While, as above, representing multiple conflicts of interest (or, at least, the appearance of some), these actions began in 1997 with the first federal grant award to the National PBIS TA Center and have continued since (see below). It has done all of this as part of a conscious agenda whose goal is to “brand” their frameworks in national prominence.By default, it has ignored, minimized, or failed to similarly acknowledge other evidence-based or effective models or programs that (often) report better results than their frameworks and.It has recommended or used only these programs in other federal grant programs-serving to extend these frameworks’ “legitimacy” and national reach.It has done this, often through its funded National Technical Assistance (TA) Centers, in ways where: Department of Education (USDoE)-at the very least-has given its RtI, PBIS, and MTSS frameworks preferential treatment, funding, and funding opportunities. In past Blogs, I have presented the data and documentation to demonstrate that the U.S. Department of Education’s Near-Exclusive “Advocacy” of RtI, PBIS, and MTSS But when this scenario involves the federal government and your tax dollars, there should be a pause for reflection.Īnd if a federal government agency doubles down on its own agenda, program, or initiative-and the decision involves (or has the appearance of involving) a political conflict of interest or fiduciary malfeasance, there should be moral, ethical, and/or legal outrage.
Ies virtual environment doe funding free#
When a private company decides to double down, it is the essence of capitalism in a free market economy. Here, the product either “gets hot,” or the company goes out of business. This is what some business start-ups do when they buy massive amounts of prime-time advertising for a new product that just is not catching on. For example, when people face a losing situation or take an unwise risk, they may decide to put more energy, resources, or time into it in an effort to turn “lemons into lemonade.” Indeed, some news channels have described our President as “doubling down” when he originally makes an illogical, untenable, or fabricated statement, then is confronted by the facts, and then reasserted his statement more vociferously.Īnd finally, sometimes doubling-down occurs in life. Recently, “doubling down” has become popular in politics. If the bluff works, the other players fold, and the winner collects the pot (usually without revealing the bluff). And so, they double what was originally a losing bet (when they should be folding instead) to make it appear that they are eminently confident that they have a winner. In Poker, a player “doubles down” when they have a losing hand, but they want the other players to think that it’s a winner. A new funding modelīeginning on 1 January 2017, funding under Start Strong for preschools is based on 600 hour enrolments.įunding for enrolments of less than 600 hours is capped at 50% of the increased base funding rates, with pro-rata funding decreases depending on hours enrolled.Call Congress: The Tainting of RtI, PBIS, MTSS, and SEL Dear Colleagues, Parents and carers should check with their preschool provider regarding their child?s fees as each preschool sets its own fee levels. Preschool providers are required to pass on 75% of the additional funding to families through fee reductions. This funding adds to the $150 million that was already allocated under the previous Preschool Funding Model, and is designed to significantly reduce preschool fees, making 600 hours of early childhood education more affordable for all families. In the 2017-18 NSW budget, the investment in Start Strong was extended through to 2021, with an additional $217 million committed over four years to strengthen the State?s ability to ensure universal access to an early childhood education program for 600 hours in the year before school. To ensure that affordability is not a barrier for families with young children, in 2016 the NSW Government allocated an initial $115 million in funding for Start Strong. Making early childhood education more affordable Higher levels of educational attainment, economic participation and family well being have all been linked to moderate levels of participation in early childhood education. The benefits endure well beyond primary school. Research shows that children who participate in a quality early childhood education program for at least 600 hours in the year before school are more likely to arrive at school equipped with the social, cognitive and emotional skills they need to engage in learning. Value of Start Strong 600 hours of quality early childhood education