Massachusetts’
Quality Rating and
Improvement System
(QRIS)
Overview and Update
Overview

What and Why of QRIS

Massachusetts’ Process for Developing a
QRIS

Preliminary Recommendations

Moving Forward
QRIS:
Quality Rating and Improvement System
“A Quality Rating & Improvement
System (QRIS) is a method to assess,
improve, and communicate the level of
quality in early care & education
and after-school settings.”
(Stair Steps to Quality, United Way Success by Six, p. 4)
Why QRIS?
QRIS are an early education and
care market intervention that
help address the tension between
increasing standards to produce
better outcomes for children
and maintaining affordable
prices for families.
From Anne
Mitchell
QRIS Creates a Structure to Organize Key Functions of
an Early Education and Care System in MA
Standards for Programs,
Practioners, and Children
Support to Programs
and Educators to Meet
and Maintain Standards
Positive Outcomes for
Children, Families and
Communities
Systems Planning,
Monitoring, Accountability
and Enforcement
Financial Supports
for Families
Family Education,
Engagement and Support
Slide from Anne Mitchell
Components of Massachusetts’ QRIS
1. Standards
2. Monitoring and Accountability
3. Program and Practitioner Supports
4. Fiscal Incentives
5. Family Information and Education
and the overarching structure
Each element will go through 3 phases –
Design, Public Input, & Implementation
MA QRIS Timeline
Feb 08| Jul 08| Dec 08| Jul 09| Dec 09| Jul 10
Today
Standards
Design Phase
Public Input
Implementation
Monitoring & Accountability
Design Phase
Public Input
Implementation
Program and Practitioner Supports
Design Phase
Public Input
Implementation
Fiscal Incentives
Design Phase
Public Input
Implementation
Consumer Engagement
Design Phase
Public Input
Implementation
PILOT QRIS (Fall 2009)
FULL IMPLEMENTATION (when funding)
Design Process for the QRIS Structure and
Standards
EEC Board
Parent Advisory
EEC Advisory
EEC Internal
QRIS Team
QRIS External
Working Group
(Subgroup of
Advisory
Committee)
Drafts of the Standards now go to
Public Input Phase
9
Standards Design Teams
External Stakeholders Standards Design Team

Mary Ann Anthony – Catholic Charities
(representative of MADCA)

Chad d’Entremont – Early Education for All

Marcia Farris – MassAEYC

Jodi Figuerido – Institute for Education and
Professional Development

Barbara Finlayson – Hampshire Educational
Collaborative

Sarah Fujiwara – Horizons for Homeless Children

Gwynn Hughes – Massachusetts After-school
Partnership

Kelty Kelley – Massachusetts Community
Partnerships Councils

Pam Kuechla – PACE Child Care Works /
Massachusetts Child Care Resource and Referral
Network

Kay Lisseck – Schott Fellows

Kathy Modigliani – Family Child Care Project

Kathy Reticker – Acre Family Day Care
(representative of MADCA)

Grace Richardson – American Family Child Care
Association, Ind. Family Child Care Provider

Jim Robertson – Plowshares

Jason Sachs/Karen Silver – Boston Public Schools

Ronna Schaffer – MA Head Start Association

Peg Sprague – United Way of Mass Bay and the
Merrimack Valley

Nancy Topping-Tailby – MA Head Start Association

Donna Traynham – MA Dept. of Elementary and
Secondary Education

Libby Zimmerman – Connected Beginnings
Internal EEC Standards Design Team

Phil Baimas, Prof. Dev. and Regulation

Pat Cameron, Special Education

Amy Checkoway, UPK and Quality

Joan Clark, IT

Gail DeRiggi, Family Support

Nancy Doyle, Quality

Joyce Holen, Regional Licensing

Annette Lamana, Quality

Jennifer Louis, Research

Dave McGrath, Licensing

Larisa Mendez-Penate, Comp Services

Anita Moeller, Programs

Deena Papanikolaou, Legal

Kelli Piligian, Regional Licensing

Alda Rego, Finance

Pam Roux, Prof. Dev.

Rod Southwick, Research

Matt Veno, Communications

Tom Weierman, Legal

Corey Zimmerman, QRIS and Research
MA QRIS Overarching Structure:
Preliminary Recommendations

Include licensed and license-exempt programs and
providers serving children birth – 14 years of age.

Voluntary participation initially, eventually may be
mandatory to receive certain funding.

Design of standards should consider different setting
types.

Recognize and incorporate existing quality standards,
such as Head Start, NAEYC and NAFCC

Hybrid of mandatory criteria plus points to move to
next level.

Provide financial and other quality supports during
implementation.
MA QRIS Standards:
Preliminary Recommendations

Five levels of quality defined in draft standards with combination of
required criteria and more flexible points.

Nine categories within draft standards*:
 Relationships
 Physical Environment
 Leadership and Management
 Health and Safety
 Curriculum and Assessment
 Community Involvement
 Family Involvement
 Program Evaluation
 Workforce Quality and Support
*Special Education & Cultural Competence embedded across
categories of draft standards.

Three versions of draft standards by program type:
 Center/school-based
 Family child care
 School-age
Center/School-Based Standards
DRAFT
Level 1:
Full licensing with no action to revoke, or
Programs operated and overseen by a local education agency (i.e. license-exempt programs)1
Level 2:
Programs must earn at least 36 points and at least 4 points must be earned in each standard area
Level 3:
Programs must earn at least 72 points and at least 8 points must be earned in each standard area
Level 4:
Current accreditation from NAEYC, or
If a Head Start designee, receipt of a Blue or Gold letter from the Office of Head Start as a result of
the triennial review process
1
Need to
insert
appropriate
language for
other types of
licenseexempt
programs, i.e.
Catholic,
Montessori
Level 5:
Current accreditation from NAEYC, and
Every classroom has a teacher with a Bachelor’s degree or higher in a related field, and
Programs which are operated and overseen by a local education agency (i.e. license-exempt) must
demonstrate that they meet all EEC licensing requirements for group programs
Moving Forward with QRIS
Next 6 months
 Standards out for public review
 Design of Monitoring & Accountability component
 Design and begin implementation of the Program
and Practitioner Supports component
 Continue communication with the field to gather
input
Next 1-2 years
 Design Fiscal Incentives component
 Pilot QRIS rating system and quality supports
Align with other EEC initiatives
 Income Eligible Re-procurement
 UPK
 Workforce Taskforce recommendations
 FY10 Budget
Seeking EEC Board Guidance on:

Preliminary recommendations and
structure of standards

Key questions for public input phase

Feedback/thoughts on other elements of
MA QRIS
For more information:
http://www.eec.state.ma.us/QRIS.aspx