|
Time to add another one to the list... 
As the Douglas administration's escalated rhetoric regarding what to do about protecting Vermont's children reaches new, shameless heights in both pandering and finger pointing, with draconian legislative proposals that really don't solve the problem but throw red meat to the base, and even disingenuous push polling, there is yet another failure of the Douglas administration in that regard worth bringing attention to. Although Vermont hasn't led a military attack on New Hampshire yet under false pretenses, Douglas' damage to our fine state is reaching Bush-like levels of neglect and incompetency. The state's Child Development Division is the agency responsible for ensuring that the state's child care providers are following the necessary procedures and safety standards, often dealing with simple matters such as numbers of fire extinguishers, property and facility inspection and such. The inspections are necessary to the initial licensing process, but unannounced inspections are also conducted to make sure regulations are being complied to. That is all well and good, but there's a big problem here. Most of the child care providers are not being inspected, and the budget for the agency is getting cut. More below the jump. |
It's certainly not for a lack of effort. The problem lies in that there are over 2,000 child care providers in the state, and only seven, yes, you heard right, seven licensors responsible for the above mentioned inspections. That's something like 286 sites per licensor, meaning they'd have to each inspect more than one a day in a typical work week. Although that may not seem like much, it doesn't leave any time to perform any of the other important duties involved with the job: follow-ups, weekly meetings, paperwork, court appearances, electronic transcription of the endless amount of notes taken, answering the phone, etc. The licensors also aren't allowed to conduct inspections in their own towns, which means they must cover each other's towns, which can add a substantial amount of travel time, especially if the inspectors live in a remote area to begin with. Yet somehow bringing back the death penalty will address the problem. Huh? Let me be clear: this is no fault of the inspectors. It's just that the way the system is set up, it's impossible to do their jobs the way they are supposed to. To top it off, my source tells me that home providers (people working out of their homes as opposed to licensed centers) are getting little, if any visits, as the division prioritizes the licensed facilities. There was a situation in Tennessee, of all places, that was similar to Vermont's... until there were four deaths over a six year period,due to neglect. Due to the lack of funding to get a sufficient number of inspectors in place, one has to wonder how long before a similar occurrence happens in Vermont. A leaked internal memo that I've obtained shows that in the 2009 budget, the Douglas administration is are cutting two positions in the the agency, and possibly one or two more in the near future, as well as targeting supplies, travel expenses, and just about everything else needed to have the agency function even somewhat effectively. So the question for Douglas (which, sadly, can be applied to just about every problem he complains about and proposes the wrong solution) is why is the budget being cut for one of the primary agencies responsible for ensuring our children are being cared for in the safest, healthiest environment possible? Don't hold your breath waiting for an answer (and by "answer" I don't mean anything Douglas' spinmeister boy Jason Gibbs feeds us). It's not chemical castration, that's for sure. |
250-1
55-1
