<< Back 5/15/02 Daycare funds threatened by re-allocation By Don Hendershot Possible Daycare Funding Cuts: • Haywood – 27 percent • Jackson – 30 percent • Macon – 44 percent • Swain – 50 percent • Average Region A – 40 percent Many children and families in the seven western counties could be left in the lurch if an N.C. Division of Child Development administrative decision to change the subsidized child care allocation for fiscal year 2002-2003 is implemented. Despite a $2.7 million increase in federal funding to the state for subsidized child care, Region A stands to lose $3.5 million in allocations. “In the worst case scenario, if the $3.5 million reduction scheduled for fiscal year 2002-2003 is implemented, 650 children in Region A would lose access to child care,” Shelia Hoyle, executive director of Southwestern Child Development Commission said. In a letter to Gov.Mike Easley, Bob Cochran, director of Jackson County Department of Social Services, said that 100 Jackson County children would lose day care services if allocations were cut. Nearly half of Graham County’s 58 children currently receiving subsidized child care would lose assistance, said Bobby Cagle, Graham County DSS director. Cochran appeared before Jackson County Commissioners earlier this month to give them a copy of the letter he drafted to Gov. Easley and present a chart showing the impact the proposed changes in the allocation formula would have on Region A. According to Cochran, Jackson County would lose 30 percent of its funding — $385,730. He said the average reduction in Region A was 40 percent. The chart showed Swain County would lose 50 percent of its funding; Macon would lose 44 percent and Haywood would lose nearly 27 percent. Cochran told commissioners that he didn’t understand the logic behind the revised formula. In his letter to the governor, Cochran states: “Based upon correspondence from the Division of Child Development and telephone conversations with DCD staff, it is clear that these reductions are not required, nor warranted. Furthermore, it is clear that administrative staff took this action without examining the full impact of the changes, nor allowing for transition time for counties to respond to the reductions. When asked on April 29 during a telephone conversation, DCD staff stated that the allocation formula was not changed in response to legislative mandate, nor was it changed in response to expressed unmet needs on the part of counties in North Carolina. Rather, this was a unilateral action by DCD staff who ‘felt that the formula should be changed.’ This comes at a time when there have been no decreases in federal funding for subsidized child care in North Carolina. In fact, the state received a $2.7 million federal funding increase for FY 02-03.” Cagle said he was at loss also to explain the reasoning behind the revised formula. “Last year a bill was introduced in the legislature proposing new allocations be put in place, but we got that stopped. I’ve yet to receive a satisfactory answer regarding this administrative change,” he said. He said it couldn’t be attributed to state budget woes because it was federal funding. “It’s my contention that this is the worst time possible to look at reallocation,” Cagle said. That money goes to the working poor and it is the only funding that enables some people to be employed, he said. Haywood County DSS director Tony Beaman called the cuts devastating. He said it would leave families in Haywood without day care. “Anyone on a waiting list would definitely be out. If the cuts stand, Haywood may be forced with closing some centers,” Beaman said. Ann Brogden of Macon County DSS said immediate impacts wouldn’t be as devastating for Macon County. “Right now, we will continue to serve through the summer as we always have. After August, it would be hard to predict,” Brogden said. Ron Penney, DCD spokesman, said the formula change was not a “new” formula but a return to an old one. Allotments in the past were based solely on children whose parents were employed. When more money became available, DCD was able to offer more resources to cover children of unemployed parents. Penney said Southwestern and Region A benefited from that change. “To keep them at that level we had to rob Peter to pay Paul,” Penney said. He said it wasn’t a problem in the past because DCD was getting new federal money, but “we’re not getting a lot now.” “DCD thought it was a good idea to go back to the original formula, to target employed parents,” Penney said. Asked about the $2.7 million federal increase Cochran had referred to, Penney said the new formula had been drafted before DCD knew that money was available. “What we will try to do is take that money and money carried over to address Region A,” Penney said. State Rep. Phil Haire (D-Sylva) said he had been appraised of the situation and had met with DCD representatives and Hoyle. “It looks like we can count on a Band-Aid fix for next year, but the root problem is the formula. We need to work to get better representation for Region A on DCD’s Allocation Work Committee,” Haire said. Hoyle and Cagle, who attended DCD’s May meeting, said they were promised seats on that work group. “We had a chance to offer our perspective at the meeting. We were able to show how devastating the new formula would be to Region A. I felt very positive after leaving that meeting. We have a good relationship with DCD. We have worked closely with them for more than 30 years. We want to ensure that no families in Region A that need assistance lose that,” Hoyle said. She said she believed Penney’s assessment regarding why DCD revised the formula. “But the result is we have a $3.5 million projected loss. That will absolutely affect children of employed parents in Region A,” she said. Hoyle said she remained hopeful after meeting with DCD that a positive resolution could be reached.