prior research initiatives, the critical data partners have demonstrated their interest and willingness to undertake rigorous program evaluation. Summary In summary, while there is still much work to do to actually launch a PFS project that will expand three-year- old preschool for low-income children, the local community stands impressively ready for such an undertaking. The local community is dedicated to early childhood health and education, has an additional target population that would benefit, and has data systems that exist to track child and family outcomes. Community Engagement Target Population & Geography Data Availability Favorable Favorable Favorable 11 Recommended Next Steps To fully realize the benefits of birth-to-five programs, and to further the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County’s leadership for early childhood health and education, the UVa PFS Lab recommends that the city and county begin to formalize a birth-to-five continuum of services. Once completed, the continuum would consist of a governing board to promote alignment of home visiting and preschool program curricula into kindergarten, effectively refer families through the program continuum, and utilize an evaluation framework that will allow the local community to understand the child, family, and community benefits of the continuum model. City and county leaders should also consider partnering with a PFS advisory firm to explore the feasibility of expanding three-year-old preschool with a PFS approach. To explore whether PFS is a viable tool to fund the expansion of three-year-old preschool in the city and county urban ring, city and county leaders should work with a PFS advisory firm to conduct an in-depth feasibility study. One available source that could lead this work is an Institute for Child Success federally funded grant competition that will provide PFS technical assistance. Stated in the application documents, “Headquartered in Greenville, South Carolina, the Institute for Child Success (ICS) is an independent, nonpartisan, nonprofit research and policy organization dedicated to the success of all young children.” “ICS uses an innovative coaching model, where jurisdictions commit specified staff to the project and are guided through the process of assessing the feasibility of PFS for improving early childhood outcomes.” Specifically, ICS will work with localities to: ● Specify outcomes they want to improve through PFS financing and calculate baselines; ● Assess the evidence base for Early Childhood interventions and the likelihood of successful implementation and impact locally; ● Calculate costs and benefits, including savings produced, by specific interventions; ● Analyze which agencies at which levels of government realize savings and benefits; ● Assess the capacity of service providers to effectively implement interventions of interest; ● Build capacity of providers for PFS finance to manage to outcomes, and scale effectively; ● Quantify the target populations for specific interventions, determining unmet need; ● Develop realistic plans for scaling programs to reach the underserved; ● Calculate how outcomes will change, as well as costs and benefits if specific interventions are expanded; ● Identify stakeholders needed for a successful PFS transaction; ● Educate and build support among a wide range of stakeholders (e.g. via a jurisdiction wide Pay for Success working group); ● Facilitate meetings with intermediaries, investors, and other players in the PFS field; and ● Connect with other jurisdictions and organizations undertaking similar projects to share resources & experience. It is important to note that applicants to the competition are not mandated to move forward with a PFS project. Applicants are only required to demonstrate that they will participate fully in exploring the concept through the 9- to 12-month technical assistance period. The competition due date is February 17, 2017. If the local community wishes to apply, they should move quickly to develop a strong application. The UVa PFS Lab will fully back preparing this application and could be a partner during the technical assistance period. However, if this competition is not a good fit, the UVa PFS Lab can also provide other options to continue Project Development should the local community wish to do so. 12 Works Cited 1 Artega, I., Humpage, S., Reynolds, A. J., & Temple, J. A. (2014). One year of preschool or two: Is it important for adult outcomes? (Vol. 40, pp. 221-237, Rep.). Economics of Education Review. 2 Shah, H. K. (2011). One year versus two years of an enhanced preschool program: Impact on academic and cognitive outcomes through third grade (Rep.). State College, PA: The Pennsylvania State University. 3 Heckman, James J. (2016, December). There’s more to gain by taking a comprehensive approach to early childhood development. Rep. Heckman Equation. 4 Ibid. 5 Rohacek, M., Greenberg, E., & Massey, M. (2016, December). The state of the science on early childhood interventions (Rep.). Retrieved http://pfs.urban.org/ece-toolkit-stateofthescience 6 Strobel, C. (2016, April 15). Virginia Preschool Initiative Guidelines for the Virginia Preschool Initiative Application 2016- 2017 (Commonwealth of Virginia, Virginia Department of Education). Retrieved from http://www.doe.virginia.gov/instruction/early_childhood/preschool_initiative/guidelines.pdf 7 Heckman, James J. (2016, December). There’s more to gain by taking a comprehensive approach to early childhood development. Rep. Heckman Equation. 8 Artega, I., Humpage, S., Reynolds, A. J., & Temple, J. A. (2014). One year of preschool or two: Is it important for adult outcomes? (Vol. 40, pp. 221-237, Rep.). Economics of Education Review. 9 Shah, H. K. (2011). One year versus two years of an enhanced preschool program: Impact on academic and cognitive outcomes through third grade (Rep.). State College, PA: The Pennsylvania State University. 10 Morgan, John. Fiscal Mapping Report: Analysis of Fiscal Resources and Issues Impacting Early Childhood Development and School Readiness in Charlottesville and Albemarle, Virginia. Smart Beginnings: Virginia Early Childhood Foundation. August 2016. 11 Invernizzi, M., Justice, L., Landrum, T., & Booker, K. (2004) Early literacy screening in kindergarten: widespread implementation in Virginia. (Vol 36, pp 479-500). University of Virginia. Journal of Literacy Research. 12 Zeidman, N. (2016, August 4). Local schools and early childhood services partner for longterm improvement. Charlottesville Tomorrow. Retrieved from http://www.cvilletomorrow.org/news/article/24623-local- schools-and-early-childhood-services-partner/ 13