March 31, 2003
Estimates Debate
Question to Minister of Children and Family Development Gordon Hogg
R. Lee: My question is, again, on community schools. You probably answered the question already, but I will try again. Community schools are a model which provides community education by bringing citizens and community partners together to serve the needs of students and the community.
In my riding of Burnaby North community schools play an important role in developing the neighbourhood community. For example, the Lochdale Community School is one of the first community schools established in this province. Over the years it has provided many programs connecting the students, parents and the local neighbourhood. Gilmore Community School not only has provided much needed services such as the very successful hot lunch program to the students by volunteers, but it also has cultivated the establishment of various local organizations such as the Heights Neighbourhood Association and the Heights Merchants Association.
My question is this: under the restructuring of funding to community schools, how can those various programs in the community schools be protected not only for students, but for the whole community?
Hon. G. Hogg: The allocation which, in the modelling we're looking at, will go to the Burnaby school district will be based on the socioeconomic needs that exist there. That is based on a belief that the primary responsibility we have is to ensure we improve educational performance. We know that students who have parents involved and the community involved tend to have an increased educational performance.
I made reference earlier to visiting Grandview Elementary School. They showed us the figures on the performance of their students on the foundation skills assessment — the testing that's done at grades 4, 7 and 10 — and how they improved dramatically in their educational performance by having a community school, by having much more participation and involvement of parents and community leaders within the context of the community.
Those decisions will be made within the context of the school district. We as a province are looking at the allocations based on socioeconomic need. We will be allocating to each school district the amount of money we have on a percentage basis based on the need that exists, so we'll use that modelling.
Then it will be incumbent upon the school district to use the best practices available, looking at the evidence and research that exists, so they can ensure that they do fund those programs which are most effective, be they a meal program or a community school program or a community-based or school-based child care worker program. They will be able to make the decisions with respect to how they see that allocation most reasonably being effective within the context of their school district.
That's how they can protect it. They can protect it by meeting with their school district, by ensuring that their school board responds to the needs of an effective program which exists. That's what we want to fund. We want school boards to make decisions around those schools that have the greatest need and therefore could have the most effective program exist within them. We're not making that decision within the context of schools, but only within the context of what is allocated to a school district.
R. Lee: The new criteria is focused on the needs of the students, but one important element of community schools is to support the families, especially the new families in the community, so they can get support from the established families or even support each other. Do you see a role for community schools as efficient facilities to support the families in the community?
Hon. G. Hogg: Certainly, there are very many effective community school programs that exist in the province. The research talked about a set of principles that were effective whether it was a community school or a lunch program or whatever it might be. Those criteria can be met through a community school. They can be met probably through a lunch program. There are a number of ways they can be met, but they are the energy that coalesces around a school program when you bring in parents, when you bring in community members, when you allow decisions to be made by teachers and by parents and by community members at the local school area. That is what makes it effective. It is not the fact that it is a community school program, because a community school program, as such, may not be nearly as effective in improving educational performance and involvement of families and communities as a lunch program or a breakfast program that may bring all of the families to the school to assist and support that.
It is those principles that are important, much more so than saying: "Here is the label of what the program is." It is the principles of involvement, commitment and energy that actually have an impact and effect on bringing families together so they become supportive of their children in a learning environment and also so there is less violence, more positive collegiality that starts to exist and better educational performance. Those are the principles that are more important than what the program is. We trust that school boards are the right people to make those decisions around what those programs should be.
R. Lee: Suppose a community lost its community school and the community programs as a result, but then, later, more social problems arose for the youngsters or the students. Would the ministry review the needs of the community periodically?
Hon. G. Hogg: The scenario which the member posits is one which I trust the school boards will be the first to become aware of and to make decisions about whether or not the allocations they have made within their school district are the appropriate ones. If they are starting to see evidence of some kind of educational performance falloff or some other types of problems that may start to exist within a community, then one could question whether or not the allocation within the context of the school district was appropriate.
The Minister of Finance has said clearly to me that if we are able to show that these programs are effective, that these programs work and that they've showed the positive outcomes we want, we will be able to continue with higher levels of funding and be able to go back and make arguments for more funding. We want examples of programs that are working well. We want examples across this province of things that are effective and that can show, through evidence-based research, that they do have an impact on educational performance. When we do that, we will use it as part of a presentation for the allocation of funding, as it exists across this province, to those areas that we will have the greatest impact on.
R. Lee: My other question is on child care. In my constituency some children with special needs are on the waiting list for child care facilities. Sometimes the waiting for additional support for special needs is quite long. Would there be any improvement in the coming year?
Hon. L. Reid: The question, actually, is two-part. The actual space is funded through the Ministry of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services. The support service that would go along with that to provide specialized supports under the supported child care piece is, frankly, the piece we're refocusing, as the minister responded earlier. There will be probably a 10 percent reduction over the course of the supported child care programming that unfolds. Indeed, we have children today — young adults, if you will, approximately 200 of them — that receive care under the supported child care model that isn't always developmentally appropriate for them, so we are going to make some changes in that in terms of refocusing it.
We also want to honour the transition piece, if you will. The infant development program in our province is zero to three years of age. In some instances, we miss a lot of children who are three to six years of age, which is a very critical group for us as a government, because that's where the research says the expanded learning need in that area can indeed create better opportunities and better outcomes for the child.
We intend to refocus the program much more strongly around the zero-to-six population and do some things differently around the older population. Certainly, the answer to your question is that the process is unfolding, and we will not have that work done for probably another month or two.
R. Lee: I also have a question on service providers. One service provider in my constituency who is running four child care facilities in Burnaby has had his funding reduced from over $400,000 to under $200,000, a reduction of over 60 percent. Some staff are leaving, and he has some difficulties in recruiting new qualified workers. My question is this: do you have any advice for them?
Hon. L. Reid: Again, the actual funding for those child care spaces falls under the Ministry of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services, the hon. Minister for Women's Equality. She could probably give you some guidance in terms of why in that particular instance those changes were made. I am not able to provide that information to you.
R. Lee: Are there any increases in support of early childhood development, such as support workers with proper training in child care facilities? What I mean is that if some qualified workers are not working, then the support for early childhood development may suffer in some of the child care facilities. I guess my question is this: would there be increased support to qualified workers?
Hon. L. Reid: I can tell the member opposite that I appreciate the question. There is opportunity for us to do a much better job around the training piece and to connect those pieces of early childhood development together much more effectively. In terms of the qualifications of those who would work in a child care setting today, that's determined under the early childhood education registry, and that piece, as well, will flow from the Ministry of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services. Their estimates actually follow our estimates, so those questions should more properly be put directly to the minister responsible for Women's Equality.
R. Lee: I'll go back to the community living model. On group homes and individualized funding I believe a well-funded individualized funding program will work, but for some people with disabilities, it would be better for them to stay in a group home than to be looked after by institutions. Would there be any choices for people with disabilities?
Hon. G. Hogg: One of the principles of the whole of community living B.C. is to ensure that we create options for the developmentally disabled so that they will have a range of choices that will exist for them, including individualized funding and group homes in that model as well as family care homes.
We're wanting to move away from the institutional models more and more to the family care home model, because we know that model will result in better care and better services to the developmentally disabled. The whole principle behind this is creating some options for them as they move forward. We don't want to have a great disruption in the system, but we do want to create options so they can find the model of service that best meets their needs.
