**Project MENTOR**

**FINAL EVALUATION REPORT**

**October 1, 2004, to July 30, 2007**

The purpose of the San Diego County Office of Education's (SDCOE)
Project MENTOR (Meeting Educational Needs Through Outreach) was to
improve the school readiness of children who are in the care of
independent preschool and family childcare providers in low-income
communities in south San Diego County.

This evaluation report describes major project activities, challenges
encountered in implementation of the work plan, and significant outcomes
for the past two and one half years (October, 2004, to June, 2007). The
project completed its two-year grant period in September, 2006 and was
approved for a nine-month no-cost extension through June, 2007. This
report presents the evaluation results for the entire project.

**I. Project Overview**

Project MENTOR was designed to meet the professional development needs
of an underserved segment of early care and education providers: family
child care providers and independent preschool providers who have
limited access to high quality, intensive professional development.

Project MENTOR trainers provided individualized, site-based professional
development to family childcare providers and independent center-based
preschool teachers in four south San Diego County communities: National
City, Imperial Beach, San Ysidro and west Chula Vista. MENTOR trainings
focused on enhancing the learning environment and instructional
practices that support early literacy development. A team of nine
trainers from SDCOE and partner agencies combined the collective
resources of each partner agency to provide outreach and professional
development to 254 family childcare and center-based preschool teachers.
Each participating provider received up to 40 hours of on-site
professional development tailored to her areas of needed improvement.

Individualized professional development activities helped providers
acquire the knowledge and expertise to utilize materials and activities
that build on children's immediate environments to support learning and
enhance school readiness. Because of the target population for project
services (independent centers and family childcare providers), mentors
did not advocate the use of a commercial or standardized curricula.
Instead, mentor trainings focused on using existing materials and
everyday routines to teach essential early literacy skills such as oral
language, vocabulary, phonological and alphabet awareness, and concepts
of print.

One of the key features of the project was the development and
implementation of community-based learning modules. The five modules
were designed to help providers maximize opportunities for learning
using materials and resources in the immediate environment. The modules
included questioning strategies, vocabulary, suggested activities to
support early literacy and math skills, and trade books linked to the
module topics. As part of the 40-hour training, project participants
conducted a community-based learning activity with their children.
Samples of the modules and pictures of providers engaged in
community-based learning activities are included with this report.

**[Staffing]{.underline}**

The San Diego County Office of Education (SDCOE) served as the lead
agency. Project partners included: YMCA-Childcare Resource Service,
Child Development Associates, and WestEd. Each partner agency
contributed at least one mentor trainer and a lead supervisor who
participated in project oversight. This collaborative model enabled the
project to draw upon the varied expertise of staff from each agency and
the organizational resources of each project partner. For example,
mentors from WestEd had extensive expertise in family childcare and
infant care, staff from SDCOE had experience serving children with
special needs, and staff from Child Development Associates had
experience in behavior and positive guidance.

**II. Significant Activities**

**[Staff Training]{.underline}**

In the first year of the project, staff trainings were held on a variety
of topics, including: state licensing and mandated reporting
requirements for licensing violations; a two-day, community-based
learning symposium with Stan Chu from Bank Street College of Education;
and an overview of the YMCA-Childcare Resource Service CARES incentive
program, which enabled providers who participated in MENTOR to receive
monetary incentives for completion. Staff also received training on the
grant evaluation requirements, instruments, and child assessments that
were administered as part of the project evaluation.

In addition to formal trainings, mentors met weekly to review various
aspects of project operation, including monitoring caseloads, sharing
resources and materials, reviewing project evaluation data, and
debriefing field experiences. Collectively, these activities helped all
staff provide high quality services to providers.

During the project period, MENTOR staff members were actively involved
in local and national professional organizations and participated
actively in trainings that supported the work of Project MENTOR. MENTOR
staff presented at the San Diego Family Childcare Association Conference
and the California Association for the Education of Young Children
(CAEYC) Conference. They also actively participated in state-level
trainings on the Preschool English Learner Guide and the California
State Preschool Foundations.

[**Provider Outreach and Recruitment**]{.underline}

Staff began recruiting providers in December, 2004, and service formally
began in January, 2005. Meetings were held with project partners to
develop recruitment strategies that would reach all providers in the
target communities. Flyers were distributed at trainings offered by
partner agencies. Also, announcements regarding Project MENTOR were
posted on partner websites and in provider newsletters mailed to
providers in the target service area. Articles about the project were
featured in a newsletters published by Educational Enrichment Services
and YMCA-CRS. Frequent updates on project activities were also provided
at the San Diego County Childcare and Development Planning Council, a
local governance organization representing early care and education
providers throughout San Diego County.

During two years of the project, provider interest increased throughout
the target communities, in part due to more varied and effective
outreach efforts, word-of-mouth, and other initiatives in San Diego such
as the Preschool for All Demonstration Project. One of the unanticipated
challenges experienced by project staff was informing many interested
providers that they were unable to participate in the project because
they did not work at centers or family childcare homes in the geographic
area targeted by the original grant proposal.

**[Project Materials]{.underline}**

In the second year of operation, project staff completed and pilot
tested five community-based learning modules (see samples included with
this evaluation report). These modules focus on learning activities that
can be conducted during everyday activities within the child's community
(e.g., going to a restaurant, store, outside on a nature walk). The
modules introduce new vocabulary that providers can use while engaging
in the learning activities and sample questions/conversation starters
that encourage and expand children's vocabulary and general knowledge
(e.g., What kinds of restaurants are there? What are some healthy
choices on the menu? How much does dessert cost? ). Each module also
includes samples of follow-up learning activities that build upon
children's everyday experiences and a resource list for books and other
materials related to the module topic. Combined with the training that
providers received, the community-based learning modules provided the
framework for helping providers utilize the child's everyday environment
and experiences as the curricula.

**[MENTOR Trainings]{.underline}**

Mentors conducted a total of **[4,629]{.underline}** site visits to
participating providers. Trainings focused on topics such as:
developmentally appropriate literacy activities, questioning strategies,
the effective use of learning materials in the children's and providers'
immediate environment, and school readiness issues such as behavior and
social/emotional development**.** Most providers completed the 40 hours
of training over a six month period, usually with one to two visits per
week. **Over [10,220]{.underline} hours of on-site, individualized
professional development was delivered to the early care and education
providers in the project.**

All providers received an initial pre-assessment of their learning
environment and literacy practices using the Early Literacy Environment
and Practices Rating Scale (ELEP). This instrument was developed by
project staff using items from the Early Childhood Environment Rating
Scale (ECERS), the Early Language and Literacy

Classroom Observation Toolkit (ELLCO) and an instrument developed by
Susan Newman at the University of Michigan. The new tool was created
with the goal to use a single observation instrument that would be
appropriate for both family childcare and center-based providers. The
results of the initial assessment guided the focus of the 40 hours of
training, which included a focus on community-based learning for all
providers.

Most mentors began the training series by focusing on "easy to fix"
issues in the learning environment such as room arrangement and
materials. This was less threatening and enabled mentors to establish
rapport with providers before addressing issues related to adult-child
interaction. Many providers lacked adequate resources such as books, art
materials and sensory play equipment. Each mentor had a small materials
budget; and, depending upon the provider's need, mentors purchased
inexpensive materials to illustrate how the provider could, at very
little cost, enhance the learning environment. For example, mentors
demonstrated how to make water color paints using food coloring, how to
make play dough, and how to build sand and water play tables using
inexpensive materials.

Mentors modeled various practices with the children in the care of
participating providers and discussed strategies that providers could
use to improve the quality of their programs. Mentors also increased
providers' access to resources such as training videos, curriculum
materials, and articles about developmentally appropriate practices to
support a balanced early literacy program. Mentors accompanied their
providers on field trips to shopping centers or fire stations to
illustrate ways to use the child's everyday learning environment to
promote early literacy skills and general knowledge.

**[Connections to Other Initiatives that Support ECE Program
Improvement]{.underline}**

In addition to the 40 hours of on site training, mentors also encouraged
providers to continue their education by taking coursework at the local
community colleges and by participating in other community trainings
offered by partner agencies.

One mentor worked with a local university (California State University,
San Marcos) to sponsor an extended studies course on community-based
learning. Several Project MENTOR providers enrolled in the course, which
was taught in both English and Spanish. As part of the course, students
developed and conducted their own community-based learning experiences
and documented what occurred. The final student presentations focused on
the community-based learning activities and what children learned by
participating.

The San Diego County Office of Education has served in a leadership role
in countywide strategic planning for universal preschool. In the final
year of Project MENTOR, SDCOE received funding to coordinate a Preschool
for All (PFA) Demonstration Project involving some of the same
communities targeted by Project MENTOR. In order to participate in the
PFA Demonstration Project, family and center-based preschool providers
applying for admission into the program had to meet established program
quality criteria. **One of the initial findings of the quality reviews
conducted by Preschool for All external consultants was that family
child care providers who had participated in Project MENTOR scored
higher on the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale than family
childcare providers who had not participated in MENTOR.**

**[End-of-Project Celebration]{.underline}**

In May, 2007, an end-of-project breakfast celebration was held for all
providers who had participated in the project. During the breakfast at a
local Mexican restaurant, providers had the opportunity to network with
each other and MENTOR staff and discuss how they planned to continue to
use what they learned in the project. Mentors and providers showcased
their work in a slideshow and in poster presentations that decorated the
walls of the restaurant. Remaining grant funds were used to purchase
books and learning materials which were distributed to providers at the
conclusion of the celebration.

**III. Project Outcomes**

Demographic profiles that included providers' educational credentials,
primary language, and number and ages of children in their care were
collected upon enrollment in the project. Data sources utilized to
document changes in provider knowledge and practice included:

-   Pre/post Early Literacy Environment and Practices Rating Scale
    (ELEP) scores.

-   Mentor training logs.

-   Mentor reflections regarding changes observed in provider practices.

-   Structured interviews with participating providers at 15- and
    40-hour training marks.

-   Final evaluation surveys completed by each provider.

These measures capture data to address ECEPD Program Achievement
Indicators 1-4 which focus on improvements in provider knowledge and
practice.

Child-level outcomes associated with Achievement Indicator #5 were
measured using the modified pre-LAS assessment and a supplemental
phonological awareness assessment administered to kindergarten-bound
children in the care of participating providers and to a sample of
children who have been in the care of parents or preschool providers who
are not participating in the project.

**[Participant Demographics]{.underline}**

A total of 311 providers participated in the project from October, 2004,
to June, 2007.

-   254 successfully completed the 40 hours of training.

-   57 providers dropped out of the project before completing 40 hours.

Of the 254 providers who completed the training series:

-   75% were family childcare providers who serve between 1 and 7
    children, typically between the ages of birth and 3. Many also serve
    school-age children in the afternoons.

-   25% were center-based preschool or toddler teachers, who typically
    serve 12-24 children.

-   69% of the providers served speak Spanish; and at their request,
    training was provided in Spanish to these providers.

-   2,308 children are in the care of project participants: 857 are
    between the ages of 0-3; 1,281 age 3-5; 170 are school age.

There were no significant demographic differences between providers who
completed the project and those who did not.

**[Outcomes for Project Objectives and Performance
Measures]{.underline}**

The tables on the following page present quantitative data for each
project objective. Project Objective #1: **"To improve early childhood
educators' [access]{.underline} to a wide variety of professional
development resources and curricular materials to improve programs in
home and center-based settings"** was successfully met through serving
center-based and family childcare providers in the target communities.
Access to a wide variety of materials was achieved through the
dissemination of community-based learning modules and a wide variety of
learning materials shared with providers.

Results for **Performance Measures 1a & b** indicate that 311 providers
were served during the entire project period, and 254 providers
completed 40 hours of training. A total of 10,220 hours of service were
delivered to project participants.

The results for **Performance Measure 1c** (to serve providers who work
with approximately 2,400 children) was met (2,308 children were served),
although the large number of family childcare providers served children
between the ages of 0-3. Another finding was that the family childcare
providers served by the project (70% of all providers served) often
serve fewer children than their license capacity permits (license
capacity was used to calculate the initial estimate of number of
children who would be reached).

**Performance Measures 1d & e** (community-based learning modules and
training): The project successfully completed five community-based
learning modules, and staff distributed the modules to all participants
and at early care and education professional development activities
offered by the San Diego County Office of Education and partner
agencies. For example, San Diego County state preschool program
directors have expressed strong interest in using the modules in their
classrooms which serve low income children throughout San Diego. Modules
will be also showcased at the 2008 Early Years Conference which attracts
early childhood educators from throughout San Diego County. In spring,
2007, SDCOE applied for and received a small amount of state funding
(AB212) to further refine the community-based learning modules, create
an on-line component, and provide training on the modules to
center-based preschool and family childcare providers.

**Performance Measure 1f** was met by establishing links with school
district staff to support kindergarten transition activities for the
children in the care of project participants. The focus of school
readiness training varied depending on the ages of children served by
the provider. MENTOR staff worked with school districts to obtain
information about kindergarten registration procedures and policies. For
example, some districts offered two-week summer kindergarten readiness
camps; others offered parent sessions about kindergarten curriculum and
requirements.

Establishing formal links between providers and school districts proved
to be one of the challenges in implementing the project. Some school
district staff, though supportive of the grant, were busy administering
their district's state funded preschool programs and did not have time
to create formal linkages with private providers in their communities.
One district, however, did invite private preschool providers to
trainings on kindergarten transition. One of the needs for further
training that emerged was that all providers (including providers who
work within state preschool programs run by school districts) need
training on the kindergarten transition process, particularly for
children who are at risk or who have special needs. Helping providers
make formal connections with school districts was complicated by the
fact that the children in their care may attend different elementary
schools, and even further complicated because the four school districts
involved in the grant were very diverse. School districts that
participated in the project ranged in size from six elementary schools
in San Ysidro to 44 elementary schools in Chula Vista, some of which
operate on traditional calendars while others are year-round.

**[Changes in the Quality of Provider Practice \[Performance Objective
#2\]]{.underline}**

Outcome data for providers and children are presented in greater detail
in the forms that follow. Evaluation results indicate that there was
great variability in the quality of providers' practice and in their
commitment to ongoing professional development. The majority of
providers served by this project possessed only the minimum number of
early childhood education units to meet licensing requirements; few have
received other sources of professional development before participating
in the project. Baseline data from the ELEP rating scale and mentors'
logs and reflections indicate that providers needed assistance in
improving a variety of aspects of their programs, including classroom
environment, use of learning materials, interactions with children, and
an overall understanding of developmentally appropriate practices. Few
providers scored above a 3 on most subscales, indicating that they fell
below acceptable standards of quality in all areas.

Data from mentors' observational logs and reflections indicate that the
majority of providers who received at least 20 hours of training
demonstrated a better understanding of developmentally appropriate
practice and made a variety of improvements in their
classrooms/programs. Results from provider interviews confirmed that
providers made the following changes in the learning environment:

-   Adding new literacy activities and materials (frequency of
    developmentally appropriate early literacy activities has increased
    in all classrooms/family childcare homes)

-   Improving the adult-child interactions to support literacy
    development (questioning strategies, dialogic reading activities)

-   Increasing the amount of time spent engaging children in purposeful
    conversations to build oral language and vocabulary skills

Observation data from mentors confirm the many improvements that
providers have made in their programs. Mentors' observations also richly
describe the challenges faced in helping some providers to make changes
in their practices. The reflections below from mentors illustrate both
the accomplishments and challenges experienced in working with
providers.

> *M. was a delight to work with. She was open, motivated, and in need,
> which made her an especially easy person to mentor. Over our months
> together I saw her make significant shifts: M. increased her knowledge
> of development and the importance of providing activities and
> interactions that are a developmental fit for an individual child.
> This was a big change from my early observations in which she was warm
> but tended to present activities to all children without consideration
> for their age or developmental needs.*
>
> *This provider stated that she learns best from watching other
> teachers. So, I have been modeling literacy activities for her. I have
> shown her ways to weave language, print and reading into everyday
> activities. For example, for cooking, I modeled using a recipe chart
> with pictures and words. On another occasion, I took photos of the
> children cooking and we made a class book of the experience. We also
> made a graph depicting the children's favorite ingredients in their
> trail mix recipe. I gave her a handout of alphabet activities that use
> movement, music and art. She was very interested in this. The provider
> is doing these activities on her own and she is spending more time on
> alphabet and beginning sounds. We collected all kinds of balls, talked
> about how ball begins with "b," then we talked about all the balls,
> comparing and contrasting as a way to model language and vocabulary
> development. I am suspecting that C's English proficiency may hinder
> her from working with the children more on oral language and
> storytelling activities.*

Additional data describing the extent to which project objectives have
been met is presented in forms that follow. Evaluation results indicate
that Project MENTOR targeted an underserved segment of early care and
education providers and provided training and other resources to improve
providers' knowledge and professional skills.

Quantitative data collected through a classroom observation tool
administered at the beginning and conclusion of the 40 hour training
indicated that providers typically make modest gains in all subscale
areas that support high quality early literacy experiences for children.
Despite the improvements made, relatively few project participants
achieved scores at the post observation that reflect exemplary practices
in all areas. Mentors often concluded their 40 hour of training with
providers acknowledging that without participating in an ongoing system
of professional support, most providers would continue to rely on the
limited resources and training available to them. These results
illustrate the challenges in working with individuals who are often not
connected to a larger system of accountability and program improvement,
and who have, until participating in Project MENTOR, received little
formal training beyond the minimum number of community college units
needed to qualify them for employment. One notable accomplishment of
Project MENTOR has been to encourage providers to view themselves as
professionals and to seek further training throughout their careers in
early childhood.

**PROJECT MENTOR -- SOUTH FINAL PROGRESS/EVALUATION REPORT**

**2004-2007**

+---------------------------------+-----+----+---+----+-----+---+----+
| > **Project Objective #1: To    |     |    |   |    |     |   |    |
| > improve early childhood       |     |    |   |    |     |   |    |
| > educators'                    |     |    |   |    |     |   |    |
| > [access]{.underline} to a     |     |    |   |    |     |   |    |
| > wide variety of professional  |     |    |   |    |     |   |    |
| > development resources and     |     |    |   |    |     |   |    |
| > curricular materials to       |     |    |   |    |     |   |    |
| > improve programs in home and  |     |    |   |    |     |   |    |
| > center-based settings**       |     |    |   |    |     |   |    |
+---------------------------------+-----+----+---+----+-----+---+----+
| **Performance Measures**        | **M | ** |   |    |     |   |    |
|                                 | eas | Qu |   |    |     |   |    |
|                                 | ure | an |   |    |     |   |    |
|                                 | Typ | ti |   |    |     |   |    |
|                                 | e** | ta |   |    |     |   |    |
|                                 |     | ti |   |    |     |   |    |
|                                 |     | ve |   |    |     |   |    |
|                                 |     | Da |   |    |     |   |    |
|                                 |     | ta |   |    |     |   |    |
|                                 |     | ** |   |    |     |   |    |
+---------------------------------+-----+----+---+----+-----+---+----+
|                                 |     | Ta |   |    | Act |   |    |
|                                 |     | rg |   |    | ual |   |    |
|                                 |     | et |   |    | Pe  |   |    |
|                                 |     |    |   |    | rfo |   |    |
|                                 |     |    |   |    | rma |   |    |
|                                 |     |    |   |    | nce |   |    |
|                                 |     |    |   |    | D   |   |    |
|                                 |     |    |   |    | ata |   |    |
+---------------------------------+-----+----+---+----+-----+---+----+
|                                 |     | R  | R | P  | Raw | R | P  |
|                                 |     | aw | a | er | Num | a | er |
|                                 |     | Nu | t | ce | ber | t | ce |
|                                 |     | mb | i | nt |     | i | nt |
|                                 |     | er | o |    |     | o |    |
+---------------------------------+-----+----+---+----+-----+---+----+
|                                 |     |    |   |    |     |   |    |
+---------------------------------+-----+----+---+----+-----+---+----+
| **Performance Measure 1a.**     | P   | 2  |   |    | 254 |   |    |
|                                 | roj | 50 |   |    |     |   |    |
| Provide at least 15 site-based  | ect |    |   |    |     |   |    |
| trainings annually to at least  |     |    |   |    |     |   |    |
| 250 early care and education    | G   |    |   |    |     |   |    |
| providers.                      | PRA |    |   |    |     |   |    |
|                                 | 7.1 |    |   |    |     |   |    |
+---------------------------------+-----+----+---+----+-----+---+----+
| **Performance Measure 1b.**     | P   | 8  |   |    | 10, |   |    |
|                                 | roj | ,0 |   |    | 220 |   |    |
| Provide a total of 40 hours of  | ect | 00 |   |    |     |   |    |
| professional development to     |     |    |   |    | h   |   |    |
| providers in the project        |     | Hr |   |    | rs. |   |    |
|                                 |     | s. |   |    |     |   |    |
+---------------------------------+-----+----+---+----+-----+---+----+
| **Performance Measure 1c.**     | P   | 2  |   |    | 2,  |   |    |
|                                 | roj | ,4 |   |    | 308 |   |    |
| Serve providers who reach       | ect | 00 |   |    |     |   |    |
| approximately 2,400 children    |     |    |   |    |     |   |    |
| during the two-year project     |     |    |   |    |     |   |    |
| period.                         |     |    |   |    |     |   |    |
+---------------------------------+-----+----+---+----+-----+---+----+
| **Performance Measure 1d.**     | P   | 5  |   |    | 5   |   |    |
|                                 | roj |    |   |    |     |   |    |
| Develop Community-Based         | ect | m  |   |    | m   |   |    |
| Learning Modules to be          |     | od |   |    | odu |   |    |
| implemented by participating    |     | ul |   |    | les |   |    |
| providers                       |     | es |   |    |     |   |    |
+---------------------------------+-----+----+---+----+-----+---+----+
| **Performance Measure 1e.**     | P   | 1  |   |    | 1,  |   |    |
|                                 | roj | ,0 |   |    | 270 |   |    |
| Provide 5 hours of training for | ect | 00 |   |    | h   |   |    |
| each project participant        |     | hr |   |    | rs. |   |    |
| focused on Community-Based      |     | s. |   |    |     |   |    |
| Learning (included in the 40    |     |    |   |    |     |   |    |
| hour total above)               |     |    |   |    |     |   |    |
+---------------------------------+-----+----+---+----+-----+---+----+
| **Performance Measure 1f.**     | P   | 1  |   |    | 1,  |   |    |
|                                 | roj | ,0 |   |    | 270 |   |    |
| Provide 5 hours of training for | ect | 00 |   |    | h   |   |    |
| each project participant        |     | hr |   |    | rs. |   |    |
| focused school readiness        |     | s. |   |    |     |   |    |
| (included in the 40 hour total  |     |    |   |    |     |   |    |
| above)                          |     |    |   |    |     |   |    |
+---------------------------------+-----+----+---+----+-----+---+----+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Explanation of Progress (Include Qualitative Data and Data Collection |
| Information)                                                          |
|                                                                       |
| **[Project Activities and Participants]{.underline}**                 |
|                                                                       |
| The first cohort of Project MENTOR providers began in January 2005. A |
| total of **[311]{.underline}** early care and education providers     |
| participated in the project, and **254 completed 40 hours of          |
| training**. The target number of providers to be served by the        |
| project for the grant was 250.                                        |
|                                                                       |
| -   254 providers have participated in the project successfully       |
|     completed 40 hours of training                                    |
|                                                                       |
| -   57 enrolled in the project but dropped out                        |
|                                                                       |
| The project also met its objective to serve family childcare (FCC)    |
| and small independent preschool providers: **75%** of project         |
| participants were family childcare providers who serve between 1 and  |
| 6 children (the objective was that 75% of participants would be FCC   |
| providers).                                                           |
|                                                                       |
| The project also met its objective to serve educators who have        |
| received limited professional development from other sources.         |
| [Sixty-seven percent]{.underline} of providers served possessed fewer |
| than 20 college credits in early childhood education. Many providers  |
| are unable to access community trainings or higher education because  |
| of limited English proficiency (**[70%]{.underline}** of participants |
| speak Spanish as their primary language; some speak limited English,  |
| but not proficiently enough to pursue higher education in English).   |
|                                                                       |
| A total of **2,308** **children**, ranging from infancy to school     |
| age, were in the care of project participants. Mentors observed that  |
| there was considerable mobility among the children in the care of     |
| participating providers, at both FCC homes and centers. This is       |
| consistent with the mobility rates in the elementary schools that     |
| serve these low-income communities. It should be noted that a large   |
| number of children in the care of participating providers were under  |
| the age of 4, which limited their participation in the child outcomes |
| portion of the study.                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| **[Description of Services Provided]{.underline}**                    |
|                                                                       |
| Mentors made **4,629 site visits** and delivered over **10,220        |
| hours** of training to the providers enrolled in the project. On      |
| average, Mentors made 18-20 site visits with each provider, spending  |
| typically between 2-4 hours per visit. Visit logs were used to track  |
| the services provided at each visit and the resources shared with     |
| each provider. Trainings focused on a variety of topics, including    |
| developmentally appropriate literacy activities, questioning          |
| strategies, the use of learning materials in the immediate learning   |
| environment, and behavior and social/emotional development. Mentors   |
| modeled research-based practices for providers, loaned training       |
| videos, and shared print materials. To develop providers' awareness   |
| of how to access inexpensive and readily available materials to       |
| enhance their programs, mentors purchased children's books at local   |
| garage sales and distributed them to providers who had an             |
| insufficient number of books or worked with providers to make         |
| learning materials and toys from inexpensive materials.               |
|                                                                       |
| Mentors also gave providers feedback on a range of issues such as     |
| their learning environment, use of materials, and interactions with   |
| children. Mentor visit logs show that providers received resources    |
| such at WestEd Parent Infant Toddler Caregiver Program (PITC)         |
| materials, instructional videos, NAEYC pamphlets on school readiness  |
| and early literacy, Virtual Pre-K (VPK) resources, and internet sites |
| that focus on early childhood issues. Logs indicated that mentors     |
| discussed and demonstrated how to utilize the various resources       |
| shared, which increased providers' utilization. Mentors also          |
| counseled providers about career development, including required      |
| community college coursework.                                         |
|                                                                       |
| **[Community-Based Learning Modules (CBLMs) \[Performance Measure     |
| 1.d\]]{.underline}**                                                  |
|                                                                       |
| Mentors developed five community-based learning modules, CBLM's, and  |
| worked with providers to use readily available materials to develop   |
| learning activities. Mentors worked with providers to implement       |
| community-based learning experiences that were relevant to the        |
| providers' neighborhood resources so that providers could continue    |
| these activities after the 40-hour training period. Examples of       |
| community-based learning activities included: A visit to a local      |
| grocery store, a walk to the corner to look at road signs and         |
| vehicles, a camping trip in the front yard, and a visit to the local  |
| post office. On a trip to the neighborhood grocery store, one         |
| provider and her children discussed how the store was organized, how  |
| different products were packaged, and the steps that most shoppers    |
| proceed through in doing their shopping. After returning to the       |
| center, this provider recreated the grocery store in a dramatic play  |
| area of the classroom. Another family childcare provider lived in a   |
| residential area far from retail shops. With her mentor, this         |
| provider walked with the children to a nearby intersection and did a  |
| lesson on signs and traffic lights. The provider brought resources    |
| back to her home and the children made various signs, discussed their |
| purposes, and talked about how drivers use signs and other            |
| information to inform their driving. In September, 2005, Dr. Stan Chu |
| of Bank Street College met with mentors for a two-day symposium to    |
| review CBLM guidelines and framework, analyze mentors' coaching       |
| activities around the modules, and further develop strategies to help |
| providers implement community-based learning activities. In           |
| September, 2006, Dr. Chu returned to San Diego for a full-day         |
| symposium for MENTOR participants on community-based learning. Sixty  |
| providers attended this Saturday workshop. Following the symposium,   |
| mentors assisted providers                                            |
|                                                                       |
| **[Challenges]{.underline}**                                          |
|                                                                       |
| By design, this project targeted providers who have traditionally not |
| participated in formal professional development programs. This        |
| underserved segment of the early care and education community is also |
| highly mobile (providers frequently leave positions) and in general,  |
| these providers possess limited formal education. Further, this was a |
| demanding project -- the number of training hours and data            |
| collection/evaluation requirements were daunting for many providers.  |
| Project participants were primarily FCC or independent preschool      |
| center teachers -- not school district employees who are required to  |
| participate in professional development as part of their employment   |
| contract. This may explain why several providers served by the        |
| project dropped out before completing 40 hours of training. These     |
| challenges were addressed by providing training that was culturally   |
| and linguistically appropriate (MENTOR services were provided in      |
| Spanish) and by encouraging providers to link with other professional |
| organizations and with financial incentive programs such as the       |
| state-funded CARES Program, which provided stipends to early care and |
| education providers who remain in their positions and participate in  |
| ongoing training.                                                     |
|                                                                       |
| # Summary of Progress in Meeting Objective #1                         |
|                                                                       |
| The demographic characteristics of the 311 providers served, and the  |
| variety of resources shared with providers (videos, print materials,  |
| referrals to trainings offered by partner organizations, and internet |
| sites) indicates that the project has met its first objective to      |
| "improve early childhood educators' [access]{.underline} to a wide    |
| variety of professional development resources and curricular          |
| materials.**"** The wide variety of professional resources and        |
| materials shared with providers, combined with a series of on-site    |
| trainings over a six month period have resulted in substantial        |
| improvements in professional practice and in the variety and use of   |
| learning materials used by providers to support children's early      |
| literacy development.                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| Impact of the trainings on provider practice is described in greater  |
| detail in the next section under Project Objective #2: Improve early  |
| childhood educator's ability to deliver high quality preschool        |
| programs that address the cognitive, social and behavioral needs of   |
| children and families in low-income communities.                      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+---------------------------------+------+---+---+----+----+----+----+
| 2\. **Project Objective #2:     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| Improve early childhood         |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| educator's ability to deliver   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| high quality preschool programs |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| that address the cognitive,     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| social and behavioral needs of  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| children and families in        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| low-income communities.**       |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
+---------------------------------+------+---+---+----+----+----+----+
| **Performance Measures**        | *    | * |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 | *Mea | * |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 | sure | Q |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 | Ty   | u |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 | pe** | a |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      | n |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      | t |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      | i |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      | t |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      | a |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      | t |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      | i |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      | v |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      | e |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      | D |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      | a |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      | t |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      | a |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      | * |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      | * |   |    |    |    |    |
+---------------------------------+------+---+---+----+----+----+----+
|                                 |      | * |   |    | ** |    |    |
|                                 |      | * |   |    | Ac |    |    |
|                                 |      | T |   |    | tu |    |    |
|                                 |      | a |   |    | al |    |    |
|                                 |      | r |   |    | P  |    |    |
|                                 |      | g |   |    | er |    |    |
|                                 |      | e |   |    | fo |    |    |
|                                 |      | t |   |    | rm |    |    |
|                                 |      | * |   |    | an |    |    |
|                                 |      | * |   |    | ce |    |    |
|                                 |      |   |   |    | Da |    |    |
|                                 |      |   |   |    | ta |    |    |
|                                 |      |   |   |    | ** |    |    |
+---------------------------------+------+---+---+----+----+----+----+
|                                 |      | R | R | P  | R  | R  | P  |
|                                 |      | a | a | er | aw | at | er |
|                                 |      | w | t | ce | Nu | io | ce |
|                                 |      | N | i | nt | mb |    | nt |
|                                 |      | u | o |    | er |    |    |
|                                 |      | m |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      | b |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      | e |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      | r |   |    |    |    |    |
+---------------------------------+------+---+---+----+----+----+----+
| **Performance Measure 2a**.     | Pro  | 9 | n | n  | 9  | n  | n  |
|                                 | ject | 9 | / | /a | 99 | /a | /a |
| ECEs will more frequently apply |      | 9 | a |    |    |    |    |
| researched-based instructional  | GPRA |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| approaches/strategies to        | 8.1  |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| support early literacy and      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| social skills development, as   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| measured by mentor              |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| logs/reflections, provider      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| observations and provider       |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| interviews (see explanation     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| below)                          |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
+---------------------------------+------+---+---+----+----+----+----+
| **Performance Measure 2b.**     | Pro  | 9 | n | n  | 9  | n  | n  |
|                                 | ject | 9 | / | /a | 99 | /a | /a |
| Improvements in the overall     |      | 9 | a |    |    |    |    |
| learning environment to support | GPRA |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| early literacy and school       | 8.1  |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| readiness are measured using    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| mentor logs, reflections and    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| the Early Literacy Environment  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| and Practices Rating Scale      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| (ELEP) administered at the      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| beginning and end of the        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| training period. The ratio      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| score reported for this         |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| performance measure (see Table  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| 1 below) is the average pre and |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| post score on a 5-point scale   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| in each domain.                 |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
+---------------------------------+------+---+---+----+----+----+----+
| Baseline data from the modified |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| Early Literacy Environment and  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| Practices Rating Scale (ELEP)   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| and mentors' logs and           |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| reflections indicate that       |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| providers needed assistance in  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| improving a variety of aspects  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| of their programs, including:   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| classroom set-up, use of        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| learning materials,             |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| interactions with children, and |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| an overall understanding of     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| developmentally appropriate     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| practices. Mentors reported     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| observing a multitude of        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| examples of ineffective,        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| inappropriate \-- even unsafe   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| \-- practices. Interview data   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| indicated that providers served |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| by this project were largely    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| isolated from other sources of  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| professional development,       |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| possess limited education, and  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| primarily drew on their own     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| experiences to inform their     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| professional practices. Despite |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| these challenges, mentors       |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| documented several improvements |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| in the practices of the         |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| providers who have completed at |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| least 20 hours of training.     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| ELEP data was collected at the  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| beginning of the training       |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| period (within the first three  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| visits) and at the end of the   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| 40-hour training.               |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| **Pre-training ELEP results     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| indicate that more than 50% of  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| providers scored below standard |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| (a score of 3 or lower on a     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| 5-point scale) in eight         |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| domains**. The low pretest      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| scores across areas indicate    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| that the majority of providers  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| began the project needing to    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| make significant improvements   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| in program quality.             |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| **Follow-up scores for 254      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| providers show that providers   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| made growth in the areas        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| targeted by the MENTOR training |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| (providers increased their      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| scores by an average of 1 point |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| on a 5 point scale).** ELEP     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| results show improvements from  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| baseline to follow-up,          |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| particularly in the areas of    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| community-based learning. Table |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| 1 shows percentage of providers |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| scoring a 3 or greater (minimum |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| quality standard for each       |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| subscale) at pre and post.      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| Between sixty and eighty        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| percent of providers scored 3   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| or higher at the conclusion of  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| the training. However, few      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| providers achieved scores of 4  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| or 5 following the 40-hour      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| training.                       |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
|   --------------------          |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| ------------------------------- |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
|   **Figure 1**.                 |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
|   ![](media/image1.w            |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| mf){width="6.833333333333333in" |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
|   height="3.4375in"}            |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
|   --------------------          |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| ------------------------------- |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <table>                         |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <colgroup>                      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <col style="width: 11%" />      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <col style="width: 11%" />      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <col style="width: 11%" />      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <col style="width: 11%" />      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <col style="width: 11%" />      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <col style="width: 11%" />      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <col style="width: 11%" />      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <col style="width: 11%" />      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <col style="width: 11%" />      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| </colgroup>                     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <tbody>                         |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <tr class="odd">                |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td colspan="9"><strong>Table   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| 1. Percentage of Providers      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| Scoring 3 or Higher Pre/Post    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| ELEP Rating                     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| Scale</strong></td>             |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| </tr>                           |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <tr class="even">               |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td></td>                       |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td colspan="8">Subscale</td>   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| </tr>                           |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <tr class="odd">                |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td><p>ELEP SCORES</p>          |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <p>(N=254)</p></td>             |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>Environment</td>            |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>Materials</td>              |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>Daily Schedule</td>         |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>Community-Based             |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| Learning</td>                   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>Provider-Child              |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| Interaction</td>                |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>Instructional               |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| Practices</td>                  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>Writing</td>                |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>Reading/Book Use</td>       |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| </tr>                           |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <tr class="even">               |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>PRE</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>40%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>35%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>38%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>8%</td>                     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>57%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>35%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>30%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>28%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| </tr>                           |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <tr class="odd">                |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>POST</td>                   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>88%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>82%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>84%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>60%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>88%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>72%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>68%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>64%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| </tr>                           |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <tr class="even">               |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>Difference/Gain</td>        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>48%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>47%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>46%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>52%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>31%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>37%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>38%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| <td>36%</td>                    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| </tr>                           |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| </tbody>                        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| </table>                        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| Data from mentors'              |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| observational logs and          |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| reflections indicate that       |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| providers who received at least |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| 20 hours of training            |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| demonstrated a better           |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| understanding of                |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| developmentally appropriate     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| practices and made a variety of |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| improvements in their           |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| classrooms/programs. Results    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| from provider interviews        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| confirm that providers made     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| changes in the learning         |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| environment by adding many new  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| literacy activities and         |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| materials, by engaging in more  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| reading and language            |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| development activities,         |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| improving questioning           |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| strategies and increasing the   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| amount of time spent engaging   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| children in purposeful          |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| conversations to build oral     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| language and vocabulary skills. |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| For example, mentors helped     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| providers incorporate literacy  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| activities into circle and      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| morning meeting time. Providers |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| reported using more songs,      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| flannel board stories,          |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| interactive reading and         |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| storytelling activities, and    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| games to develop vocabulary and |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| phonological skills.            |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| In interviews and on evaluation |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| surveys, providers commented    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| that they benefited from the    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| individualized nature of the    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| training and that they learned  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| several new activities and      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| strategies to support the       |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| children's learning and         |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| development. Providers reported |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| that children enjoyed the new   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| activities and that they were   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| better behaved (in large part   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| because programs now include    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| more developmentally            |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| appropriate practices and       |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| improvements in environment to  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| support learning). Using        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| non-academic language, the      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| majority of providers also      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| articulated the early literacy, |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| numeracy and social/emotional   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| skills that were addressed in   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| the new activities. Although    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| mentors reported that newly     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| implemented activities and      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| strategies have resulted in     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| substantial improvements in the |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| overall quality of the          |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| programs, many providers were   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| still far from meeting the      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| professional standards that     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| mentors consider adequate to    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| impact student learning,        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| particularly in the areas of    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| phonological awareness, oral    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| language and vocabulary, and    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| early math, and providers would |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| benefit from even more          |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| professional development over   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| time.                           |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| One area of concern was the     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| relatively small percentage of  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| participants who indicated that |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| they have gained a better       |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| understanding of the larger     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| research-base that guides these |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| newly implemented learning      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| activities. When asked to       |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| report on the changes that have |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| occurred in their practice as a |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| result of the training, many    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| providers focused on discrete   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| activities rather than a larger |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| understanding of                |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| developmentally appropriate     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| practice that is the foundation |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| of the newly learned            |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| activities. Given the           |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| relatively low entry points for |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| the majority of providers,      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| MENTOR training resulted in     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| important improvements in the   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| learning environment and        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| adult-child interactions.       |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| However, achieving exemplary    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| levels of instructional         |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| practice and classroom quality  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| would require a much greater    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| depth of understanding of child |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| development and instruction     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| than the 40 hours of MENTOR     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| training provided. Therefore,   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| despite the significant         |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| improvements made as a result   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| of the training, many mentors   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| expressed uncertainty about     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| whether providers would         |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| continue to improve and extend  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| their new knowledge to all      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| aspects of their curriculum and |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| instructional practices.        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| Mentors attempted to address    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| these concerns by explicitly    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| connecting developmentally      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| appropriate learning activities |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| to the skills and knowledge     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| that children acquire when      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| engaged in those activities and |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| by referring providers to other |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| professional development        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| opportunities in the San Diego  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| area (although language and     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| education levels are a barrier  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| for many providers in accessing |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| other trainings). At staff      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| meetings, mentors discussed     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| training strategies to help     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| providers recognize that        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| Project MENTOR is designed to   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| improve their knowledge and     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| skills beyond the array of new  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| activities and strategies they  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| learn by participating in the   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| project. Additionally, mentors  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| encouraged their providers to   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| become involved in San Diego    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| County's Preschool for All      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| (PFA) Demonstration Project,    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| which requires preschool        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| providers to meet educational   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| and program quality standards.  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| Many providers began to         |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| recognize that if they are to   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| participate in incentive        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| programs such as CARES or       |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| subsidy programs such as PFA,   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| they must meet established      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| professional standards.         |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| Evaluation data collected       |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| throughout the project indicate |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| that, despite the low provider  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| skill level upon entry into the |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| project, MENTOR training        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| significantly improved          |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| providers' knowledge and        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| practices that support early    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| literacy skill development in   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| children ages birth to six.     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| Rating scale, observation and   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| provider interview data         |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| indicate that project           |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| participants utilized more      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| researched-based instructional  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| approaches/strategies to        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| support early literacy and      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| social skills development.      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| Although 40 hours of intensive  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| training resulted in            |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| significant improvements,       |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| providers still need further    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| training to reach levels of     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| quality that would lead to the  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| measurable impacts on           |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| children's learning. This       |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| finding reinforces the need for |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| sustained, intensive and        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| individualized professional     |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| development initiatives to      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| raise the overall quality of    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| the early care and education    |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| workforce, and for              |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| systems-level supports such as  |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| increased pay and higher        |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| educational requirements that   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| would raise the overall level   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| of professional competence of   |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
| the field.                      |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
+---------------------------------+------+---+---+----+----+----+----+
|                                 |      |   |   |    |    |    |    |
+---------------------------------+------+---+---+----+----+----+----+

+---------------------------------+-----+----+---+----+----+----+----+
| 3\. **Project Objective #3:     |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| Increase the number of children |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| who exit preschool with the     |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| essential literacy, numeracy    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| and behavioral skills to        |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| succeed in kindergarten and     |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| beyond.**                       |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
+---------------------------------+-----+----+---+----+----+----+----+
| **Performance Measures**        | **M | ** |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 | eas | Qu |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 | ure | an |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 | Typ | ti |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 | e** | ta |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |     | ti |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |     | ve |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |     | Da |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |     | ta |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |     | ** |   |    |    |    |    |
+---------------------------------+-----+----+---+----+----+----+----+
|                                 |     | ** |   |    | ** |    |    |
|                                 |     | Ta |   |    | Ac |    |    |
|                                 |     | rg |   |    | tu |    |    |
|                                 |     | et |   |    | al |    |    |
|                                 |     | ** |   |    | P  |    |    |
|                                 |     |    |   |    | er |    |    |
|                                 |     |    |   |    | fo |    |    |
|                                 |     |    |   |    | rm |    |    |
|                                 |     |    |   |    | an |    |    |
|                                 |     |    |   |    | ce |    |    |
|                                 |     |    |   |    | Da |    |    |
|                                 |     |    |   |    | ta |    |    |
|                                 |     |    |   |    | ** |    |    |
+---------------------------------+-----+----+---+----+----+----+----+
|                                 |     | R  | R | P  | R  | R  | P  |
|                                 |     | aw | a | er | aw | at | er |
|                                 |     | Nu | t | ce | Nu | io | ce |
|                                 |     | mb | i | nt | mb |    | nt |
|                                 |     | er | o |    | er |    |    |
+---------------------------------+-----+----+---+----+----+----+----+
| **Performance Measure 3a**.     | P   | 9  | n | n  | *  | n  | n  |
|                                 | roj | 99 | / | /a | *9 | /a | /a |
| Kindergarten-bound children in  | ect |    | a |    | 99 |    |    |
| the care of project             |     |    |   |    | ** |    |    |
| participants will demonstrate   | G   |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| higher levels of performance on | PRA |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| assessment tasks that measure   | 8.2 |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| early literacy and numeracy     |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| skills, compared to             | G   |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| demographically similar         | PRA |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| children in the care of         | 8.  |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| providers who have not          | 2.1 |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| participated in the project.    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
+---------------------------------+-----+----+---+----+----+----+----+
| A total of **2,308** children   |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| are in the care of project      |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| participants. Approximately 857 |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| children in the care of         |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| participating providers are     |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| between the ages of 3 months to |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| three years; 1,281 children are |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| between the ages of 3-5 (68% of |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| all project children),          |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| including 170 who are           |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| kindergarten-bound. During the  |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| three-year project period,      |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| parental consent to administer  |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| early literacy assessments was  |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| secured from 308 families (128  |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| project children and 180        |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| comparison children).           |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| Therefore, the number of        |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| children who participated in    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| the child-level assessments     |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| represents a small percentage   |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| of the total number of children |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| served by project participants. |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| Kindergarten-bound children in  |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| the care of project             |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| participants and comparison     |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| children at other preschool     |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| centers and family childcare    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| homes were assessed using the   |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| following instruments: Simon    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| Says, Art Show, upper case      |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| letter names, rhyme             |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| recognition, initial consonant  |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| sounds, modified pre-LAS Early  |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| Literacy Component (20 items    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| that measure colors, shapes,    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| letter names, counting).        |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| Results are presented in the    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| table below:                    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| +-------------+-----+------+    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | Table 3.    |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | Results     |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | from        |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | Literacy    |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | Assessments |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| |             |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | 2005, 2006  |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | and 2007    |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | Results     |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| +-------------+-----+------+    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | Measure     | P   | Co   |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| |             | roj | mpar |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| |             | ect | ison |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| |             | Ch  | Chil |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| |             | ild | dren |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| |             | ren |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| |             |     | (n=  |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| |             | (   | 180) |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| |             | n=1 |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| |             | 70) | **Me |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| |             |     | an** |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| |             | **  | *    |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| |             | Mea | *Sco |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| |             | n** | re** |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| |             | **S |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| |             | cor |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| |             | e** |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| +-------------+-----+------+    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | Simon Says  | 9   | 9.17 |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | (10 items)  | .26 |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| +-------------+-----+------+    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | Art Show    | 9   | 9.37 |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | (10 items)  | .68 |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| +-------------+-----+------+    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | Upper Case  | 11  | 6.80 |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | Letter      | .50 |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | Names       |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| +-------------+-----+------+    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | Lower Case  | 8.3 | 7.3  |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | Letter      |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | Names       |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| +-------------+-----+------+    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | Pre-LAS     | 14  | 1    |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | Literacy    | .41 | 4.11 |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | Assessment  |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | (20 items)  |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| +-------------+-----+------+    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | Rhyme       | 23% | 25%  |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | recognition |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | **(percent  |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | pr          |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | oficient)** |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| +-------------+-----+------+    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | Identifying | 11% | 11%  |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | beginning   |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | consonants  |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | **(percent  |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | pr          |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| | oficient)** |     |      |    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| +-------------+-----+------+    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
|                                 |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| Children in the care of project |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| MENTOR providers performed      |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| slightly (though not            |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| significantly) better on letter |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| names. However, there were no   |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| differences between MENTOR      |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| children and children in the    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| care of non-MENTOR providers on |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| all other subtests. **The most  |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| substantial differences between |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| the two groups were in letter   |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| names -- approximately 51% of   |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| children in the care of MENTOR  |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| providers knew 11 or more       |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| letter names as compared to 28% |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| of children in the care of      |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| non-MENTOR providers.** These   |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| results should be interpreted   |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| with caution since there is no  |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| random assignment and children  |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| in the comparison group are a   |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| convenience sample of entering  |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| kindergarten students who had   |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| received preschool experiences  |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| from non-MENTOR providers       |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| (including Head Start and       |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| private centers). Importantly,  |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| mentors observe that children   |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| gained other skills not         |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| directly measured by project    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| assessments, including oral     |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| language (the children spend    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| more time talking with each     |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| other and adults), general      |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| knowledge, and early math       |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| concepts beyond the counting    |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
| tasks measured in the Pre-LAS.  |     |    |   |    |    |    |    |
+---------------------------------+-----+----+---+----+----+----+----+