HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARD STANDING COMMITTEES - 02252019 - FHS Cte Agenda Pkt
FAMILY & HUMAN SERVICES
COMMITTEE
February 25, 2019
10:30 A.M.
Note Changed Location:
County Finance Building, 625 Court Street, Room B001 (at Main Street entrance)
Supervisor Candace Andersen, Chair
Supervisor John Gioia, Vice Chair
Agenda
Items:
Items may be taken out of order based on the business of the day and preference
of the Committee
1.Introductions
2.Public comment on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on this
agenda (speakers may be limited to three minutes).
3. RECEIVE and APPROVE the draft Record of Action for the December 3, 2018 Family
& Human Services Committee meeting. (Julie DiMaggio Enea, County Administrator's
Office)
4. CONSIDER recommending to the Board of Supervisors the appointment of Kathryn
Ames to At Large #10 seat and reappointment of of Gail Garrett to the Nutrition Project
seat on the Advisory Council on Aging to terms expiring on September 30, 2020, as
recommended by the Council. (Anthony Macias, Employment and Human Services
Department)
5. CONSIDER recommending to the Board of Supervisors the appointment of Meaghan
Doran to the Business #3 seat, Robert Muller to the Business #9 seat, Romina Gonzalez
to the Business #12 seat, and Fred Wood to the Education & Training #2 seat on the
Workforce Development Board to terms ending on June 30, 2020. (Rochelle
Martin-Soriano, Workforce Development Board)
6. CONSIDER recommending to the Board of Supervisors the appointment of Leslie
Gleason to the ESD Program Grantee seat, Lindy Lavendar to the Community seat,
Sherry Lynn Peralta to the Employment and Human Services Department seat, Doug
Leich to the Faith Community seat, Manuel Arrendondo to the Health Care seat, and
Tony Ucciferri to the Public Housing Authority seat on the Council on Homelessness to
terms ending on January 1, 2021. (Jaime Jenett, Health Services Department)
7. CONSIDER accepting report from the Employment and Human Services Department
on efforts to intervene in and prevent human trafficking and the commercial sexual
exploitation of children, and on the operation of Children & Family Justice Centers.
(Devorah Levine, Employment and Human Services Department)
1
8. CONSIDER recommending to the Board of Supervisors approval of the 2017-2027
Comprehensive County Child Care Needs Assessment prepared by Brion Economics,
Inc., on behalf of Contra Costa County Local Planning and Advisory Council for Early
Care and Education. (Susan Jeong, Contra Costa County Office of Education)
9. CONSIDER approving 2019 Family and Human Services Committee meeting schedule
and work plan. (Julie DiMaggio Enea, County Administrator's Office)
10.The next meeting is currently scheduled for March 25, 2019.
11.Adjourn
The Family & Human Services Committee will provide reasonable accommodations for persons
with disabilities planning to attend Family & Human Services Committee meetings. Contact the
staff person listed below at least 72 hours before the meeting.
Any disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and
distributed by the County to a majority of members of the Family & Human Services Committee
less than 96 hours prior to that meeting are available for public inspection at 651 Pine Street, 10th
floor, during normal business hours.
Public comment may be submitted via electronic mail on agenda items at least one full work day
prior to the published meeting time.
For Additional Information Contact:
Julie DiMaggio Enea, Interim Committee Staff
Phone (925) 335-1077, Fax (925) 646-1353
julie.enea@cao.cccounty.us
2
FAMILY AND HUMAN SERVICES
COMMITTEE 3.
Meeting Date:02/25/2019
Subject:RECORD OF ACTION FOR THE DECEMBER 3, 2018 FHS
MEETING
Submitted For: David Twa, County Administrator
Department:County Administrator
Referral No.: N/A
Referral Name: N/A
Presenter: Julie DiMaggio Enea Contact: Julie DiMaggio Enea (925)
335-1077
Referral History:
County Ordinance requires that each County body keep a record of its meetings. Though the
record need not be verbatim, it must accurately reflect the agenda and the decisions made in the
meeting.
Referral Update:
Attached is the draft Record of Action for the December 3, 2018 Family & Human Services
Committee meeting.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
RECEIVE and APPROVE the draft Record of Action for the December 3, 2018 Family & Human
Services Committee meeting.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
None.
Attachments
DRAFT FHS Committee Record of Action for December 3, 2018
3
FAMILY & HUMAN SERVICES
COMMITTEE
December 3, 2018
10:30 A.M.
651 Pine Street, Room 101, Martinez
Supervisor Candace Andersen, Chair
Supervisor John Gioia, Vice Chair
Present: Chair Candace Andersen; Vice Chair John Gioia
Staff
Present:
Julie DiMaggio Enea, Senior Deputy County Administrator
Attendees:Jennifer Grand-Lejano, PH Tobacco Prev; Ruth and Larry Goldenberg; Katie Wilbur; Alicia
Austin-Townsend; Susan Horrocks; Charles Madison; Sharon Madison; Roberta Chambers, RDA; L
Hallen; Kathy Kelly, EHSD; Wendy Therrian, EHSD; Kathy Gallagher, EHS Director; Anthony
Macias, EHSD; Lauren Rettagliata; Tim Callaghan; Jill Ray, BOS District II Representative; Laura
Otis-Miles, HSD-MH; Rich Penska, HSD_MH; Brian Vanderlind, CCCSO; Alicia Silva, MHCS;
Dan McClelland, Forensic MH; Cedrita Claiborne, HSD Public Health; Thomas Anderson; Gigi
Crowder; Jan and Tony Khalil; Mark Cohen; Marc Scannell, HSD MH; Jan Cobaleda-Kegler,
HSD-BH; Matthew White, HSD BH; Douglas Dunn; Carly Finkle; Mariana Moore; Caitlin Sly;
Larry Sly; Bob Uyeki; Becky Gershon; Ardavan Davaran; Amy Cole; Windy Taylor, HSD BH;
Warren Hayes, HSD BH; Lauren Hansen; Teresa Pasquini; Don Green; Sarah Kennard; Ms.
Dandie; Bill and Trisha Green
1.Introductions
Due to the large attendance, the meeting was relocated to Room 101 and convened
at 12:00 noon.
2.Public comment on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on this
agenda (speakers may be limited to three minutes).
No one requested to speak during the public comment period.
3.RECEIVE and APPROVE the draft Record of Action for the October 22, 2018 Family
& Human Services Committee meeting.
The Committee approved the minutes of the October 22, 2018 FHS meeting as
presented.
AYE: Chair Candace Andersen, Vice Chair John Gioia
Passed
4.ACCEPT follow-up report from the Employment and Human Services Director in
DRAFT
4
4.ACCEPT follow-up report from the Employment and Human Services Director in
response to CalFresh Partnership recommendations pertaining to wait times
experienced by CalFresh clients.
Wendy Therrian presented the staff report.
Mariana Moore expressed frustration about the long wait times for food stamps.
She acknowledged the department's efforts but said more should be done to reduce
wait times and that a bolder response is needed. She requested an estimate of the
number of staff that would be needed to address the problem.
Larry Sly expressed concern about the additional workload associated with the
"tsunami of people" that will be wanting services due to pending SSI changes. He
wanted to know how the County was preparing for this workload spike. He opined
that the County's Single Audit report is incomprehensible and not a good substitute
for clear department reporting or an independent analysis. He stated that he was
requesting only a one-time funding allocation.
Kathy Gallagher responded that not all who are eligible for SSI will actually apply,
and that Mathematica (policy research) makes estimates at the state level. She noted
that these estimates have no relation to the state dollar allocation to the County.
She acknowledged that there is a tight window during which to hire and train staff.
EHS plans to hire in January, as applications will be accepted in May, to be
effective June 1. She consented to having an independent analysis conducted if
private funding were made available to fund such an analysis.
Community organization representatives commented that the strategies necessary to
expedite the process such as flexible interviews and telephone signatures, will
require additional staff, and that the homeless and mentally ill are unable to
complete the benefits applications nor can they store/file the information.
Gigi Crawford suggested drop-in sites vs. telephone interviews and suggested that
new staff training include curriculum on mentally ill recipients.
Carly Finkle suggested that staff need to be trained by May 1 and that the State's
estimate was an additional 10,000 applicants, a 33% increase over the County's
current workload.
Supervisor Gioia acknowledged that in lieu of lifting the hiring freeze, EHS is
reassigning staff internally to address workload shifts. He suggested starting the
hiring process early in anticipation of the SSI changes. He acknowledged the needs
and explained that the County Budget is a zero-sum exercise and the Board has the
challenge of balancing all of the County's needs within the limited resources
available. He described some of the other critical County needs, including the need
to curtail staff turnover occurring due to hard-to-afford employee health benefits.
The Committee accepted the staff report with direction to the EHS Director to
report back again next year.
AYE: Chair Candace Andersen, Vice Chair John Gioia
DRAFT
5
Passed
5.RECOMMEND to the Board of Supervisors the appointment of Jill Kleiner to At
Large #19 seat with a term expiring September 30, 2019, and Steve Lipson to At Large
#6 seat, and Jatin Mehta to At Large #8 seat with terms expiring September 30, 2020,
on the Advisory Council on Aging, as recommended by the Council.
The Committee approved the appointment of Jill Kleiner to At Large #19 seat with
a term expiring September 30, 2019, and Steve Lipson to At Large #6 seat, and
Jatin Mehta to At Large #8 seat with terms expiring September 30, 2020, on the
Advisory Council on Aging and directed staff to forward the recommendations to
the Board of Supervisors.
AYE: Chair Candace Andersen, Vice Chair John Gioia
Passed
6.ACCEPT the annual report from the Public Health Division of the Health Services
Department on the implementation of the Secondhand Smoke Protections Ordinance
and DIRECT staff to forward the report to the Board of Supervisors for their
information.
DIRECT staff to provide another update on the Secondhand Smoke Protections
Ordinance to the Family and Human Services Committee in 2019.
Dan Peddycord and Jen Grand presented the staff report. The Committee accepted
the report and directed staff to send a letter to each City Manager inviting them to
model their own city ordinances after the County's ordinance.
AYE: Chair Candace Andersen, Vice Chair John Gioia
Passed
7.ACCEPT the annual report from the Public Health Department on the implementation
of the Tobacco Retailer Licensing and Businesses Ordinances and DIRECT staff to
forward the report to the Board of Supervisors for their information.
DIRECT staff to report back to the Family and Human Services Committee in 2019.
Dan Peddycord presented the staff report, citing 74% compliance with pack and
flavor restrictions based on a spot check of stores. He noted that Senator Glazer
has introduced a bill to prohibit flavored tobacco and that many other jurisdictions
have established local ordinances doing so.
The Committee accepted the staff report and directed staff to provide another status
report in six months.
AYE: Chair Candace Andersen, Vice Chair John Gioia
Passed
DRAFT
6
8.CONSIDER accepting the cumulative evaluation report from the Health Services
Department on the implementation of Laura’s Law – Assisted Outpatient Treatment
(AOT) program during the period February 2016 through June 2018, and
CONSIDER recommending to the Board of Supervisors that the AOT Program be
extended beyond the previously authorized three-year pilot period as part of Contra
Costa Behavioral Health Services’ ongoing service delivery for persons experiencing
serious mental illness.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
Actual expenditures for FY 17/18: Funding Source:
CCBHS - $1,812,919 Mental Health Services Act
County Counsel - 32,379 County General Fund
Public Defender - 56,250 County General Fund
Superior Court - 2,585 County General Fund
$1,904,133
Funds are budgeted for the CCBHS portion of the AOT Program for the balance of FY
2018/19, and MHSA revenue is expected to sustain the CCBHS portion of the program
costs for the fiscal years 2020-23.
Dr. Matt White introduced Roberta Chambers of RDA, who presented the
cumulative AOT Program evaluation report for the period February 2016 through
June 2018. The main findings reported were that the program cost less than
expected, enrollees are receiving a high degree of service, and that court-involved
participants received less service than voluntary participants. She reported that
13/70 participants were homeless and that the program coordinates and trains with
police, the CORE Team, H3 and County Mental Health to link qualified requestors
with the program.
Warren Hayes commented that there are 20 scattered housing sites/slots available
to the program. Rich Penksa commented that eligibility for these housing slots
requires enrollment in AOT.
Douglas Dunn commented that County Counsel was too restrictive and that judicial
petition is underused. He expressed concern that premature discharge of enrollees
led to relapse.
Lauren Rettagliata commented that we have ACT but no judicial element (AOT).
She suggested that the judge needs to meet quarterly and establish a bond of trust
with the mentally ill person. She said that the judge should become like the
mentally ill person's advocate. She also identified a communication gap in that the
4C hearing officer is routinely not aware if an individual was dismissed from AOT.
Teresa Pasquini express gratitude for the program but concurred with the
comments made by others.
Bill Green suggested setting up a group to study easing program restrictions
because the program is underutilized.
DRAFT
7
Alicia Austin-Townsend commented that MH is not actually discharging, but has
identified a few individuals for judicial intervention -- ACT first, and then
determine if AOT is warranted.
Supervisor Gioia advised that implementation issues were better discussed at AOT
workgroup meetings. The Committee accepted the evaluation report and decided to
recommend to the Board of Supervisors continuation of the AOT Program beyond
the three-year pilot authorization.
AYE: Chair Candace Andersen, Vice Chair John Gioia
Passed
9.This is the final meeting of the 2018 Committee. No further meetings are scheduled.
10.Adjourn
Chair Andersen adjourned the meeting at 2:10 p.m.
For Additional Information Contact:
Julie DiMaggio Enea, Interim Committee Staff
Phone (925) 335-1077, Fax (925) 646-1353
julie.enea@cao.cccounty.usDRAFT
8
FAMILY AND HUMAN SERVICES
COMMITTEE 4.
Meeting Date:02/25/2019
Subject:Appointments to the Advisory Council on Aging
Submitted For: Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director
Department:Employment & Human Services
Referral No.: N/A
Referral Name: Appointments to Advisory Bodies
Presenter: Anthony Macias Contact: Anthony Macias 925.602.4175
Referral History:
On December 6, 2011 the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 2011/497 adopting policy
governing appointments to boards, committees, and commissions that are advisory to the Board of
Supervisors. Included in this resolution was a requirement that applications for at
large/countywide seats be reviewed by a Board of Supervisors committee.
The Advisory Council on Aging provides a means for county-wide planning, cooperation and
coordination for individuals and groups interested in improving and developing services and
opportunities for the older residents of this County. The Council provides leadership and
advocacy on behalf of older persons and serves as a channel of communication and information
on aging.
The Advisory Council on Aging consists of 40 members serving 2 year staggered terms, each
ending on September 30. The Council consists of representatives of the target population and the
general public, including older low-income and military persons; at least one-half of the
membership must be made up of actual consumers of services under the Area Plan.
The Council includes: 19 representatives recommended from each Local Committee on Aging, 1
representative from the Nutrition Project Council, 1 Retired Senior Volunteer Program, and 19
Members at-Large.
Referral Update:
There are currently 31 seats filled on the Advisory Council on Aging and 9 vacancies. These
vacant seats include: Local Committee Pinole, Local Committee Richmond, Local Committee
Pittsburg, Local Committee San Ramon, Local Committee San Pablo, Local Committee Martinez,
Local Committee Oakley, Nutrition Project Council and Member-At-Large #10 seat.
The recommended appointments will bring the membership to 33, leaving 7 seats vacant:
9
The recommended appointments will bring the membership to 33, leaving 7 seats vacant:
Seat title Current incumbent Incumbent Supervisor
District
Nutrition Project Council Garrett, Gail I
At-Large 1 Adams, Fred II
At-Large 2 Krohn, Shirley IV
At-Large 3 Benson, Ed
At-Large 4 Welty, Patricia V
At-Large 5 Card, Deborah V
At-Large 6 Lipson, Steve I
At-Large 7 Selleck, Summer V
At-Large 8 Mehta, Jatin III
At-Large 9 Xavier, Rita I
At-Large 10 Ames, Kathryn IV
At-Large 11 Bhambra, Jagjit V
At-Large 12 Neemuchwalla, Nuru IV
At-Large 13 Dunne-Rose, Mary D II
At-Large 14 Yee, Dennis IV
At-Large 15 Bruns, Mary IV
At-Large 16 O'Toole, Brian IV
At-Large 17 Donovan, Kevin D.II
At-Large 18 Nahm, Richard III
At-Large 19 Kleiner, Jill II
At-Large 20 Frederick, Susan I
Local Committee Lafayette McCahan, Ruth II
Local Committee Orinda Clark, Nina II
Local Committee Antioch Fernandez, Rudy III
Local Committee Pleasant Hill VanAckern, Lorna IV
Local Committee Pinole
Local Committee Concord Omran, Fuad IV
Local Committee Richmond
Local Committee El Cerrito Kim-Selby, Joanna I
Local Committee Hercules Doran, Jennifer V
Local Committee Pittsburg
Local Committee San Ramon
Local Committee Clayton Tervelt, Ron IV
Local Committee Alamo-DanvilleDonnelly, James II
Local Committee Walnut Creek Thomas, Jessica IV
Local Committee Moraga Katzman, Keith II
Local Committee San Pablo
Local Committee Martinez
Local Committee Brentwood Kee, Arthur III
Local Committee Oakley Cook, Branin III
10
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
RECOMMEND to the Board of Supervisors the appointment of Kathryn Ames to At Large #10
seat and reappointment of of Gail Garrett to the Nutrition Project Seat, with terms expiring
September 30, 2020, on the Advisory Council on Aging, as recommended by the Council.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
There is no fiscal impact.
Attachments
K. Ames Application
G. Garrett Reappointment Memo
G. Garrett Application
11
Print Form
Contra
Costa
County
For Office Use Only
Date Received :
BOARDS, COMMITTEES, AND COMMISSIONS APPLICATION
MAIL OR DELIVER TO:
Contra Cos1a ColJ1ty
CLERK OF TI-iE BOARD
651 Pine Street, Rm . 100
tv1arti1ez, California 94553-1 292
PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT IN INK
(Each Position Req.iires a Sepcs'3le Application)
BOARD , COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION NAME AND SEAT TITLE YOU ARE APPLYING FOR :
For Reviewers Use Only:
Accepted Rejected
PRIN T EXACT NAM E OF BOARD, COMMITTEE, OR COMMISSION PRINT EXACT SEAT NAME (if applicable)
1. Name :! B Me 5
(Last Name)
lZ a th Y'yo
(First Name)
B
(Middle Name)
2. Address: I Pl e¢{?d.n± Hiii
(No .) (Street ) (Apt.) (City) (State ) (Z ip Code )
3. Phones: I
(Home No .) (Work No .) (Cell No .)
4. Email Address: I
5. EDUCATION : Check appropriate box if you possess one of the following :
High School Diploma j8I G.E.D . Certificate D California High School Proficiency Certificate Cl
Give Highest Grade or Educat ional Level Achieved! B'A tJ U.PJ d.,r'\ $e ·{'\n 't.{,£) ~ J=\-o 1y /Jct fd e..s Col l.e1e
Names of colleges I universities Degree Degree Date
Course of Study I Ma jor Units Completed Degree attended Awarded Type Awarded
Semester Quarter
A)' I ::).~, ~1-:-iie u~,,VNl {\\(\I ~\ 51 i'"'J 1
,;es6£:lm' CJ D ~I I
B)I l{-o 1 '1 1'J~Mtb ),{();~ ~;+v H l.lYY\~(\ I
s ~o ('\/ ~/#/) EJNot2SCJ CJ D ~ I l a~,/, 'l ci 1
C)I
11 I
Yes No DCI CJ D DI I
D) Other schools I tra ining Course Stud ied Hours Completed Cert ificate Awarded :
completed :
1 I I I I
Yes No CICI
I
THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
12
0 2-/ Z.D/ b: (f)&Prl-'? (J lJ w J+€'2LS -Voi-v f\)E<c_{G
-Ofhce wo<~ wh\Gh lnc.Ju..d-Ul d3t-8 1(\pwf-,
6. PLEASE FILL OUT THE FOLLOWING SECTION COMPLETELY. List experience that relates to the qualifications needed to
serve on the local appointive body. Begin with your most recent experience. A resume or other supporting documentation
may be attached but it may not be used as a substitute for completing this section.
A) Dates (Month, Day , Year)
From To
~~
Total : Yrs . Mos .
QI]c=J
Hrs. per weekEZl2]. Volunteer D
B) Dates (Month , Day , Year)
From To
I 'q 11 I Uiill
Total : Yrs . Mos.
I 1 ·~ II z I
Hrs . per wee~ . Volunteer D
C) Dates (Month , Day , Year)
From To
[iU]~
Total: Yrs. Mos.
Cl]~
Hrs . per week~. Volunteer D
D) Dates (Month, Day , Year)
From To
l iqb8 I ~
Total : Yrs . Mos .
IHrs pe~ell~ vLteer 0
~" lt)J i
Al 1)
Title Duties Performed
.Jt71 ~omp~ P l==t=~~~====~~~~P 1)~t2-f:n'r-rlj
IC(Cf 2 -20DJ /-td-yw ~ ~;t-5
Zoo 2 -zo 1 3 rfr:ln rreJ Pro l..-LA:remerd-
-}D ((:i;n ~el.--m;}<h" '2.. of-5" vpp I te~
Al+~ B~t-e..D ~\f~\
rk \ e.'1 I {_,A
Employer's Name and Address
THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
Duties Performed
fO\e(ltA, i' (\ V-i-n 'f-i'o~ I
lAftJ fv -1" p~·t-len
lr~l"tf.~«ed f;
(Y\~1~t't> b 1' O \ o~ u) ~.h
.-pcoLe~;,ed .b\ood c:-LJ ·h.J<_&
_ , p 1~+-e_) 11 S -pee; e f'fl.
--er/ ~ oc+i (Ci
Duties Performed
13
7. How did you learn about this vacancy?
occc HomepageD Walk-In DNewspaper Advertisement DDistrict Supervisor ~Other I m p ro ke r
8 . Do you have a Familial or Financial Relationship with a member of the Board of Supervisors? (Please see Board
Resolution no. 2011/55 , attached): No __Jth_ Yes___Q_
If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: ,...--------------------,
9. Do you have any financial relationships with the County such as grants, contracts, or other economic relations?
No_D._ Yes_Cl_
If Yes , please identify the nature of the relationship: l....._ _________________ ......1...
I CERTIFY that the statements made by me in this application are true , complete , and correct to the best of my knowledge and
belief, and are made in good faith . I acknowledge and understand that all information in this applicati on is publically
accessible. I understand and agree that misstatements I omissions of material fact may cause forfeiture of my rights to serve
on a Board, Committee, or Commission in Contra Costa County.
Sign Name : ~.r/hry /l Date : 'J J q J.zo) f r I
Important Information
1. This application is a public doo.Jment and is subject to the California Publ ic Records Ad (CA Gov. Code §6250-6270 ).
2. Send the completed paper application to the Office of the Cieri< of the Board at: 651 Pine Street, Room 106, Martinez, CA 94553.
3. A resume or other relevant information may be submitted INith this application .
4. All members are required to take the following tra ining : 1) The BrolM1 Act., 2) The Better Government Ordinance , and 3) Ethics Tra ining .
5. Members of boards , commissions , and committees may be required to : 1) file a Statement of Economic Interest Form also knO'Ml as a Form
700 , and 2) complete the State Ethics Tra ining Course as required by AB 1234.
6. Advisory body meetings may be held in various locations and some locations may not be accessible by public transportati on .
7. Meeting dates and times are subject to change and may occur up to two days per month .
8. Some boards , committees , or commissions may assign members to subcommittees or 1Mlr1< groups Wiich may require an additional
commitment of time.
THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
14
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for
Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted Resolution
no. 2011/55 on 2/08/2011 as follows:
fN THE MATIER OF ADOPTfNG A POLICY MAKfNG FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERV ISORS INELIGIBLE
FOR APPOfNTMENT TO BOARDS, COMMITTEES OR COMMISSIONS FOR WHICH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IS THE
APPOfNTING AUTHORITY
WHERE AS the Board of Supervisors wishes to avoid the reality or appearance of improper influence or favoritism ;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the following policy is hereby adopted:
I. SCOPE: This policy applies to appointments to any seats on boards, committees or commissions for which the Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors is the appoi ntin g authority.
II. POLICY: A person wi ll not be e li gible for appointment if he/she is related to a Board of Supervisors' Member in any of the followin g
relationships:
1. Mother, father , son , and daughter;
2 . Brother, sister, grandmother, grandfather, grandson, and granddaughter;
3. Great-grandfather, great-grandmother, aunt, un cle, nephew , niece, great-grandson, and great-granddaughter;
4 . First cousin;
5. Husband , wife, father-in -l aw, mother-in-law , son-in-law, daughter-in-law, stepson , and stepdaughter;
6. Sister-in-law (brother's spouse or spo use's sister), brother-in-law (sister 's spouse or spouse 's broth er), spouse 's grandmother,
spouse 's g randfather, spouse 's granddaughter, and spouse 's grandson ;
7. Registered domestic partner, pursuant to California Family Code section 297 .
8. The relatives, as defined in 5 and 6 above, for a registered domestic partner.
9. Any person with whom a Board Member shares a financial interest as defined in the Political Reform Act (Gov 't Code §87103 .
Financial Int erest), suc h as a business partner or business associate.
THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
15
1 of 1
Kathy Gallagher, Director
40 Douglas Dr., Martinez, CA 94553 Phone: (925) 313-1579 Fax: (925) 313-1575 www.cccounty.us/ehsd .
MEMORANDUM
D ATE: 1/09/2019
T O: Family and Human Services Committee
CC: Laura Cepoi, Program Manager Area Agency on Aging
Victoria Tolbert, Director Aging and Adult Services
FROM : Anthony Macias, Senior Staff Assistant, for Area Agency on Aging
SUBJECT: Advisory Council on Aging – Appointment Requested
The Contra Costa Area Agency on Aging (AAA) recommends the following individual for
reappointment to Nutrition Project Council seat assigned to the Contra Costa Advisory Council on
Aging (ACOA) with terms expiring on September 30, 2020:
Nutrition Project Council Seat: Gail Garrett
Recruitment is handled by both the Area Agency on Aging, the ACOA Membership Committee and
the Clerk of the Board using CCTV. Members of the AAA staff have encouraged interested
individuals including minorities to apply through announcements distributed to the senior centers,
Contra Costa libraries, the East, Central and West County Senior Coalitions and among the active
ACOA membership. The ACOA Membership Committee has developed a survey and will continue
work to populate the Council with members who are also consumers of services provided by the
Older Americans Act. The Contra Costa County EHSD website contains dedicated web content
where interested members of the public are encouraged to apply. The website provides access to the
Board of Supervisors official application with instructions on whom to contact for ACOA related
inquiries, including application procedure.
The Nutrition Advisory Council elected Ms. Garret to continue to represent their interests to the
ACOA, on January 8, 2019. The Membership Committee and the Council’s current President, Shirley
Khron, recommend the reappointment of Gail Garrett to Nutrition Project Council Seat, who is
interested in serving an additional term. Please find copies of the member ’s applications provided as
separate attachments.
Thank You
16
Submit Date: Aug 21, 2018
Seat Name (if applicable)
First Name Middle Initial Last Name
Email Address
Home Address Suite or Apt
City State Postal Code
Primary Phone
Employer Job Title Occupation
Contra Costa County Boards & Commissions
Application Form
Profile
Which Boards would you like to apply for?
Advisory Council on Aging: Submitted
Describe why you are interested in serving on this advisory board/commission (please limit
your response to one paragraph).
I am currently on the Board & would like to reapply/renew.
This application is used for all boards and commissions
Do you, or a business in which you have a financial interest, have a contract with Contra
Costa Co.?
Yes No
ACOA Secretary
Gail L Garrett
Richmond CA
Retired
Gail L Garrett Page 1 of 6
17
If "Other" was Selected Give Highest Grade or
Educational Level Achieved
Name of College Attended
Course of Study / Major
Units Completed
Degree Type
Date Degree Awarded
Is a member of your family (or step-family) employed by Contra Costa Co.?
Yes No
Education History
Select the highest level of education you have received:
Other
College/ University A
Type of Units Completed
None Selected
Degree Awarded?
Yes No
College/ University B
BA
St Mary's College
Cross Cultural Studies
Cross Cultural Studies
2002
Gail L Garrett Page 2 of 6
18
Name of College Attended
Course of Study / Major
Units Completed
Degree Type
Date Degree Awarded
Name of College Attended
Course of Study / Major
Units Completed
Degree Type
Type of Units Completed
None Selected
Degree Awarded?
Yes No
College/ University C
Type of Units Completed
None Selected
Degree Awarded?
Yes No
Gail L Garrett Page 3 of 6
19
Date Degree Awarded
Course Studied
Hours Completed
Dates (Month, Day, Year) From - To
Hours per Week Worked?
Position Title
Other schools / training completed:
Certificate Awarded?
Yes No
Work History
Please provide information on your last three positions, including your current one if you are
working.
1st (Most Recent)
Volunteer Work?
Yes No
Employer's Name and Address
St Mary's College of California- 1926 St Mary's Road - Moraga, CA
Duties Performed
Administrative Computer Service
8/83-4/17
37-1/2
Computer Operator
Gail L Garrett Page 4 of 6
20
Dates (Month, Day, Year) From - To
Hours per Week Worked?
Position Title
Dates (Month, Day, Year) From - To
Hours per Week Worked?
Position Title
2nd
Volunteer Work?
Yes No
Employer's Name and Address
Duties Performed
3rd
Volunteer Work?
Yes No
Employer's Name and Address
Gail L Garrett Page 5 of 6
21
Upload a Resume
If "Other" was selected please explain
Duties Performed
Final Questions
How did you learn about this vacancy?
Other
. Do you have a Familial or Financial Relationship with a member of the Board of
Supervisors?
Yes No
If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship:
Do you have any financial relationships with the County such as grants, contracts, or other
economic relations?
Yes No
If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship:
Please Agree with the Following Statement
I understand that this form is a public document and is subject to the California Public
Records Act.
I Agree
I am already a member .
Gail L Garrett Page 6 of 6
22
FAMILY AND HUMAN SERVICES
COMMITTEE 5.
Meeting Date:02/25/2019
Subject:RECOMMENDATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Submitted For: Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director
Department:Employment & Human Services
Referral No.:
Referral Name: Appointments to Advisory Bodies
Presenter: Rochelle Martin Soriano Contact: Rochelle Soriano 925-671-4535
Referral History:
On December 13, 2011, The Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 2011/498 adopting policy governing
appointments to independent boards, committees, and commissions, and special districts. Included in this resolution
was a requirement that independent bodies initially conducting interviews for At Large/Countywide seats provide
appointment recommendations to a Board Committee for further review.
The Workforce Development Board implements federal requirements for programs to address the education, skills,
and employment needs for a skilled workforce, and that lead to an increase in the skills and earnings of Contra
Costa residents.
On March 14, 2016, the Family and Human Services Committee (FHS) accepted the Employment and Human
Services Department's recommendation to decertify the then-current Workforce Investment Act local Board and
re-certify a new board structure in compliance with the new Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA).
FHS approved these recommendations, and the Board did the same at its March 29, 2016 meeting.
Under new standards in WIOA (2016) and as adopted by the Board on March 29, 2016, the new Workforce
Development Board structure is: a total of 23 required seats and 2 "optional seats", consisting of: 13 Business
representatives, 5 Workforce representatives, and 5 Education and Training representatives as follows: (1) Adult
Education/Literacy; (2) Higher Education; (3) Economic & Community Devl; (4) Wagner Peyser representative; (5)
Vocational Rehabilitation. Also two additional/ "optional" seats that may be filled from any of the 3 categories
above.
Referral Update:
The Workforce Development Board currently has 20 filled seats and 5 vacancies. Please see two
attached memos recommending appointments to 4 seas, along with applications, current rosters
and attendance records.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
RECOMMEND to the Board of Supervisors the appointment of Meaghan Doran to the Business
23
RECOMMEND to the Board of Supervisors the appointment of Meaghan Doran to the Business
#3 seat, Robert Muller to the Business #9 seat, Romina Gonzalez to the Business #12 seat, and
Fred Wood to the Education & Training #2 seat on the Workforce Development Board to terms
ending on June 30, 2020, as recommended by the Employment and Human Services Department
and approved by the Workforce Development Board Executive Committee.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
There is no fiscal impact.
Attachments
WDB Transmittal Memo_Wood and Muller
WDB Transmittal Memo_Doran and Gonzalez
WDB Attendance Roster
Candidate Application_Meaghan Doran_WDB
Candidate Application_Fred Wood_WDB
Candidate Application_Romina Gonzalez_WDB
Candidate Application_Robert Muller_WDB
24
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
4071 Port Chicago Highway • Suite 250 • Concord, CA 94520
Tel. (925) 671-4560 • Fax (925) 228-0238
Website: www.wdbcc.com
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 18, 2018
TO: Family and Human Services Committee
CC: Enid Mendoza, CAO Sr. Deputy County Administrator
FROM: Donna Van Wert, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Appointment to Workforce Development Board
This memorandum requests the Family and Human Services Committee recommend to the Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors the appointment of the following candidates to the new WIOA compliant Workforce
Development Board of Contra Costa County.
Background:
Local board structure and size:
Compared to predecessor legislation, the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) substantially
changes Local Board composition by reducing local workforce development board size while maintaining a
business and industry majority and ensuring representation from labor and employment and training
organizations.
The Executive Committee of the local WIOA board met January 21, 2016 and approved a recommended WIOA
Board configuration, subsequently approved by the Board of Supervisors on March 29, 2016. To meet the
categorical membership percentages, the WDB recommended a board of twenty-five (25) members. This option
represents the minimum required local board size under WIOA plus an additional six (6) optional representatives
in the following enumerated categories: 1) business; 2) workforce; 3) education and training.
Category – Representatives of Business (WIOA Section 107(b)(2)(A))
• Thirteen (13) representatives (52%)
Category – Representatives of Workforce (WIOA Section 107(b)(2)(A))
• Five (5) representatives (20%)
Category – Representatives of Education and Training (WIOA Section 107(b)(2)(C))
• One (1) Adult Education/Literacy Representative (WIOA title II)
• One (1) Higher Education Representative
• One (1) Economic and Community Development Representative
• One (1) Wagner Peyser Representative
• One (1) Vocational Rehabilitation Representative
Two (2) additional seats from the above categories, including constituencies referenced in
Attachment III of Training Employment & Guidance Letter (TEGL) 27-14.
DONNA VAN WERT
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
25
Recommendation:
a) Recommend approval of local board candidates for the vacant
Business Seat #9- to the new WIOA-compliant board (Attached application & board roster)
• Interview Date – August 14, 2018
• Robert Muller - Approved on September 12, 2018 at the Executive Committee Meeting
• No other candidate competed for the vacant Business Seat # 9
Education and Training Seat #2 to the new WIOA-compliant board (Attached application & board
roster)
• Interview Date – August 7, 2018
• Fred Wood - Approved on September 12, 2018 at the Executive Committee Meeting
• No other candidate competed for the vacant Education and Training Seat # 2
NEW APPOINTMENT
Seat Last Name First Name Address & District
#
Term of
Expiration
District
(Resident)
Business Seat
#9
Muller Robert PO BOX 711
Martinez, CA 94553
District # 5
6/30/2020 District #5
Education &
Training Seat
# 2
Wood Fred 2600 Mission Bell
Dr. San Pablo, CA
94806
District # 1
6/30/2020 Davis, CA
Thank you
DVW/rms
attachment
26
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
4071 Port Chicago Highway • Suite 250 • Concord, CA 94520
Tel. (925) 671-4560 • Fax (925) 228-0238
Website: www.wdbcc.com
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 18, 2018
TO: Family and Human Services Committee
CC: Enid Mendoza, CAO Sr. Deputy County Administrator
FROM: Donna Van Wert, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Appointment to Workforce Development Board
This memorandum requests the Family and Human Services Committee recommend to the Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors the appointment of the following candidates to the new WIOA compliant Workforce
Development Board of Contra Costa County.
Background:
Local board structure and size:
Compared to predecessor legislation, the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) substantially
changes Local Board composition by reducing local workforce development board size while maintaining a
business and industry majority and ensuring representation from labor and employment and training
organizations.
The Executive Committee of the local WIOA board met January 21, 2016 and approved a recommended WIOA
Board configuration, subsequently approved by the Board of Supervisors on March 29, 2016. To meet the
categorical membership percentages, the WDB recommended a board of twenty-five (25) members. This option
represents the minimum required local board size under WIOA plus an additional six (6) optional representatives
in the following enumerated categories: 1) business; 2) workforce; 3) education and training.
Category – Representatives of Business (WIOA Section 107(b)(2)(A))
• Thirteen (13) representatives (52%)
Category – Representatives of Workforce (WIOA Section 107(b)(2)(A))
• Five (5) representatives (20%)
Category – Representatives of Education and Training (WIOA Section 107(b)(2)(C))
• One (1) Adult Education/Literacy Representative (WIOA title II)
• One (1) Higher Education Representative
• One (1) Economic and Community Development Representative
• One (1) Wagner Peyser Representative
• One (1) Vocational Rehabilitation Representative
Two (2) additional seats from the above categories, including constituencies referenced in
Attachment III of Training Employment & Guidance Letter (TEGL) 27-14.
DONNA VAN WERT
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
27
Recommendation:
a) Recommend approval of local board candidates for the vacant
Business Seat #9- to the new WIOA-compliant board (Attached application & board roster)
• Interview Date – August 1, 2018
• Romina Gonzalez - Approved on October 10, 2018 at the Executive Committee Meeting
• No other candidate competed for the vacant Business Seat # 12
Business Seat #10 to the new WIOA-compliant board (Attached application & board roster)
• Interview Date – September 12, 2018
• Meaghan Doran - Approved on October 10, 2018 at the Executive Committee Meeting
• No other candidate competed for the vacant Business Seat # 3
NEW APPOINTMENT
Seat Last Name First Name Address & District
#
Term of
Expiration
District
(Resident)
Business Seat
#12
Gonzalez Romina 2231 Monument
Blvd.
Concord, CA 94520
District # 4
6/30/2020 District #4
Business Seat
# 3
Doran Meaghan 1125 Tamalpais
Avenue
San Rafael, Ca
94901
6/30/2020 Sausalito, CA
Thank you
DVW/rms
attachment
28
Name Seat #Appointment
Date
Term End Date Total # meetings HELD
since appointment
Total # meetings ATTENDED
since appointment date
Total # of
Absences
Committee
Michael McGill 1 3/29/2016 6/30/2020 10 8 2 Executive
Joshua Aldrich 2 10/9/2016 6/30/2020 BED
Vacant 3 6/30/2020
Terry Curley 4 10/9/2018 6/30/2020 BED
Bhupen B. Amin 5 3/29/2016 6/30/2020 10 8 2 Executive/BED
Jose Carrascal 6 3/29/2016 6/30/2020 10 8 2 Executive/Youth
Jason Cox 7 3/29/2016 6/30/2020 10 7 3 Executive
Ashley Georgian 8 3/29/2016 6/30/2020 10 7 3 BED
Vacant 9 6/30/2020
Robert Rivera 10 3/29/2016 6/30/2020 10 7 3 BED
Justin Steele 11 3/29/2016 6/30/2020 10 7 3 BED
Vacant 12 6/30/2020
Melissa Johnson-Scranton 13 3/13/2018 6/30/2020 2 1 1 TBD
Name Seat #Appointment
Date
Term End Date Total # meetings HELD
since appointment
Total # meetings attended
since appointment date
Total # of
Absences
Committee
Thomas Hansen 1 10/17/2017 6/30/2020 4 2 2 TBD
Robert III Williams 2 3/29/2016 6/30/2020 10 0 10 Youth
Steve Older 3 3/29/2016 6/30/2020 10 7 3 BED
Margaret Hanlon-Gradie 4 3/29/2016 6/30/2020 10 6 4 Executive
Vacant 5 6/30/2020
Name Seat #Appointment
Date
Term End Date Total # meetings HELD
since appointment
Total # meetings attended
since appointment date
Total # of
Absences
Committee
G. Vittoria Abbate 1 10/17/2017 6/30/2020 4 4 0 Youth
Vacant 2 6/30/2020
Name Seat #Appointment
Date
Term End Date Total # meetings HELD
since appointment
Total #meetings attended
since appointment date
Total # of
Absences
Committee
Kristin Connelly 1 3/29/2016 6/30/2020 10 6 4 BED
Richard Johnson 2 3/29/2016 6/30/2020 10 6 4 Youth
Carol Asch 3 3/29/2016 6/30/2020 10 6 4 Youth
Name Seat #Appointment
Date
Term End Date Total # meetings HELD
since appointment
Total # meetings attended
since appointment date
Total # of
Absences
Committee
Yolanda Vega 1 3/29/2016 6/30/2020 10 8 2 Executive/Youth
John Montagh 2 6/6/2017 6/30/2020 6 4 2 BED
BUSINESS
VACANT SEAT
Term length: 48 months
WDBCCC Bylaws
ARTICLE X - TERMINATIONS
affirm the recommendation.
10.18.2018
BOARD MEMBERS ATTENDANCE RECORDS
FULL BOARD MEETINGS
PY 2017-2018
WORKFORCE & LABOR
EDUCATION AND TRAINING
GOVERNMENTAL AND ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
FLEX ADDITIONAL MEMBERS
PENDING APPROVAL/CONFIRMATION
B. Failure to attend three consecutive regularly scheduled Full WDBCCC/ and or committee meetings, excessive excused absences from regularly scheduled WDBCCC and/or
committee meetings, or failure to resign when he/she ceases to be representative of the group from which he/she was selected. Said conduct shall automatically be
reviewd by the WDBCCC Executive Committee which in turn shall present a recommendation to the WDCCC. A majority vote of the WDBCCC membership is needed to affirm
29
Print Form
Contra
Costa
County
For Office Use Only Date Received:
BOARDS, COMMITTEES, AND COMMISSIONS APPLICATION
MAIL OR DELIVER TO:
Contra Costa Crunty
CLERK OF THE BOAAD
651 Pire Street, Rm. 100
Martinez, Califonia 94553-1292
PLEASE TYPE OR PRINTIN INK (Each Position Requires a Separate Application)
BOARD, COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION NAME AND SEAT TITLE YOU ARE APPLYING FOR:
For Reviewers Use Only:
Accepted Rejected
!workforce Development Board ,---------------------.
PRINT EXACT NAME OF BOARD, COMMITTEE, OR COMMISSION
1 . Name:IDoran Meagh an(Last Name)
2.Address:
PRINT EXACT SEAT NAME (if applicable)
(First Name) (Middle Name)
(No.) (Street) (Apt.) (City) (State) (Zip Code)
3.Phones:!=======(Home No.) (Work No.) (Cell No.)
4. Email Address:
5.EDUCATION: Check appropriate box if you possess one of the following:High School Diploma D G.E.D. Certificate D California High School Proficiency Certificate D Give Highest Grade or Educational Level Achieved.._lG_ra_d _u _a _te_D_e_g_r _ee _______________ __.,Names of colleges I universities attended A)State University of New York atOswego
B) Dominican University of [California C)I D) Other schools/ tra ining completed: I
Date Degree Degree Course of Study / Major Units Completed Degree Awarded Type
International Business/ I!Coaching MBA Sustainable IEnterprise 11 I Course Studied I I I
YesNolEIO
Yes No IEJO
Yes No OD
Semester CJ
CJ CJ Hours Completed I I
THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
Awarded Quarter D D 15/02
D EJ 1112111 D DI' Certificate Awarded: Yes No DD
I I ·1
A1a
30
6. PLEASE FILL OUT THE FOLLOWING SECTION COMPLETELY. List experience that relates to the qualifications needed to
serve on the local appointive body. Begin with your most recent experience. A resume or other supporting documentation
may be attached but it may not be used as a substitute for completing this section.
A)Dates (Month, Day, Year)
From To��
Total: Yrs. Mos. CJCJ
Hrs. per week.El. Volunteer D
B)Dates (Month, Day, Year)
From To��
EJ1,�os I
Hrs. per wee� . Volunteer D
C)Dates (Month, Day, Year)
From To�EJ
Total: Yrs. Mos.
l�rs per welQlunteer D
D)Dates (Month, Day, Year)
From To�� Total: Yrs. Mos. 1:rs per we!Qlunteer D
Title Duties Performed
Manager of Customer Programs I
Employer's Name and Address 1-----''--"------------!Oversee MCE's portfolio of energy
MCE
1125 Tamalpais Ave.
San Rafael, CA 94901
Title
!efficiency, low-income, health and
safety, disaster recovery, and
!workforce development programs.
Duties Performed
Energy Efficiency & Marketing Manager Oversaw the development of the MCE
'-----------------' Direct Install team, conducted
Employer's Name and Address outreach to multifamily properties,
--=;.;.;..i:.c...;;;J.c.;;.;....;;..;.-'=.;.;.;;;.....;;;.;..;.;;;...;.....;.;;;.;;;.;..;;..;;.;;.._ project managed participating
Marin City Community Development
Corp.
1441 Drake Ave.
Marin City, CA 94956
!Project Manager
Title
Emplover's Name and Address
Dominican University of California
Participatory Action Research Project -
tanal Community
51 Acacia Ave.
San Rafael, CA 94901 Title
!Finance Coordinator
Employer's Name and Address
Ballard Construction
Syracuse, NY 1 3204
THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
properties from engagement to
beyond project completion, oversaw
organization wide marketing,
k:leveloped relationship with laborers
ultimately resulting in a pre-
apprenticeship program.
Duties Performed
Managed full cycle of research project
designed to access the collective
knowledge of the Canal community.
Duties Performed
!completed job costing, AP, and
payroll.
31
. How did you learn about this vacancy?□ccc Homepage□ Walk-In □Newspaper Adv e rtisement □District Sup ervisor IE]Other IPatience Ofodu
8. Do you ha ve a Familial or Financial Relationship with a member of the Board of Supe rvisors? (Plea se see BoardResolution no. 2011/55, attached): No _IE]__ Yes_o_
If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: J.--------------------
9. Do you ha ve any financial relationships with th e County such as grants, contracts, or other economic relations?No_lEI_ Yes_Il_
I If Yes, please identify the nature of the rela tionship: ,...._ _________________ _._
I CERTIFY that the statements ma de by me in this application are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and a re made in good faith. I acknowledge and understand that all inform ation in this application is publically
accessible. I unde rstand and agree that misstatements I omissions of material fact may cause forfeiture of my rights to se rve on a Bo ard, Committee, or Commission in Contra Costa County.
Sign Name :< _Date:_9--L....+-/ �' el�\�--
Important Information
1.This application is a public dOa.Jment and is subject to the California Public Records Act (CA Gov. Code §625 0-6270).
2.Send the completed paper application to the Office of the Clerk of the Board at: 651 Pine Street, Room 106, Martinez, CA 94563.
3.A resume or other relevant information may be submitted with this application.
4.All members are required to take the following training: 1) The Brown Act, 2) The Better Government Ordinance, and 3) Ethics Training.
5.Members of boards, commissions, and committees may be required to: 1) file a Statement of Economic Interest Form also known as a Form
700, and 2) complete the State Ethics Training Course as required by A61234.
6.Advisory body meetings may be held in various locations and some locations may not be accessible by public transportation.
7.Meeting dates and times are subject to change and may occur up to MO days per month.
8.Some boards, committees, or commissions may assign members to subcommittees or v.ork groups 1M1id1 may require an additional
commitment of time.
THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
32
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for
Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted Resolution
no. 2011/55 on 2/08/2011 as follows:
IN THE MATTER OF ADOPTING A POLICY MAKING FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS INELIGIBLE
FOR APPOINTMENT TO BOARDS, COMMITTEES OR COMMISSIONS FOR WHICH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IS THE
APPOINTING AUTHORITY
WHEREAS the Board of Supervis?rs wishes to avoid the reality or appearance of improper influence or favoritism;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the following policy is hereby adopted:
I.SCOPE: This policy applies to appointments to any seats on boards, committees or commissions for which the Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors is the appointing authority.
II.POLICY: A person will not be eligible for appointment if he/she is related to a Board of Supervisors' Member in any of the following
relationships:
1.Mother, father, son, and daughter;
2.Brother, sister, grandmother, grandfather, grandson, and granddaughter;
3.Great-grandfather, great-grandmother, aunt, uncle, nephew, niece, great-grandson, and great-granddaughter;
4.First cousin;
5.Husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, stepson, and stepdaughter;
6.Sister-in-law (brother's spouse or spouse's sister), brother-in-law (sister's spouse or spouse's brother), spouse's grandmother,
spouse's grandfather, spouse's granddaughter, and spouse's grandson;
7.Registered domestic partner, pursuant to California Family Code section 297.
8.The relatives, as defined in 5 and 6 above, for a registered domestic partner.
9.Any person with whom a Board Member shares a financial interest as defined in the Political Refonn Act (Gov't Code §87103,
Financial Interest), such as a business partner or business associate.
THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
33
September 25, 2018
Contra Costa County
Clerk of the Board
661 Pine Street, Rm. 105
Martinez, California 94553
Re: Meaghan Doran
Dear Contra Costa Coun ty Workforce Development Board Selection Committee,
On behalf of the Marin Builders Association I respectfully submit this letter of recommendation for Meghan Doran of
Marin Clean Energy.
It has been our sincere pleasure to work with Meaghan over the years. She has been an active partner in our
association and has served on a number of committees. Specifically, she has represented Marin Clean Energy in our
Cornerstone Partnership Program, served on our Advisory Committee and been a strong supporter of our
Construction Technology Education Program for local students. Meaghan has brought dedication, enthusiasm and
energy to every group she has been involved in with us at Marin Builders Association and we believe she would be
an asset to your Workforce Development Board.
Thank you for your consideration of this recommendation for Meaghan Doran - a true community leader.
! - • •
. u
Chief Executive Officer
660 Las Gallinas Avenue, San Rafael, CA 94903 l p. 415.462.1220 l f. 415.462.1225
marinbuilders.COM 34
Print Form
Contra
Costa
County
For Office Use Only Date Received:
BOARDS, COMMITTEES, AND COMMISSIONS APPLICATION
MAIL OR DELIVER TO:
Contra Costa C,runty
CLERK OF THE BOARD
651 Pine Street, Rm. 100
Martinez, Calttomia 94553-1292
PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT IN INK (Each Position Requires a Separate Application)
BOARD, COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION NAME AND SEAT TITLE YOU ARE APPLYING FOR:
For Reviewers Use Only: Accepted Rejected
llN o(k�u... AA!opJtl¥9: �o.t J.. I -N�,-..S��-£cfu.._tpJ}
__ M __ �
PRINT EXACT NAME OF BOARD, diMMITTEE, OR COMMISSION PRINT EXACT SEAT NAME (if applicable)
1.Name:I Wo§J.,(Last Name)
3.Phones: ----------
1-l e-d(First Name)
(Home No.) (Work No.) (Cell No.)
Ed. Wl\l'--(Middle Name)
4. Email Address: ________________ __,
5. EDUCATION: Check appropriate box if you possess one of the following:
High School Diploma� G.E.D. Certificate □ California High School Proficiency Certificate 0
Give Highest Grade or Educational Level Achieved .... l _l)�od--=-::......c.(111----=-0C..;.X.:...L-==-. ____________ __.
Names of colleges I universities Degree Degree Date Course of Study/ Major Units Completed Degree attended Awarded Type Awarded Semester Quarter A) 'D°i�� \Jc,Jk" 0.ol(� l�j'b\co..l �C..ill.\\CQ...I Yes No li!D B D @] I '°l1:� I
B)u";�;..rt-:) �. �lR-Mi 11 I C..\N..W\J\.�'11 I YesNolx)O D �0-Vu C)l lJW\�� '\ t ��rt�� I -s·,1 ;.,,_�<:.NM c...Yes No lx]O D (I k � s.-lY v\ D) Other schools I training Course Studiedl Hours Completed completed: I I I I I
THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
[ill [D 1-:+L 'oO
� I�\. v. 1 113)8'1Certificate Awarded: Yes No OD
I I
A1a
35
6.PLEASE FILL OUT THE FOLLOWING SECTION COMPLETELY. List experience that relates to the qualifications needed toserve on the local appointive body. Begin with your most recent experience. A resume or other supporting documentation
may be attached but it may not be used as a substitute for completing this section.A)Dates (Month, Day, Year)From ToI •tim I 1 11� I Total: Yrs. Mos. [u[O Hrs. per weekl Fl I. Volunteer DB)Dates (Month, Day, Year)From ToDD DD Hrs. per weeO . Volunteer □ C)Dates (Month, Day, Year)From ToDD Total: Yrs. Mos.
geglunteer □ D)Dates (Month, Day, Year)From ToDD Total: Yrs. Mos.
QeQlunt�r □
I
I
I
I
Title
C.,lA.°' \I\ cA . ..l l avEmployer's Name and Address �+r°' �&+o-...
�M"'-��
e.o,� "O,<. vi d-Title
Employer's Name and Address
Title
Emolover's Name and Address
Title
Employer's Name and Address
THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
Duties Performed I t"'i C .f E.�t.C:U..1'\ �
�CA.A...
Duties Performed I
Duties Performed I
Duties Performed I
36
7.How did you learn about this vacancy?
(Jjj;cc Homepage□ Walk-In l'.Jnlewspaper Advertisement [jibistrict Supervisor IXJibther 1 � d...� f;-'#!_� 'J>-1� �o.J
8.Do you have a Familial or Financial Relationship with a member of the Board of Supervisors? (Please see Board Resolution no. 2011/55, attached): No --lil-Yes_D_ ...------------------�If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: '-------------------......1
9. Do you have any financial relationships with the County such as grants, contracts, or other economic relations? No � Yes_D_
If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: '---------------------'-
I CERTIFY that the statements made by me in this application are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and are made in good faith. I acknowledge and understand that all information in this application is publically accessible. I understand and agree that misstatements/ omissions of material fact may cause forfeiture of my rights to serve on a Board, Committee, or Commission in Contra Costa County.
Sign Name:
Important Information
1. This application is a public document and is subject to the California Public Records Act (CA Gov. Ccx:Je §62�270).
2. Send the completed paper applicaton to the Office of the Clerk of the Board at 651 Pine Street, Room 106, Martinez, CA 94553.
3.A resume or other relevant information may be submitted with this application.
4.All members are required to take the following training: 1) The Brown Act, 2) The Better Government Ordinarce, and 3) Ethics Training.
5.Members of boards, commissons, and committees may be required to: 1) file a Statement of Eoonomic Interest Form also known as a Form
700, and 2) complete the State Ethics Training Course as required by AB 1234.
6.Advisory body meetings may be held in various locations and some locations may not be accessible by public transportation.
7.Meeting dates and times are subject to change and may occur up to two days per month.
8.Some boards, corrmittees, or oorrvnissons may assign members to subcommittees or work groups 'Nhich may require an additonal
commilment of time.
THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
37
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for
Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted Resolution
no. 2011/55 on 2/08/2011 as follows:
IN THE MATTER OF ADOPTING A POLICY MAKING FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS INELIGIBLE
FOR APPOINTMENT TO BOARDS, COMMITTEES OR COMMISSIONS FOR WHICH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IS THE
APPOINTING AUTHORITY
WHEREAS the Board of Supervisors wishes to avoid the reality or appearance of improper influence or favoritism;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the following policy is hereby adopted:
I. SCOPE: This policy applies to appointments to any seats on boards, committees or commissions for which the Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors is the appointing authority.
II.POLICY: A person will not be eligible for appointment if he/she is related to a Board of SJpervis:>rs' Member in any of the following
relationships:
1.Mother, father, son, and daughter;
2.Brother, sister, grandmother, grandfather, grandson, and granddaughter;
3. Great-grandfather, great-grandmother, aunt, uncle, nephew, niece, great-grandson, and great-granddaughter;
4.First cousin;
5.Husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, stepson, and stepdaughter;
6. Sister-in-I av,., (brother's� or spouse's sister), brother-in-law (sister' s spouse or� s broths-),� s gra,dmother,
spotm' s grandfather, spotm' s grandda.ighta-, a,d � s gra,ds:>n;
7.Registered domestic partner, pursuant to California Family Code section 297.
8.The relatives, as defined in 5 and 6 above, for a registered domestic partner.
9.Any pers,n with whom a Board Member shares a financial interest as defined in the Political Reform Act (Gov't Code §87103,
Financial Interest), such as a business partner or business associate.
THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
38
Submit Date: Sep 06, 2018
Seat Name (if applicable)
First Name Middle Initial Last Name
Email Address
Home Address Suite or Apt
City State Postal Code
Primary Phone
Employer Job Title Occupation
Contra Costa County Boards & Commissions
Application Form
Profile
Which Boards would you like to apply for?
Workforce Development Board: Submitted
Describe why you are interested in serving on this advisory board/commission (please limit
your response to one paragraph).
I believe that people that have the passion to serve and make a difference in society, are key to
contributing to implement efforts and expand broad and deep economic development accomplishments. I
am hoping I can be part of a little change and inspire others to support economic growth thru education,
hard work and commitment.
This application is used for all boards and commissions
Do you, or a business in which you have a financial interest, have a contract with Contra
Costa Co.?
Yes No
Romina P Gonzalez
Dolan's Lumber Doors &
Windows Public Relations
Romina P Gonzalez Page 1 of 7
A1b
39
If "Other" was Selected Give Highest Grade or
Educational Level Achieved
Name of College Attended
Course of Study / Major
Units Completed
Degree Type
Date Degree Awarded
Is a member of your family (or step-family) employed by Contra Costa Co.?
Yes No
Education History
Select the highest level of education you have received:
Other
College/ University A
Type of Units Completed
Semester
Degree Awarded?
Yes No
College/ University B
Some College
JFK University
Entreprenurial Leadership
2 quarter units -22hrs
Certificate
June 2013
Romina P Gonzalez Page 2 of 7
40
Name of College Attended
Course of Study / Major
Units Completed
Degree Type
Date Degree Awarded
Name of College Attended
Course of Study / Major
Units Completed
Degree Type
Type of Units Completed
None Selected
Degree Awarded?
Yes No
College/ University C
Type of Units Completed
None Selected
Degree Awarded?
Yes No
Romina P Gonzalez Page 3 of 7
41
Date Degree Awarded
Course Studied
Hours Completed
Dates (Month, Day, Year) From - To
Hours per Week Worked?
Position Title
Other schools / training completed:
Certificate Awarded?
Yes No
Work History
Please provide information on your last three positions, including your current one if you are
working.
1st (Most Recent)
Volunteer Work?
Yes No
Employer's Name and Address
Dolan's Lumber Doors & Windows 2231 Monument Blvd. Concord CA 94520
California Personal Lines Broker
and Code& Ethics
26
June 1 2014- Present
35
Public Relations & Safety Program
Director
Romina P Gonzalez Page 4 of 7
42
Dates (Month, Day, Year) From - To
Hours per Week Worked?
Position Title
Dates (Month, Day, Year) From - To
Hours per Week Worked?
Duties Performed
Run Monthly Sales Reports, Implement, keep under systematic review customer loyalty programs, Event
coordinator, Product Knowledge seminars for sales staff and customers. Monitor and track security
standards, policies, and procedures.
2nd
Volunteer Work?
Yes No
Employer's Name and Address
Monument Impact 2699 Monument Blvd, Concord CA 94520
Duties Performed
Create, Implement, Monitor and review to ensure that Center programs including WIA (Work Force
Investment Act) guidelines are met, and performances are of adequate quality. Establish work schedules
and assign work to staff members. Confer with directors and production staff to discuss issues such as
deliverables, budgets, and policies. Develop ideas for programs and features that Career Development
department could produce. (Cal-Works Welfare to Work Program for Limited English Proficient
individuals)
3rd
December 2011- May 5 2014
50
Career Development Manager
2013
Romina P Gonzalez Page 5 of 7
43
Position Title
Upload a Resume
If "Other" was selected please explain
Volunteer Work?
Yes No
Employer's Name and Address
East Bay Works Once Stop Career Center 4071 Port Chicago Hwy #250, Concord, CA 94520
Duties Performed
Co-chair East Bay Works WIN Workforce Integration Network -Plan and schedule programming and event
coverage, based on broadcast length, time availability, and other factors, such as community need for
Spanish speaker Clients. Taught seminars on customer service and how to obtain and maintain a job.
Final Questions
How did you learn about this vacancy?
Other
. Do you have a Familial or Financial Relationship with a member of the Board of
Supervisors?
Yes No
If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship:
Do you have any financial relationships with the County such as grants, contracts, or other
economic relations?
Yes No
Co-Chair and Trainer
Donna P. Van Wert
Romina P Gonzalez Page 6 of 7
44
If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship:
Please Agree with the Following Statement
I understand that this form is a public document and is subject to the California Public
Records Act.
I Agree
Romina P Gonzalez Page 7 of 7
45
46
Print Form
Contra
Costa
County
For Office Use Only Date Received:
BOARDS, COMMITTEES, AND COMMISSIONS APPLICATION
MAIL OR DELIVER TO: Contra Costa County CLERK OF THE BOARD
651 PineStree� Rm.106 Martinez, Galifomia 94553-1292
PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT IN INK
(Each Position Requires a Separate Application)
BOARD, COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION NAME AND SEAT TITLE YOU ARE APPLYING FOR:
For Reviewers Use Only:
Accepted Rejected
lccc Workforc e Development Board ,_B_u_s-in_e_s_s/_E_c _o_no-m-ic_D_e_v_e _lo_p _m-en_t _C_o_m_m _it -te _e_,
PRINT EXACT NAME OF BOARD, COMMITTEE, OR COMMISSION PRINT EXACT SEAT NAME (if applicable)
1.Name:IMull er Rob ert Anthon y ===========================================!. (La st Name) (First Name) (Middle Nam e)
2.Address:-
3.Phones:
(No.) (Street)
N/A
(Home No.) (Work No.)
4.Email Address: -
(Apt.) (City)
(Cell No.)
5. EDUCATION: Check appropriate box if you possess one of th e following:
(State)
High School Diploma !El G.E.D. Certificate D California High School Profici ency Certificate D
(Zip Code)
G i ve Highest Grade or Educati onal Level Ach i eve d.,__ ____________________ .... Names of colleges I universities attended A)I 11 8)1 11 C)I 11 D)Other schools/ training completed: I I I
Date Degree Degree Course of Study I Major Units Completed Degree Awarded Type
I
I
I Course Studied
I
Yes No DO
Yes No DD
Yes No DD
Semester D D D Hours Completed
I I
THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
Awarded Quarter D DI D DI D DI Certificate Awarded: Yes No OD
I I I
A1b
47
6.PLEASE FILL OUT THE FOLLOWING SECTION COMPLETELY. List experience that relates to the qualifications needed to
serve on the local appointive body. Begin with your most recent experience. A resume or other supporting documentation
may be attached but it may not be used as a substitute for completing this section.
A)Dates (Month, Day, Year)From To
I12/1/2017I I Present I
Total: Yrs. Mos.
�I7Months I
Hrs. per week�. Volunteer
B)Dates (Month, Day, Year)From To
I12,1,2012 I I12,1,2017 I
Total: Yrs. Mos.
15 Years I IO Months I
□
Hrs. per week�. Volunteer D
C)Dates (Month, Day, Year)From To
CJCJ Total: Yrs. Mos.
geglunteer
D)Dates (Month, Day, Year)From To
CJCJ Total: Yrs. Mos.
□
QQlunteerD
Title Duties Performed
!Learning Manager I Manager of Learning & Development Department, including
Employer's Name and Address ten (10) Direct Reports. In charge of all Training and Procedural Shell Martinez Refinery issues for the site. Related tasks POBox711 include: CCHS Process Safety Martinez, CA 94553 Team, P-Tech Advisory Board Member, manage LMC Intern Processes, hiring events, job fairs, community outreach.
Title Duties Performed I Learning & Development Supervisor I Ran Production Mentor Program, in charge of all phases of Operator Training Program and of 2500 site Employer's Name and Address Operating Procedures. Worked Shell Martinez Refinery !with CCHS developing andPO Box 711 implementing Critical ProcedureMartinez, CA 94553 HAZOP Review Policies/Practices.Coordinated community events,Managed P-Tech Internships andOnboarding processes, P-TechAdvisory Board Member.
Title Duties Performed I I
Employer's Name and Address
Title Duties Performed I I
Employer's Name and Address
THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
48
7.How did you learn about this vacancy?
DCCC Homepage□ Walk-In □Newspaper Advertisement □District Supervisor IEJOther relc_o_l _le_a _g _u _e ______ _.
8.Do you have a Familial or Financial Relationship with a member of the Board of Supervisors? (Please see Board
Resolution no. 2011/55, attached): No ___IEI___ Yes__o_
If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: ..._ _________________ ----1.
9.Do you have any financial relationships with the County such as grants, contracts, or other economic relations?
No -1EI_ Yes_.D_
If Yes, please identify the nature of the relationship: t----------------------L
I CERTIFY that the statements made by me in this application are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and
belief, and are made in good faith. I acknowledge and understand that all information in this application is publically
accessible. I understand and agree that misstatements I omissions of material fact may cause forfeiture of my rights to serve
on a Board, Committee, or Commission in Contra Costa County.
Sign Name:
Important Information
1.This application is a public document and is subject to the California Public Records Act (CA Gov. Code §6 250-6270).
2.Send the completed paper application to the Office of the Clerk of the Board at: 651 Pine Street, Room 106, Martinez, CA 94553.
3.A resume or other relevant information may be submitted with this application.
4.All members are required to take the following training: 1) The Brown Act, 2) The Better Government Ordinance, and 3) Ethics Training.
5.Members of boards, rommissions, and committees may be required to: 1) file a Statement of Economic Interest Form also known as a Form700, and 2) complete the State Ethics Training Course as required by AB 1234.
6.Advisory body meetings may be held in various locations and some locations may not be accessible by public transportation.
7.Meeting dates and times are subject to change and may occur up to two days per month.
8.Some boards, committees, or commissions may assign members to subcommittees or work groups which may require an additionalrommitrnent of time.
THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
49
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for
Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted Resolution
no. 2011/55 on 2/08/2011 as follows:
IN THE MATTER OF ADOPTING A POLICY MAKING FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVJSORS INELIGIBLE
FOR APPOINTMENT TO BOARDS, COMMITTEES OR COMMISSIONS FOR WHICH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IS THE
APPOINTING AUTHORITY
WHEREAS the Board of Supervisors wishes to avoid the reality or appearance of improper influence or favoritism;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the following policy is hereby adopted:
I.SCOPE: This policy applies to appointments to any seats on hoards, committees or commissions for which the Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors is the appointing authority.
II.POLTCY: A person will not be eligible for appointment if he/she is related to a Board of Supervisors' Member in any of the following
relationships:
J. Mother, father, son, and daughter;
2.Brother, sister, grandmother, grandfather, grandson, and granddaughter;
3.Great-grandfather, great-grandmother, aunt, uncle, nephew, niece, great-grandson, and great-granddaughter;
4.First cousin;
5.Husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, stepson, and stepdaughter;
6.Sister-in-law (brother's spouse or spouse's sister), brother-in-law (sister's spouse or spouse's brother), spouse's grandmother,
spouse's grandfather, spouse's granddaughter, and spouse's grandson;
7.Registered domestic partner, pursuant to California Family Code section 297.
8.The relatives, as defined in 5 and 6 above, for a registered domestic partner.
9. Any person with whom a Board Member shares a financial interest as defined in the Political Reform Act (Gov't Code §87103,
Financial Interest), such as a business partner or business associate.
THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
50
To: Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
Re: Workforce Development Board of Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors,
It is my pleasure to write a letter in support of Robert Muller being appointed to the Workforce
Development Board of Contra Costa County.
While I am not personally acquainted with Mr. Muller, he comes highly recommended by Erin
Hallissy, External Relations Advisor for the Shell Martinez Refinery and member of the
Martinez Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors as well as Ann Notarangelo, External
Relations Manager for the Shell Martinez Refinery, both of whose opinions I value and trust.
According to Erin and Ann, Mr. Muller has been a valued employee of the Shell Oil Company
since 1987; he currently is the manager of the Leaming and Development Department and works
with recruiting, training and onboarding new operator hires and P-Tech interns. He has been on
the P-Tech Advisory Board at Los Medanos College since 2012.
I fully support the appointment of Robert Muller to the Workforce Development Board of Contra
Costa County and I am confident in his ability to contribute to the mission of promoting the local
workforce and supporting the economic vitality in the region.
Sincerely,
Julie Johnston
President & CEO Martinez Chamber of Commerce
Martinez Chamber of Commerce
603 Marina Vista Avenue
Martinez, CA 94553
www.martinezchamber.com 51
FAMILY AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE 6.
Meeting Date:02/25/2019
Subject:RECOMMENDATION FOR APPOINTMENTS TO THE COUNCIL ON
HOMELESSNESS
Submitted For: Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Department:Health Services
Referral No.:
Referral Name: Advisory Body Recruitment
Presenter: Jaime Jenett, Continuum of Care Planning and
Policy Manager; Joseph Mega, MPH, MD, Medical
Director-Health Care for the Homeless
Contact: Jaime Jenett
(925) 608-6700
Referral History:
On December 6, 2011 the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 2011/497 adopting policy
governing appointments to boards, committees, and commissions that are advisory to the Board of
Supervisors. Included in this resolution was a requirement that applications for at
large/countywide seats be reviewed by a Board of Supervisors committee.
Referral Update:
Please see the attached memo from the Council on Homelessness, which details their request to
fill the 6 current vacancies on the 18-member council. Attached is the proposed roster showing
city of residence for current and prospective members. Below is the current Council roster:
Name Start date End date Position
Alejandra Chamberlain 1-Jan-18 31-Dec-20 Educational and Vocational Services
Bradley R Lindblom 13-Mar-18 31-Dec-19 Public Safety Representative #2
Candace C Collier 13-Mar-18 31-Dec-20 Consumer/Consumer Advocate
Carolyn Foudy 1-Jan-19 31-Dec-20 Employment and Human Services
Representative
Dan Sawislak 13-Mar-18 31-Dec-20 Affordable Housing Director
Deanne M Pearn 13-Mar-18 31-Dec-20 Homeless Service Provider
Gabriel Lemus 13-Mar-18 31-Dec-20 Emergency Solutions Grant Rep.
Manjit Sappal 13-Mar-18 31-Dec-20 Public Safety Representative #1
Miguel Hidalgo-Barnes 13-Mar-18 31-Dec-20 Behavioral Health Representative
Patrice Guillory 13-Mar-18 31-Dec-19 Reentry Services Representative
Teri House 13-Mar-18 31-Dec-20 City Government Seat
Tracy Pullar 13-Mar-18 31-Dec-20 Veterans Administration Representative
Vacancy 1-Jan-19 1-Jan-21 CoC/ESG Program Grantee
Vacancy 1-Jan-19 1-Jan-21 Community Member
52
Vacancy 1-Jan-19 1-Jan-21 Employment and Human Services
Representative
Vacancy 1-Jan-19 1-Jan-21 Faith Community Representative
Vacancy 1-Jan-19 1-Jan-21 Health Care Representative
Vacancy 1-Jan-19 1-Jan-21 Public Housing Authority
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
RECOMMEND to the Board of Supervisors the following appointments to the Council on
Homelessness to terms ending on January 1, 2021:
Nominee Affiliation Seat District
Leslie Gleason Shelter, Inc.CoC/ESG Program Grantee All
Lindy Lavendar Pacheco Area Community Member IV
Sherry Lynn Peralta Employment and Human Services
Representative All
Doug Leich Multi-Faith Actdion
Coalition Faith Community Representative All
Manuel Arredondo La Clinica De La RazaHealth Care Representative All
Tony Ucciferri CCC Housing
Authority Public Housing Authority All
Attachments
HSD Recommendation Letter
Rubric for COH Applications
Applicant Roster 2019
Proposed COH Roster
53
54
55
2018 COH Application Assessment Form
Name of Candidate: Seat applying for:
Reviewer: Score: Recommended: Y/N
Known information:
Ranking Scale is 1 (Does not meet criteria/don’t know ) to 5 (Completely meets criteria )
Criteria Ranking Notes
Demonstrates a professional interest in, or personal commitment to addressing
and alleviating the impact of homelessness on the people of the County of
Contra Costa.
If Consumer Seat has a lived experience of homelessness (i.e., be homeless or
formerly homeless).
Likely to contribute unique expertise, opinions, and viewpoints on homeless
issues.
Knowledge of:
Principles and practices of project planning, monitoring, and evaluation.
Principles of effective team building and project management.
Standard organizational and management practices as applied to the
analysis and evaluation of programs, policies, and operational needs.
Principles and practices of working in multi -cultural, multi -ethnic
environments
Skill to:
Participate in planning, organizing, directing, coordinating, and
evaluating projects, events, or technical area s.
Participate in the development and administration of program goals,
objectives and procedures.
Provide effective leadership, build relationships, and utilize team
building skills
Organize and prioritize timelines and project schedules in an effective
and timely manner.
Analyze problems, identify alternative solutions, project consequences
of proposed actions and implement recommendations in support of
goals.
Work effectively under pressure, meet deadlines, and adjust to
changing priorities.
Communicate clearly and concisely, both orally and in writing.
56
2018 COH Application Assessment Form
Other criteria to consider:
Contribution of balance of gender, ethnic, cultural, and geographical representation on Council
Representation from organizations or agencies who serve various homeless subpopulations such as: persons with chronic
substance abuse issues, persons with serious mental illness, persons experiencing chronic homelessness, persons with
HIV/AIDS, veterans, families with children, unaccompanied youth, victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual
assault, and stalking, and seniors.
Balance of Government and Community Based Organizations represented
57
2019 COH Seat Applications
February 2019
Seat Name Agency City of Residence
1. Community Member Barth, Daniel Lives in Richmond Richmond
2. Community Member Buckingham, Louis Lives in Antioch Antioch
3. Community Member Buckley, Kimberli Works in Concord/works for Concord Library Concord
4. Community Member Cummings, June Works in Contra Costa Fairfield
5. Community Member Dandie, La’Tanya Janet Lives in Richmond Richmond
6. Community Member Dunson, Kyle Lives in Concord/works for BFHP Concord
7. Community Member Fockler, Henry Lives in Martinez Martinez
8. Community Member Gabaldon, Betty Lives in Walnut Creek Walnut Creek
9. Community Member Gardner, Nicole Lives in Antioch Antioch
10. Community Member Gaughan, Pete Lives in Concord Concord
11. Community Member Hasan, Michelle Lives in Antioch Antioch
12. Community Member Jackl, Felix Lives in Antioch/works in H.S. Antioch
13. Community Member Jones, Titania Lives in Concord Concord
14. Community Member Kain, Brenda Lives and works in Concord /works for city Concord
15. Community Member Lavender, Lindy Lives in Pacheco Pacheco
16. Community Member Mayes, Christa Lives in Crockett/program participant Crockett
17. Community Member Meyer, Susannah Lives in Brentwood/Works for Meals on
Wheels
Brentwood
18. Community Member Powers, DeVonn Lives in Concord Concord
19. Community Member Ramirez, Leonard Lives in Concord Concord
20. Community Member Roche-Greene, Dominique Lives/Works in Richmond /Works for City of
Richmond
Richmond
21. Community Member Wardley, Erma Lives in Pinole Pinole
22. Community Member Warner, Carry Lives in Concord Concord
23. Community Member Young, Patt Lives in Pittsburg Pittsburg
1. CoC/ESG Grantee Gleason, Susan (Leslie) Shelter, Inc. Oakland
2. CoC/ESG Grantee Ucciferri, Tony Housing Authority of County of Contra Costa Concord
1. EHSD Representative Lee, Lashanna Adult Protective Services Social Worker Dublin
2. EHSD Representative Peralta, Sherry Lynn Division Manager Hercules
58
2019 COH Seat Applications
February 2019
1. Faith Community
Representative
Kinney, Richard Apostle City Ministries San Pablo
2. Faith Community
Representative
Leich, Doug Multi -Faith ACTION Coalition Danville
3. Faith Community
Representative
Proctor, Vicki Extended Hands Ministry Antioch
4. Faith Community
Representative
Smith, Frances N/A Richmond
5. Faith Community
Representative
Wells, Robin Lafayette United Methodist Church Lafayette
1. Health Care Arredondo, Manuel La Clinica De La Raza
(LCSW, MPH)
El Cerrito
2. Health Care Blue, Richard CCRMC
(LVN)
Martinez
3. Health Care Lougee, Mariel Healthcare for the Homeless (M.D.) Oakland
4. Health Care May, Leslie Mental Health Commission (Masters in
Health Care admin)
Antioch
5. Health Care Noy, Mariana Contra Costa Health Services: CCRMC and
Clinics
(MSW)
San Leandro
6. Health Care Proctor, Vicki Brightstar Care
(CNA)
Antioch
7. Health Care Raulston, Erika Swords to Plowshares
(Nursing student)
Antioch
1. Public Housing Authority Smargiasso, Bruce Pittsburg Housing Authority Pittsburg
2. Public Housing Authority Ucciferri, Tony Housing Authority of County of Contra Costa Concord
1. Misc Green, Rodney Former Brookside Resident
59
ANNA ROTH , RN , MS, MPH
HEALTH SERVICES DIRECTOR
LAVONNA M ARTIN, MPH, MPA
HEALTH , HOUSING AND HOMLESS SERVICES
DIRECTOR
CONTRA COSTA
HEALTH, HOUSING AND
HOMELES S SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
2400 Bisso Lane, D2
Concord, California
94520
PH (925) 608-6700
FAX (925) 608-6741
Contra Costa Behavorial Health • Contra Costa Emergency Medical Services • Contra Costa Environmental Health • Contra Costa Health Plan • Contra Costa Hazardous Materials •
Contra Costa Public Health • Contra Costa Regional Medical Center • Contra Costa Health Centers • Health, Housing and Homeless Services
Council on Homelessness Roster 2019
The Contra Costa Council on Homelessness (Council on Homelessness) is appointed by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors to
assist and provide guidance in the development and implementation of long range planning and policy formulation that addresse s
homeless issues in Contra Costa County. The Council on Homelessness provides a f orum for communication and coordination of the
County’s Strategic Plan to End Homelessness; educate the community on homeless issues, allocate federal HUD Homeless Assistan ce
funding to providers, and advocate on federal, state and local policy issues affe cting people who are homeless or at-risk of homelessness.
Council on Homelessness members are appointed and serve two year terms.
Seat Name Appointee Affiliation City of
Residence
Term
Expiration
1. Affordable Housing
Developer
Dan Sawislak Executive Director,
Resources for Community Development
Berkeley 12/31/20
2. Behavioral Health
Representative
Miguel Hidalgo-Barnes,
PsyD
Program Manger, Hume Center Richmond 12/31/20
3. City Government Seat Teri House CDBG Consultant, City of Antioch Pittsburg 12/31/20
4. CoC/ESG Program
Grantee
Leslie Gleason Director of Programs, Shelter, Inc. Oakland 12/31/21
5. Community Member Seat Lindy Lavender Community Affairs Representative,
Central San
Pacheco 12/31/21
6. Consumer/Consumer
Advocate
Candace Collier Former Consumer,
Contra Costa Health Services
Antioch 12/31/20
7. Education and Vocational
Services Representative
Alejandra Chamberlain Homeless Education Liaison, Contra Costa
Office of Education
Pleasant
Hill 12/31/20
8. Emergency Solutions
Grants Representative
Gabriel Lemus Contra Costa Department of Conservation
and Development
Martinez 12/31/20
9.
Employment and Human
Services (EHSD)
Representative
Sherry Lynn Peralta Program Director, Employment and Human
Services Department
Hercules
12/31/21
10. Faith Community
Representative
Doug Leich Multi -Faith ACTION Coalition Danville 12/31/21
11. Health Care
Representative
Manuel Arredondo,
LCSW, MPH
Supervisor of Integrated Behavioral Health,
La Clinica De La Raza
El Cerrito 12/31/21
12. Homeless Service Provider Deanne Pearn Executive Director, Contra Costa Interfaith
Housing
Moraga 12/31/20
13. Public Housing Authority Tony Ucciferri Special Assistant to the Executive Director,
Housing Authority of County of Contra Costa
Concord 12/31/21
14. Public Safety
Representative #1
Bradley Lindblom Sergeant, San Pablo Police Department San Pablo 12/31/19
15. Public Safety
Representative #2
Manjit Sappal Chief, Martinez Police Department Martinez 12/31/20
16. Reentry Services
Representative
Patrice Guillory Network Manager,
Healthright 360
Antioch 12/31/19
17. Veterans Administration
Representative
Tracy Pullar Homeless Program Manger, U.S. Department
of Veterans Affairs
Martinez 12/31/20
Rev. 12.14.18
60
FAMILY AND HUMAN SERVICES
COMMITTEE 7.
Meeting Date:02/25/2019
Subject:Update on Human Trafficking, Commercially Sexually Exploited Children &
Family Justice Centers
Submitted For: Kathy Gallagher, Employment & Human Services Director
Department:Employment & Human Services
Referral No.: FHS #111
Referral Name: Human Trafficking, Commercially Sexually Exploited Children & Family
Justice Centers
Presenter: Devorah Levine, Asst. EHS Director Contact: Devorah Levine 925
608-4890
Referral History:
On January 6, 2015, the Board approved referring oversight to the Family and Human Services
Committee (FHS) on the Family Justice Centers and Commercially Sexually Exploited Children
initiatives. This became FHS Referral No. 111.
On June 8, 2015, November 14, 2016, and February 20, 2018, FHS received and approved annual
reports from the Employment and Human Services Department on the Zero Tolerance for
Domestic Violence Initiative, Human Trafficking, Commercially Sexually Exploited Children,
and the Family Justice Centers.
Referral Update:
Please see the attached report as submitted by the Employment and Human Services Department.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
ACCEPT report from the Employment and Human Services Department on efforts to intervene in
and prevent human trafficking and the commercial sexual exploitation of children, and on the
operation of Children & Family Justice Centers.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
There is no fiscal impact.
Attachments
Staff Report on Human Trafficking, Commercially Sexually Exploited Children & Family Justice Centers
Powerpoint Presentation_Human Trafficking and Commercially Sexually Exploited Children & Family Justice
61
Powerpoint Presentation_Human Trafficking and Commercially Sexually Exploited Children & Family Justice
Centers
62
1
To: Family and Human Services Committee, Contra Costa
County Board of Supervisors Date: February 25, 2019
From: Devorah Levine, Assistant Director, Employment and Human Services Department
Subject: Update on Human Trafficking, Commercially Sexually Exploited Children & Family
Justice Centers
Human Trafficking in Contra Costa County: A Snapshot
Data on Prevalence
Human trafficking can take many forms, but is generally categorized as either sex trafficking or
labor trafficking. Sex trafficking is defined as the use of force, fraud, or coercion to perform a
commercial sex act. Labor trafficking is a form of severe exploitation where individuals are
threatened or otherwise compelled into debt bondage or other forced labor for little or no pay.
Both sex and labor trafficking happen in Contra Costa County and are not mutually
exclusive—a survivor can be subjected to both sex and labor exploitation.
By nature, human trafficking is a hidden crime and is often under reported, especially labor
trafficking reports (labor trafficking can be more difficult to identify than sex trafficking).
However, six Contra Costa agencies have consistently collected data over the last several years
through a specialized human trafficking services grant, providing an important snapshot.1 This
data was collected over a six month period between July 1 and December 31, 2018 and
represents 35 new survivors of human trafficking who were identified and served during this
time period.
1 These agencies include STAND! for Families Free of Violence, Community Violence Solutions, Calli House,
Bay Area Legal Aid and Rainbow Community Center.
M E M O R A N D U M
Kathy Gallagher, Director
40 Douglas Drive, Martinez, CA 94553 | (925) 608.4800 | Fax (925) 313.9748 | www.ehsd.org
63
2
83%
14%
3%
Victims Served by Type of Trafficking,
July -December 2018
sex trafficking victims
served
labor trafficking victims
served
unknown type of
trafficking victims served
20%
80%
Victims Served by Citizenship,
July -December 2018
foreign national
victims served
US citizen victims
served
64
3
Data on human trafficking is hard to come by, and is often not reliable, as agencies and
systems often are not tracking clients by trafficking specifically. Clients may first be identified
and tracked as experiencing other forms of violence (such as domestic violence, sexual assault
or economic abuse). Additionally, agencies that are identifying trafficking clients, may not be
collecting details on the type or setting of trafficking. The data represented here does not define
the totality of trafficking in Contra Costa County. In fact, it is likely under-representative of the
amount of trafficking occurring, especially labor trafficking.
Human Trafficking Intervention and Prevention Efforts
Human Trafficking Coalition
The Alliance to End Abuse, a robust partnership and initiative of the Board of Supervisors,
continues to lead and expand the Contra Costa Human Trafficking Coalition by uniting a
89%
11%
Victims Served by Sex,
July -December 2018
Female
Male
91%
9%
Victims Served by Age,
July -December 2018
Adult
Minor
65
4
diverse, culturally relevant group of community agencies, law enforcement, and social services
agencies. The Coalition is made up of over 30 partner agencies including a wide range of
service providers, community based organizations, law enforcement, the District Attorney’s
Office and other local and national governmental departments. As a collaboration of agencies,
the Coalition’s goals include; conducting public awareness activities; providing training,
technical assistance and a forum to share best practices; establishing policies and protocols;
and creating a coordinated system of care. Coalition meetings occur quarterly and include a
training component, highlighting the work of one partner agency, and the sharing of
resources/networking.
The Coalition, in collaboration with the Family Justice Centers, continue to run the human
trafficking multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) with a focus on high risk and complex human
trafficking cases. This multidisciplinary team includes multiple agencies (law enforcement,
District Attorney’s office, service providers, and culturally responsive agencies) with a focus
on helping survivors meet their personal and family goals. Agencies have reported increased
collaboration, increased access to services for survivors and increased relationships built across
systems. The human trafficking MDT continues to be the flagship of the Human Trafficking
Coalition.
The Contra Costa County Human Trafficking Coalition continues to strengthen its outreach
and awareness efforts. In January 2018, the Coalition once again partnered with the District
Attorney's office to launch a human trafficking awareness campaign. The campaign focused on
labor trafficking, highlighting the restaurant, cleaning service and hotel/motel industries.
Awareness ads ran on buses throughout the County including WestCat, Tri-Delta Transit and
County Connection. In addition to the awareness campaign, the Coalition hosted two
documentary screenings of “Me Facing Life: Cyntoia’s Story” (a documentary that highlights
the story of a survivor of human trafficking) and put on several human trafficking trainings in
collaboration with the Family Justice Center.
Additional Coalition led outreach and awareness projects include the Red Sand Project and
Community Awareness Days. The Coalition has now successfully led multiple “Red Sand
Project” events in Contra Costa, including two successful events at the Antioch Community
Center. The Red Sand Project is an interactive art exhibit in which volunteers spread red sand
in sidewalk cracks to raise awareness about survivors of human trafficking who have “slipped
through the cracks.” The Coalition has also continued its work around “community awareness
days”, in which volunteers go to local businesses and distribute “Learn the Signs” posters.
These events have triggered multiple cities to pass human trafficking related resolutions such
as Antioch’s recent decision to repeal its 2007 massage business ordinance, replacing it with a
revised one that requires massage businesses to register with the Antioch Police Department
rather than obtain city permits, as previously required. This will help control the amount of
illegitimate parlors that often traffic individuals.
Lastly, the Coalition launched a Train the Trainer program in 2018 to increase the amount of
human trafficking trainings happening county-wide. In an attempt to streamline accurate, clear
and unified information on human trafficking and trauma informed care, The Alliance
developed a Human Trafficking 101 and Trauma 101 curriculum. In spring of 2018, The
66
5
Alliance accepted its first train the trainer cohort. These individuals focus on either human
trafficking or trauma, and complete the yearlong program in order to become Alliance certified
trainers - able to train their own agencies, and respond to community requests for training. This
cohort has completed over 50 hours of instructional time and about half of the cohort have now
led or co-led human trafficking and trauma trainings throughout the County. This program has
increased the capacity to provide trainings on human trafficking. A second train the trainer
cohort will launch in 2019.
Office of Victims of Crime –Human Trafficking Grants
The Alliance continues to manage a Comprehensive Services for Victims of Human
Trafficking Grant through the Office of Victims of Crime (Department of Justice). This grant,
which the Alliance has managed since 2014, has four main goals: increase the number of
trafficking victims served; increase the number of services provided to human trafficking
victims; increase the number of professionals trained in human trafficking identification and
serving victims; and increase cross-agency collaboration to enhance and expand services for
victims of human trafficking.
Grant partners include Community Violence Solutions, STAND! for Families Free of
Violence, Bay Area Legal Aid, Rainbow Community Center and Calli House. These agencies
work to provide wrap-around services to all victims of human trafficking as well as increase
training and outreach. The Alliance has supported the coordination of services, data collection,
data analysis and evaluation of programming for this grant.
1 1 5 6 9 10
16 17 21 22 22 23 24 26 29
38
66
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Units of ServiceType of Service
Types of Services Provided,
July -December 2018
67
6
Grant partners provided 336 units of service to survivors of human trafficking from July –
December, 2018. The most frequent service recorded was “ongoing case management”
followed by “crisis intervention or 24 hour hotline support.” Additionally, social service
advocacy, client orientation and client intake remain some of the top services provided.
In addition to service provision, grant partners provide trainings across the County on human
trafficking. Grant partners trained 286 individuals over 14 separate training events, from July –
December, 2018. The majority of those trained were schools and educational institutions
(60%), followed by social service providers (8%) and mental health/substance abuse providers
(8%). Community Violence Solutions and Rainbow Community Center continue to lead
training and outreach efforts for this grant.
In October 2018 the Alliance, in partnership with the District Attorney’s Office, was awarded
the Enhanced Collaborative Model Task Force to Combat Human Trafficking grant by the
Office of Victims of Crime. This three-year grant is focused on creating and supporting a
human trafficking task force that is co-led by both law enforcement and victim service
providers – working to increase services for survivors and strengthen investigations. The
Contra Costa Human Trafficking Task Force will launch in 2019 and will be a collaboration of
local, state and federal law enforcement agencies working with victim service organizations to
1) better identify all types of human trafficking victims; 2) enhance investigation and
prosecution of all types of human trafficking; 3) address the individualized needs of all
identified human trafficking victims by linking them to comprehensive services; 4) enhance
awareness of human trafficking among law enforcement and service providers, as well as
21
29
29
36
43
43
43
50
57
79
86
86
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Local/Regional Dimensions of Human Trafficking
Global Dimensions of Human Trafficking
Legal Assistance for Human Trafficking Victims
Techniques for Screening/Interviewing Human…
Collaboration & Building Mutidisiplinary Relationships
Culturally & Linguistically Appropriate Services for…
Health & Trauma Consequences of Human Trafficking
Services Available for Victims of Human Trafficking
Procedures for Reporting Human Trafficking Victims
Identification of Human Trafficking Victims
Definition of Human Trafficking
Risk Factors for Human Trafficking
Percentage of Time Topic was CoveredTopicPercentage of Time a Topic was Covered in Training,
July -December 2018
68
7
within the broader Contra Costa community; and 5) improve trauma-informed practices for
human trafficking victims within law enforcement and victim service providers. The Task
Force will further enhance the work of the Contra Costa Human Trafficking Coalition and
strengthen trafficking investigations and prosecution. In preparation for development of this
Task Force the District Attorney’s office created its first Human Trafficking Unit.
Responding to Commercially Sexually Exploited Children/Youth (CSEC/Y) involved with
Children and Family Services (CFS)
Federal and State regulations and laws require county child welfare agencies to implement
policies and procedures for commercially sexually exploited children and youth. These
regulations include: identification, documentation, finding appropriate services and providing
training.
The Contra Costa County Commercially Sexually Exploited Children (CSEC) Program is now
entering its fifth year of implementation. Contra Costa County Children & Family Services
(CFS) opted into the California state wide CSEC Program at its inception. Components of the
program include training, screening, identification, service provision as well as protocols and
policies. Through this program, the Contra Costa County CSEC Interagency Protocol was
updated in 2018, and protocol partners were asked to recommit.
The CSEC Interagency Protocol is utilized to support systemic change both across and within
mandated partner agencies, in support of commercially sexually exploited and at-risk children,
youth and their families. The Protocol provides a framework for all CSEC Interagency
Protocol agency members to standardize best practices in the areas of: 1) identification and
assessment, 2) providing services and resources, 3) training, and 4) documentation. The
Protocol provides general guidance and reference for existing and new CSEC Interagency
Steering Committee members. The indicators of an effective inter-agency protocol include the
following actions between agency stakeholders:
standardized best practices embedded into written inter-agency protocols;
open and continuing dialog;
regular attendance at quarterly CSEC interagency Steering Committee meetings;
an increase in CSEC MDTs;
an increase in inter-agency cross trainings (including CSEC 101, trauma-informed,
harm reduction strategies);
an increase in available CSEC-specific resources;
an increase in discussions regarding shared funding and data sharing;
an increase in collaborative efforts for at-risk and exploited children, youth, and their
families, that are timely and effective;
improved countywide CSEC-related outcomes.
In tandem to the updated protocol, the Contra Costa County CSEC Steering Committee re-
launched in 2018 to better uphold, execute and strengthen what the protocol lays out. Over 20
agencies have met three different times to further deepen relationships and learning through the
CSEC Steering Committee.
69
8
As a part of the CSEC program, CFS keeps data on all CSE youth in their care. Below is a
snapshot of the children and youth who are alleged or suspected victims, or at risk of,
commercial sexual exploitation (CSE) within the child welfare system. California Department
of Social Services requires that counties properly document within the state case management
system called Child Welfare Services/Case Management System (CWS/CMS) the children and
youth who are alleged or suspected victims or at risk of commercial sexual exploitation (CSE).
Data is entered as follows (data below is from FY2017-2018):
Total number of calls to the hotline/intake alleging that a child/youth is a victim of CSE
which resulted in a referral requiring further investigation: 157
Total number of CSE victims identified: 140
o Number of children/youth identified as at-risk of CSE: 109
o Number of identified victims of CSE prior to entering foster care: 13
o Number of identified victims of CSE in an open case not in foster care
(Voluntary Services): 1
o Number of identified victims of CSE in an open case while in foster care: 10
o Number of identified victims of CSE while Absent Without Leave (AWOL): 7
CFS serves victims of CSE in a variety of ways including service linkage, case coordination,
consultation, and outreach/education. This past fiscal year, CSEC within Child Welfare were
served through a layered approach to services. Intensive and comprehensive case management,
counseling, and outreach programs within the school districts are provided by Catholic
Charities of the East Bay (via Differential Response Path II and After Care) and Community
Violence Solutions (concurrent with the open CFS case plan). CSEC case management
services support the youth with safety planning, substance abuse services, housing, educational
goals, etc. The CSEC case managers also visit Juvenile Hall and provide one-on-one support
for those placed in the GIM (Girls in Motion) program. All of the programs follow a model
78%
9%
7%
5%
1%
Identified CSE or Potential CSE Victims within
CFS, FY2017-2018
At-risk of CSE
CSE prior to entering
foster care
CSE in an open case
while in foster care
CSE while Absent
Without Leave (AWOL)
70
9
that is victim centered, trauma-informed, and strength based. Service providers also advocate
for treatment that is culturally, linguistically, and age appropriate for the CSE child or youth.
The following is a list of CFS contracted services within Contra Costa County that currently
support CSEC:
Catholic Charities of the East Bay:
Clinical case management for preventative at-risk CSEC identified cases (pre- and post-
CFS involvement)
Counseling from Master’s level clinicians
Community Violence Solutions:
Case management services and direct services (concurrent and post-CFS involvement)
Drop in Center (located in two regions of the county)
Group counseling support for youths
School outreach programming throughout the county
Humanitarian bags (including personal hygiene products, school supplies)
24/7 Crisis Line
CSEC Coordinator:
Coordinate efforts of CFS CSEC/Y Community Liaisons
Serve as a Liaison with Human Trafficking Coalition and other Human Trafficking
staff
Monitor the CSEC Interagency Protocol
Ensure and manage data tracking
CSEC Liaison:
Support for, and liaison with, CFS social workers
Support for CSE child/youth
Contra Costa County Community College District:
Training for foster parents throughout the county
Challenges and Needs in Addressing Human Trafficking
While incredible progress has been made on identifying and serving victims of human
trafficking, significant barriers remain.
One of the main challenges is identification of, and training on, labor trafficking. While
awareness on sex trafficking has increased, understanding on labor trafficking has not
continued at the same pace. More resources and attention is needed to focus on this
complicated issue including looking at the overlap with tax evasion and fraud, wage and hour
violations, building code inspections, health inspections, etc. Highlighting and bringing in
efforts that increase the level of training, awareness, and funding to address promising
71
10
practices related to labor trafficking is needed. This includes special attention to the hospitality
industry, restaurants, salons, and other industries known to have large numbers of trafficked
workers.
Another ongoing challenge is consistent, cross-agency data collection on human trafficking.
This data is needed to be able to accurately understand trends, gaps and emerging needs. A key
gap in our ability to respond to human trafficking as a County has to do with a lack of
coordinated, integrated and reliable data. Many agencies and systems are not collecting the
data that is needed, and if they are, they are unable to share or coordinate data in a way that
allows us to aggregate it or compare it.
Recognizing the need for robust data and evaluation, the Alliance contracted with external
evaluators in early 2018 to develop a pilot database that allows Alliance human trafficking
grant partner agencies to enter human trafficking data within a single system. The hope is that
eventually this database will be expanded beyond human trafficking in years to come. In this
pilot phase human trafficking data is used for grant reports and County-wide human trafficking
briefs. The database integrates a number of agency and non-profit-sourced quantitative data. In
addition to providing a baseline, the database eventually will also provide statistics and other
data required for the development of grant proposals, and the procurement of other funding
streams. The human trafficking database was launched in August of 2018 and is in the
beginning phases of testing.
While there is great promise for this new database, ongoing tracking of this issue, and all issues
of interpersonal violence, are difficult to track across the County consistently. Doing so
requires pulling information and data from systems over which the Alliance has little control or
authority. Many of the data points necessary to answer questions related to the impact violence
intervention and prevention efforts are either not currently collected, or if they are, they are not
easily extracted. It is important to identify, extract and coordinate those data elements that are
critical for the Alliance to understand and help inform strategies to addressing human
trafficking, as well as where to invest limited resources.
Additional challenges remain related to flexible and timely housing and shelter options,
language capacity, and culturally relevant and responsive services for victims.
The Family Justice Center
The Family Justice Center (FJC) continues to be a one-stop center for families affected by
domestic violence, sexual assault, elder abuse, child abuse, and human trafficking. The Family
Justice Center coordinates with on-site partners so clients can get safer sooner. The Alliance
continues to support the development of the FJC and County departments remain essential
partners among many, supporting residents who are accessing the centers.
In 2018, the Family Justice Centers provided services to 3,074 individuals who experienced
interpersonal violence (1,865 clients from central center and 1,210 clients from west center).
Those services impacted an additional 2,368 children living with these clients. FJC is able to
provide comprehensive and integrated services by working together with their 48 on-site
partners. In 2018 the FJC welcomed 6 new partner agencies including Early Childhood Mental
72
11
Health, International Rescue Committee and Lao Family Community Center. Below is a
snapshot of FJC clients:
68%
13%
8%7%
3%2%
70%
7%10%9%
1%3%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Domestic
violence
Sexual assault Child abuse Elder abuse Stalking Human
trafficking
Type of Violence Clients Experienced, 2018
West Center Central Center
52%
22%
17%
8%
4%
2%1%
Race/Ethnicity of Clients, 2018
Hispanic
White
Black/African American
Asian
Other
73
12
Additional information about FJC clients in 2018:
98% are worked about safety
80% have prior history with domestic violence, the child welfare system, adult
protective serves, restraining orders or law enforcement
64% earn less than $2,000 per month
60% have children
30% speak Spanish as a primary language
22% are referred by law enforcement
21% have no medical insurance
20% lack immigration status
18% are disabled
16% are men
15% are referred by friends or family
13% live with a substance abuser
135 are over 60 years old
6% have no place to stay tonight
Coordinate Integrated Services
FJC’s services are organized into two groups: crisis support and long term safety. Crisis
support services are coordinated through FJC Navigators, who connect clients to the services
they need to leave their abusive situations or deal with their present crisis. After dealing with
crisis, FJC staff offer services to get clients to long term safety and independence by working
on four domains: health, education and training, wealth and community. Below are highlights
from FJC’s work to integrate services in 2018:
21%
17%
10%
6%
6%
5%
Top Client Needs, 2018
Advocacy (Comprehensive Services)Family Law/Court Assistance
Restraining Order Law Enforcement
Mental Health Victim Services
74
13
The number of IPV clients served (3,074) increased by close to 26%, compared to the
previous one-year period.
FJC expanded their partnerships by adding more (6 new partners) on and off site
partners.
Out of the 566 clients who filled out the 2018 client survey, 98% were satisfied with the
services, 99% felt safe and comfortable at the FJC, and 98% would recommend the FJC
to a friend in need.
Project Highlights
Lawyers for Family Justice
A few years ago the FJC launched a legal incubator project where attorneys can gain
experience in the practice of law and how to manage a law practice while providing
pro-bono and low bono services to clients of the FJC. This program was an attempt to
better meet clients’ legal needs. Between January 2018 and December 2018 the lawyers
for family justice program provided pro bono legal services to 469 clients of the Family
Justice Center. These services were provided by 10 attorneys working in the Lawyers
for Family Justice Program. The most frequent legal advice and assistance given was
(in order); child custody; divorce; restraining orders and; immigration.
Noteworthy statistics on the Lawyers for Family Justice Center:
1,440 hours of pro-bono office hours
35 low bono representation cases
13 pro bono representation cases
6 bilingual attorneys
5 legal trainings for incubator attorneys
5 ex parte child custody orders filed
3 new attorneys in 2018
2 sexual assault civil suit consults
Community Restorative Justice Solutions
The FJC in partnership with several other agencies launched a restorative justice
program in 2018 as a two-year pilot, funded through a CalOES Victim Services
Innovation grant. The five program partners (in addition to FJC) include Community
Violence Solutions, Latina Center, Rainbow Community Center, RYSE Youth Center
and Narika. Community Restorative Justice Solutions fosters restorative justice
solutions for survivors, those who have harmed, their families and communities through
Circle and Family Group Conferencing. The restorative justice process creates a space
to listen and respond to the needs of the person harmed, the person who did harm, their
children, families, and their communities; to encourage accountability through personal
reflection and collaborative planning; to integrate the person causing harm into the
community; to empower families to address violence and abuse; and to create caring
climates that support healthy families and communities.
75
14
Capacity Building and Partnership Support
FJC’s capacity building and partnership support strategy includes hosting monthly
multidisciplinary team (MDT) case reviews of high danger domestic violence and human
trafficking cases and law enforcement training coordination. In addition, through the Family
Justice Institute, FJC offers trainings and workshops to educate service providers and the
public about issues related to IPV. Below are highlights from FJC’s work in capacity building
and partnership:
Of the 45 partners who completed partner surveys in 2018, 86% stated that they could
connect clients to more resources, compared to 84% who shared that view in 2017 and
77% who shared that view in 2016.
95% of partners who completed the partner survey in 2018 believed that it was easy to
work with FJC navigators to meet the needs of their clients; and 93% of respondents
felt FJC was responsive to their needs and requests
Between January 2018 and November 2018 FJC convened 10 domestic violence
multidisciplinary team meetings with 133 partners to discuss high risk domestic
violence cases. 30 cases were nominated and discussed. Of the reviewed cases, 97% of
victims were women, 63% had children and 20% were still married to their abusers.
63% of victims nominated were connected with a law enforcement agency; 25 of the
victims nominated were connected to 56 partner agencies.
In 2018 the Family Justice Institute offered 26 workshops and/or trainings, attended by
850 individuals. FJC developed and recruited trainers for these workshops and trainings
in response to training needs identified by partners. The topics include Interpersonal
Violence 101, Trauma 101 and Human Trafficking 101.
Community Building
FJC strives to support resident-centered and community-based prevention strategies. They
aim to engage residents and foster resident ownership of the Family Justice Center, build
on community assets, and improve connections among residents, public agencies and non-
profit organizations. FJC’s Community Fellowship Program has advanced this approach,
engaging local resident survivors with leadership development training and opportunities
through a 4-month long stipend. In turn, these Community Fellows have brought
community input and survivor insight to FJC’s work. They have been involved in every
facet of FJC’s work and have made significant contributions.
FJC also hosts monthly Project Connect gatherings, intended to build community, offer
learning opportunities and share stories. 202 individuals, many of them current or former
clients, came together for Project Connect events in 2018.
Resources:
Family Justice Center 2018 Report
Contra Costa Human Trafficking Coalition
Alliance to End Abuse
76
Update on Human Trafficking and Commercially Sexually
Exploited Children & Family Justice Centers
Family and Human Services Committee, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
Devorah Levine Alex Madsen
Assistant Director Division Manager
Employment & Human Services Employment & Human Services
Policy & Planning Division The Alliance to End Abuse
February 25, 2019
77
130+ new trafficking cases identified
146+ trafficking survivors served
Served by Grant Partners, January –December 2018
Source: Contra Costa OVC Comprehensive Service for Victims of Human Trafficking Grant78
Survivors of human trafficking identified by year
Source: Contra Costa OVC Comprehensive Service for Victims of Human Trafficking Grant
131
113
202
130
153 146
216
146
0
50
100
150
200
250
2015 2016 2017 2018
New trafficking cases identified Total trafficking survivors served
79
Survivors of human trafficking identified by type of
trafficking & year
Source: Contra Costa OVC Comprehensive Service for Victims of Human Trafficking Grant
106
87
78
71
2
19
102
50
19
3
16
8
4 4 6
1
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2015 2016 2017 2018
sex unknown labor sex and labor
80
109+ at risk youth
31+
Youth identified by CFS in one year (FY2017-2018)
exploited youth before, during
or after care
81
CSEC identified by CFS by year
Source: Contra Costa CFS CSEC Program Report
85
109
37
31
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
FY2016-2017 FY2017-2018
at risk exploited before, during or after care
82
83
84
Looking Forward
•Human Trafficking Task Force
•Focus on prevention
•Identification of, and services for, labor trafficking survivors
•Increase data & evaluation capacity
85
86
•(embed video) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBhh3tmOja4
87
3,074 +
clients served in 2018
Source: FJC 2018 Report 88
Source: FJC 2018 Report 89
FJC clients served in 2018, by type of violence experienced
Source: FJC 2018 Report
68%
13%
8%7%
3%2%
70%
7%
10%9%
1%3%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Domestic
violence
Sexual assault Child abuse Elder abuse Stalking Human
trafficking
West Center Central Center
90
FJC Client Survey Data 2018
Source: FJC Client Survey Analysis 91
•Center to be develop in East County (opening May 2019)
•Will continue to expand partners, services and trainings
•New projects including: Restorative Justice circles, Prevention
Blueprint, Collaborative Responses to Domestic Violence Prevention
Looking Ahead
92
Devorah Levine Alex Madsen
Assistant Director Division Manager
Employment & Human Services Employment & Human Services
Policy & Planning Division The Alliance to End Abuse
925-608-4890 925-608-4971
dlevine@ehsd.cccounty.us amadsen@ehsd.cccounty.us
93
FAMILY AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE 8.
Meeting Date:02/25/2019
Subject:2017-2027 Comprehensive County Child Care Needs Assessment
Submitted For: David Twa, County Administrator
Department:County Administrator
Referral No.: FHS #81
Referral Name: Local Child Care & Development Planning Council Activities Update
Presenter: Susan Jeong, CC Office of Education Contact: Susan Jeong (925) 942-3413
Referral History:
The California Department of Education, Early Education and Support Division, requires every
county to develop a child care needs assessment of early education and before-and after-school
programs for their jurisdictions every five (5) years. The Child Care Planning Council of Contra
Costa County has prepared the attached report not only to satisfy this requirement, but also to
help inform child care policies and priorities based on the current status of child care in the
County. Issues discussed in this report include:
Current supply of licensed child care within Contra Costa County
Demand for child care by age for County residents ages 0-12
Magnitude and location of gaps in child care supply
Cost of child care for families
Sources of child care subsidy assistance
Estimates of the level of need for child care among special populations, such as children
with disabilities and non-English speakers
Referral Update:
Please see the attached 2017-2027 Comprehensive County Child Care Needs Assessment
prepared by Brion Economics, Inc., on behalf of the Contra Costa County Local Planning and
Advisory Council for Early Care and Education (LPC), First 5 Contra Costa, Contra Costa
County Office of Education and Contra Costa County Conservation and Development Department.
The needs assessment requires Board of Supervisors approval and is provided to this Committee
for preliminary review and discussion. The previous study was completed in 2012.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
RECOMMEND to the Board of Supervisors approval of the 2017-2027 Comprehensive County
Child Care Needs Assessment prepared by Brion Economics, Inc., on behalf of Contra Costa
County Local Planning and Advisory Council for Early Care and Education.
94
Attachments
2017 10-Year Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment
95
707.494.6648 | joanne@brionecon.com | www.brionecon.com
Final Report
Contra Costa County
Comprehensive Countywide
Child Care Needs Assessment –
2017 to 2027
Prepared for
Contra Costa County Local Planning and Advisory Council for Early Care and Education (LPC),
First 5 Contra Costa,
Contra Costa County Office of Education and Contra Costa County Conservation and
Development Department
Prepared by
Brion Economics, Inc., with Davis Consultant Network and Nilsson Consulting
August 2018
96
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc i
Table of Contents
Page
1. Introduction and Findings 1
Summary of Findings 1
Acknowledgements 5
2. Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027 6
Background and Methodology 6
Summary of Supply and Demand 8
3. State Mandated Needs Assessment 22
4. Child Care Provider Survey Findings 37
Summary of Key Findings 37
Introduction 37
Sample 38
Child Care Center Findings 40
Family Child Care Provider Findings 47
5. Stakeholder Survey 53
Introduction 53
Summary of Key Findings 53
Sample and Method 53
Stakeholder Survey Findings by Sector 54
Potential Sites for Child Care Facilities 58
Identified Potential New Child Care Locations 61
Contributors 63
97
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report ii
Additional City Data 64
Appendix A: Tables for Needs Assessment by City and County 65
Appendix B: Needs Assessment Form 130
Appendix C: Center Director Survey and Family Child Care Provider Survey Instrument,
in English and Spanish 133
Appendix D: Stakeholder Survey 190
List of Tables
Page
Table 2‐1 Population Growth by City 2017 and 2027 from ABAG 11
Table 2‐2 Population by Age Group by City 2017 and 2027 12
Table 2‐3 Child Care Demand Summary Table for 2017 and 2027 13
Table 2‐4 Child Care Supply Summary Table for 2017 ‐ Total Number of Spaces by
Age 14
Table 2‐5 Total Infant Supply and Demand by City ‐ 2017 15
Table 2‐6 Total Preschool Supply and Demand by City ‐ 2017 16
Table 2‐7 Total School Age Supply and Demand by City ‐ 2017 17
Table 2‐8 Total Supply and Demand by City for Children 0 to 12 Years Old ‐ 2017 18
Table 2‐9 Number and Type of Child Care Providers by City in 2017 19
Table 2‐10 Summary of Supply and Demand of Child Care by Age Group and City:
2017 20
Table 2‐11 Summary of Supply and Demand for Childcare by Age Group and by
City: 2027 21
Table 3‐1 Children by Age, 0‐12 Years Old for 2017 23
Table 3‐2 Children Ages 0‐12 Years by Race/Ethnicity for 2017 24
98
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report iii
Table 3‐3 Children in Grades K‐12 by Language Spoken (Excluding English) for
2016‐17 24
Table 3‐4 Children with and IFSP and IEP by Age Group for 2017 25
Table 3‐5 Children in Child Protective Services System and Number Referred 25
Table 3‐6 Children in Families on CalWORKs by Age Group for 2017 26
Table 3‐7 Number of Children in Families by Income Category and Age Group 27
Table 3‐8 Number of Children in Migrant Families for 2017 27
Table 3‐9 Number of Children in Families at or Below 70% of SMI with Working
Parents 28
Table 3‐10 Estimated Number of Children in Families Where All Parents/Guardians
Work 2017 29
Table 3‐11
and 3‐12
Demand for Part Day State Preschool for 3 and 4 Year Olds ‐ 2017
30
Table 3‐13 Capacity at Licensed and License‐Exempt Child Care Centers and Family
Child Care Homes (FCCHs) 31
Table 3‐14 Weekly Cost of Care by Age Group and Facility Type 32
Table 3‐15 Income Eligible Children Enrolled in Programs 33
Table 3‐16 Countywide Unmet Need for Subsidized Care by Type of Care and by
Age 34
Table 3‐17 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 in Contra Costa County 36
99
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 1
1. Introduction and Findings
The County Office of Education retained Brion Economics, Inc. (BEI) in 2017 to conduct a
Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment, which will be used for a variety of purposes. One of
the main purposes of the assessment is to fulfill the State’s requirement for each county to
analyze the child care needs for infants, preschool, and school age children. This analysis is
what we call a Child Care Supply and Demand Study, and estimates the demand for child care
by age group and compares it to available supply of child care spaces. This study presents the
analysis at the County level as well as the city and community level (see Chapters 2 and 3). BEI
prepared a countywide‐only study for Contra Costa County in 2012, and a detailed countywide
and city level analysis in 2006 ‐ 2007.
This study has been prepared for the Contra Costa County Local Planning Council in partnership
with First 5 Contra Costa County. This study builds on our past work for the County in both
2012 and 2007. It is being prepared as part of a larger study concerning Child Care Facility
Needs in the County and in combination with two online surveys on child care issues. The first
online survey focused on child care providers. The results of this survey are discussed in
Chapter 4. The second online survey targeted stakeholders in the County that have some
relationship to providing child care facilities, or are involved in the development community,
including public agencies and decision makers (see Chapter 5).
BEI has been conducting child care needs assessments and other planning studies since 2000,
when the firm was initially formed. The firm has conducted more than 60 studies for a variety
of clients, public and private, and regarding a variety of aspects of child care, including
Economic Impact Studies, Preschool for All studies, Strategic Plans, and Facility Development
Handbooks. However, child care needs assessments are our main focus regarding child care
work.
Summary of Findings
Total Children: In 2017, there were an estimated 1.12 million people in Contra Costa
County, of which 195,500 were children ages birth to 12 years old, or 17.4% of total
population. Overall, 75,100 or 38% of those children require licensed or license‐exempt
care, based on labor force participation rates (LFPRs) and licensed care demand factors,
as discussed in more detail below.
100
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 2
Population Growth 2017 to 2027: Overall, Contra Costa County will see an increase in
population of 72,900 residents, or 6.5% between 2017 and 2027, for a total population
of 1,200,000 in 2027. For children birth to 12 years old, there will also be an increase of
12,900 or 6.2%, for a total child population of 208,400.
Child care Supply: There are approximately 39,800 child care spaces in Contra Costa
County for children from birth to 12 years old.
Total Demand for Child Care at 2017: The total demand for licensed child care spaces
as of 2017 equals about 75,200. The breakdown is 18% infants, 29% preschool, and 53%
school age.
Infant Care Shortage: In Contra Costa County, there is currently a shortage of almost
10,000 infant (birth to two years old) spaces with 25% of demand currently met. The
shortage varies significantly by city.1
Preschool Shortage: For preschool age children (three to four years old2), there is a
shortage of 2,700 spaces, with 88% of demand being met.3 The shortage varies
significantly by city.
1 Infants include children from birth through 2 years old.
2 Preschool includes 3 and 4 year olds, as well as 25% of 5 year olds.
Countywide 2017 2027 Net Change
Total Population 1,120,460 1,193,320 72,860
Total Employees 392,790 425,128 32,338
Total Children 0‐12 years 195,517 208,397 12,880
0 to 2 Years 41,476 44,327 2,851
3 to 4 Years 33,857 36,125 2,269
School Age 120,185 127,945 7,760
Children 0 to 12 as % of Total Population 17.4% 17.5% 0.01%
Age of Children FCCH Spaces Center Spaces # of Spaces % of Supply
0 to 2 Years 1,933 1,459 3,398 9%
3 to 4 Years 3,866 14,861 19,085 48%
School Age 2,487 14,806 17,293 43%
Total Supply 8,286 31,126 39,776 100%
Age of Children # of Spaces Needed % of Demand
0 to 2 Years 13,368 18%
3 to 4 Years 21,739 29%
School Age 40,034 53%
Total Demand 75,141 100%
101
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 3
School Age Shortage: For school age children (ages five to 12 years old), there is a
shortage of 22,700 spaces in Contra Costa County. Approximately 43% of total demand
is met with existing supply.4
Change Since 2012: In 2012, there was a total shortage of 7,400 spaces with 88% of
demand overall met. In 2017, the total shortage increased to 35,400.5 This is partly due
the change in demand factors used in the two studies. Reallocation of two year olds to
Infant and of some five year olds to School Age has changed the distribution of supply
and demand.
Future Infant Demand in 2027: By 2027, total demand for licensed child care spaces
will increase to about 80,200 or by about 5,000 spaces without any new supply added to
the market. This breaks down to a need for 14,300 infant spaces or an increase of 7%.
Based on the current supply of spaces, there will be a shortfall of 10,900 infant spaces,
with 24% of total demand met. This assumes no increase in the number of licensed or
license‐exempt spaces between 2017 and 2027.
Future Preschool Demand in 2027: Demand for preschool spaces will be 23,200 with a
shortfall of 4,100 preschool spaces; 82% of demand will be met, which is a 6% decrease
in demand compared to 2017 conditions. This assumes no increase in the number of
licensed or license‐exempt spaces between 2017 and 2027.
Future School Age Demand in 2027: For school age spaces, there will be an estimated
demand for 42,700 spaces, creating a shortfall of 25,400 spaces in 2027; about 40% of
demand will be met. Again, this assumes no increase in the number of licensed or
license‐exempt spaces between 2017 and 2027.
3 Demand for, or shortage of, spaces refers to licensed or license‐exempt spaces.
4 Ibid.
5 It should be noted that the demand factors used in 2012 were significantly less than those used in the 2017 study,
which contributes to the significant shortages as compared to 2012. Two year olds have been moved to Infant and
removed from Preschool.
Age of Children
Shortage of Spaces
2017
% of Demand Met
2017
Shortage of Spaces
2027
% of Demand Met
2027
0 to 2 Years (9,970)25%(10,903)24%
3 to 4 Years (2,654)88% (4,135)82%
School Age (22,741)43%(25,371)41%
Total Shortage/(Surplus)(35,365)53%(40,408)50%
102
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 4
The following graphics summarize the supply and demand data by type of care and year.
Age of Children # of Spaces Needed % of Demand
0 to 2 Years 14,301 18%
3 to 4 Years 23,220 29%
School Age 42,664 53%
Total Demand 80,184 100%
3,398
19,085 17,293
39,776
13,368
21,739
40,034
75,141
(9,970)(2,654)
(22,741)
(35,365)
(60,000)
(40,000)
(20,000)
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
Infant Preschool School Age TotalNumber of Child Care SpacesChildren by Age Group
Supply and Demand for Child Care in Contra Costa County ‐2017
Supply of Child Care
Demand for Child Care
Surplus/(Shortage)
103
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 5
Acknowledgements
We would like to acknowledge the following organizations for their support in this effort:
The Contra Costa County Child Care Resource and Referral Services agency (CocoKids)
Contra Costa County, Conservation Department
Contra Costa County Office of Education
Contra Costa County Human Services Department
Contra Costa County Planning and Advisory Council for Early Care & Education
3,398
19,085 17,293
39,776
14,301
23,220
42,664
80,184
(10,903)(4,135)
(25,371)
(40,408)
(60,000)
(40,000)
(20,000)
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
Infant Preschool School Age TotalNumber of Child Care SpacesChildren by Age Group
Supply and Demand for Child Care in Contra Costa County ‐2027
Supply of Child Care
Demand for Child Care
Surplus/(Shortage)
104
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 6
2. Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
This chapter presents methodology, analysis, and results of the Child Care Needs Assessment
for current conditions (2017) and future conditions (2027) for children from birth to 12 years
old by city/area in Contra Costa County.
A summary of the child care supply and demand analysis findings are in Chapter 1. Please note
that all Chapter 2 tables are at the end of the Chapter.
Background and Methodology
In California, there are several methodologies for estimating demand for child care but there is
limited published data on this issue. Given the diversity of demographics in the state by county,
the use of a single set of child care demand factors across the state does not make sense. The
California Child Care Coordinators Association (CCCCA) adopted a set of general demand factors
that is in use across the state for infants, toddlers, and school‐aged children.6 However, they
suggest that local jurisdictions should consider local conditions and develop demand factors
that reflect conditions in their county and while Contra Costa County has used the
recommended demand factors in prior studies, it has decided to use demand factors for this
study that reflect observations and experiences of child care demand in our county. The
demand rates we have chosen (50% for infant/toddler care, 100% for preschool care, and 50%
for school‐aged care) reflect information about current use of those types of care, as well as the
County’s belief that it is important that quality child care be available to all children who need
it.7
Other urban counties, like San Francisco and San Mateo, have also taken a local approach to
determine demand factors based on available data and value‐based milestones that amplify
access to child care in their community. The County believes this set of child care demand
factors for licensed child care best reflects our local conditions.
The following table summarizes the rates used by age group in the 2007, 2012, and 2017
studies. While the County use of the higher demand factors included in this study is logical, it is
6 See California Child Care Coordinators Association’s “LPC Child Care Need Assessment: Instruction Guide for
Completing the Aggregate County Report.” http://www.california‐childcare‐coordinators.org/resources/resources‐
lpc‐coordinators.html.
7 This decision was made by the Contra Costa County Child Care Data Committee in March 2018.
105
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 7
important for BEI to make this change explicit so that readers who are reviewing our prior work
understand why the resulting unmet demand has changed so significantly.
The Needs Assessment begins with the underlying demographic data and then growth
projections are incorporated into the analysis. Child care supply and demand analysis by
city/area and for the County is then estimated at 2017 and 2027. Appendix A Tables 1 to 47
present Needs Assessment tables and the supporting data for each city/area individually for
Existing Conditions (2017) and Future Conditions (2027).
Appendix A Tables 1 to 47 provide detailed analysis tables, one set for each of the 22
cities/areas analyzed for this study, and one for Contra Costa County as a whole under current
2017 and future 2027 conditions (see Appendix A Tables 46 and 47).
This study focuses on children ages 0 to 12 years old, with the following age ranges:
Infants – children birth through 2 years old.
Preschool – children ages 3 to 4 and 25% of 5 year olds.
School Age – children ages 5 to 12 (including 75% of 5 year olds).
It is assumed that 75% of 5 year olds will be enrolled in kindergarten or transitional
kindergarten and will not be generating demand for preschool age child care spaces.
Detailed demographic data for each city/area in 2017 is presented in Appendix A, Table 48.
Households and employment are based on ABAG data, and the percentage of the population by
age group for children birth to 12 years old is calculated from U.S. Census data (2010).
Appendix A, Table 49 presents the same detailed demographics estimates as Appendix A,
Table 48 for 2027.
Child Care supply in 2017 by city/area, type of care, and child age group is shown in detail in
Appendix A, Table 50.
Year Infants Preschool School Age
2018 50% 100% 50%
2013 37% 90% 39%
2007 37% 75% 39%
Demand Factor for Licensed Care
106
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 8
Summary of Supply and Demand
The Needs Assessment is focused on 19 incorporated cities and three other unincorporated
areas, as shown in Table 2‐1. The other three areas are Alamo‐Blackhawk, Rodeo‐Crockett, and
East Rural Contra Costa County, as defined by the Association of Bay Area Governments
(ABAG). As shown in Table 2‐1, total population for Contra Costa County in 2017 is estimated
at 1,120,000, based on calculating the average annual growth between 2015 and 2020 based
on ABAG Projections ‘13. Table 2‐1 also shows population growth by city/area between 2017
and 2027. Overall, the County is expected to grow from 1,120,000 residents to 1,190,000, an
increase of almost 73,000 or 6.5%. In terms of size, Concord will see the largest population
growth in the County, with approximately 14,700 new residents, followed by Richmond with an
estimated 10,300 new residents. The City of Hercules is projected to see the largest percentage
increase of population at 13.9%. The City of Oakley is expected to see growth of 12.4%,
followed by Concord at 11%.
Age Groupings
Table 2‐2 calculates 2017 population by age group for all children under three years old,
children three to four years old, and children five to 12 years old by city and by total. The
breakdown of children by age is calculated based on data from the 2010 U.S. Census, which
measures population by age. The percentage of children from birth to 35 months, from three
to four years (including 25% of five year olds), and five to 12 years (including 75% of five year
olds) was applied to current 2017 population figures to estimate the current number of children
by age group. Countywide, there are approximately 41,500 children under the age of three
years, 33,900 children ages three and four years old, and 120,200 children five to 12 years old,
for a total of 195,500. Children ages 12 and under comprise approximately 17.4% of the total
County population and this figure varies by city or area. By 2027, it is estimated that there will
be 208,400 children ages 12 and under in the County, an increase of 12,900 children or an
increase of 6.2% from 2017.
107
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 9
Child Care Supply
Table 2‐4 summarizes current licensed and legally license‐exempt8 child care supply by age
group for Infants, Preschool, and School Age children by city/area as of August 2017, based on
information provided by CocoKids. Supply data breaks down the number of spaces by age
group and by city/area. It also shows what percentage of overall supply each city/area has as
compared to the County overall. Concord and Richmond together have the greatest number
and percentage of child care spaces, making up over 26% of the total number of spaces in the
County. Countywide, there are approximately 3,400 Infant spaces, 19,100 Preschool spaces,
and 17,300 School Age spaces, for a total of almost 39,800 spaces. Concord and Richmond
together have almost 24% of the total children in the County as of 2017.
Child Care Demand
Demand is calculated by figuring the number of children by age group with working parents,
based on applying labor force participation rates (LFPRs) for children under age six (from the
2015 5‐Year American Community Survey) to the number of Infants and Preschoolers. LFPRs
for six to 17 year olds are applied to the number of School Age children. This allows us to
calculate the number of children in each of these age groups with working parents. Labor force
participation rates include families with two working parents or a single parent who works.
Relevant demand factors are then applied to the number of children with working parents to
determine the number of those children requiring licensed care, as discussed above. It is
assumed that only a percentage of children with working parents require licensed care because
some parents choose to have nannies, extended family, friends, or other arrangements for their
children and are therefore not looking for a licensed child care space.
For Infants, a demand factor of 50% is applied to children with working parents. This is the
demand factor that was provided by the data committee for this project. (The California Child
Care Coordinators Association recommends a demand factor of 37% of infants for needs
assessments. Infants include children from ages zero months to 35 months.)
For Preschool children, demand factors typically vary between 75% and 100% of children with
working parents. At the direction of the data committee, we are using 100% of three and four
year old children with working parents. Preschool numbers also include 25% of five year olds.
8 Legally license‐exempt programs include programs run by City Park & Recreation programs, Co‐operative/Parent
Participation programs, school district programs, and federal migrant programs.
108
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 10
The demand factor for School Age children is 50% of children with working parents. This figure
is 10% higher than the demand factor recommended by CCCCA but decided on by the data
committee for this project as better reflecting Contra Costa County. School age children for this
study include six to 12 year olds and 75% of five year olds.
Once demand is calculated, the percent distribution of total demand for spaces by age group is
calculated as well as the percent of total children requiring licensed care.
The total demand for spaces by age group for both 2017 and 2027 is summarized in Table 2‐3.
At 2017, the City of Richmond shows the greatest demand for all age groups, needing almost
9,500 spaces. The City of Antioch follows, requiring over 8,400 spaces, with the City of Concord
closely following in demand. Overall, countywide, there is demand for almost 13,400 infant
spaces, 21,700 preschool spaces, and 40,000 school age spaces, or 75,100 spaces countywide in
2017.
In 2027, the demand in Richmond is still highest, with a continued 13% of the total demand, or
10,200 spaces. In 2027, countywide, it is expected that there will be a need for 14,300 infant
spaces, 23,200 preschool spaces, and 42,700 school age spaces, for a total demand of almost
80,200 licensed child care spaces, or an increase of 5,000 spaces or 7%.
Tables 2‐5 through 2‐7 summarize the supply and demand by city/area for infants,
preschoolers, and school age kids, respectively. For infants, there is a shortfall of almost 10,000
spaces, with 25% of current demand met (see Table 2‐5). For preschool, there is a shortfall of
2,700 spaces with 88% of demand met (see Table 2‐6). And for school age children, there is a
shortfall of almost 22,700 spaces, with 43% of demand met (see Table 2‐7).
Table 2‐8 summarizes the supply and demand at 2017 for all age groups combined.
Countywide there is a shortfall of almost 35,400 spaces, and 53% of total demand is met. That
means: roughly one in two children that need a child care space could potentially find one.
These rates vary significantly by city/area, however.
The number and type of child care providers by city/area is shown in Table 2‐9. The number of
family child care homes, licensed centers, and license‐exempt centers are each listed by
city/area. The City of Concord has the most total child care facilities at 170, followed by the
City of Richmond with 163, and the City of Antioch with 133. In total, there are 824 family child
care homes (FCCHs), 348 licensed centers, and 77 license‐exempt centers in the County, for a
total of 1,249 providers.
109
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 11
A summary of surplus/shortage by age group and city/area in 2017 (current conditions) is
shown in Table 2‐10. Overall, the shortage of infant care makes up 28% of the overall shortfall,
preschool makes up 8%, and school age makes up 64% of the total shortfall of 35,400 spaces in
Contra Costa County. The same data for 2027 (future conditions) is provided in Table 2‐11. In
2027, the shortage is more significant because the supply of child care is not considered to
increase from 2017, while population does increase. The total shortfall at 2027 is estimated at
around 40,400 spaces. In reality, some additional supply will be created but it is difficult to
predict how much or where it might occur.
Table 2‐1
Population Growth by City 2017 and 2027 from ABAG
Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017
City/Area
Population at
2017
Population at
2027 2017 to 2027 % Change
Antioch 108,720 114,320 5,600 5.2%
Brentwood 54,380 56,560 2,180 4.0%
Clayton 11,300 11,600 300 2.7%
Concord 133,320 148,000 14,680 11.0%
Danville 45,580 46,880 1,300 2.9%
El Cerrito (1) 30,760 31,920 1,160 3.8%
Hercules 28,420 32,380 3,960 13.9%
Lafayette 26,420 27,480 1,060 4.0%
Martinez 44,380 45,760 1,380 3.1%
Moraga 16,860 17,600 740 4.4%
Oakley 41,780 46,940 5,160 12.4%
Orinda 18,320 18,960 640 3.5%
Pinole 31,040 32,360 1,320 4.3%
Pittsburg (1) 93,000 101,580 8,580 9.2%
Pleasant Hill (1) 41,440 42,800 1,360 3.3%
Richmond (1) 132,100 142,360 10,260 7.8%
San Pablo 35,440 37,600 2,160 6.1%
San Ramon 77,500 81,660 4,160 5.4%
Walnut Creek 87,240 92,680 5,440 6.2%
Alamo‐Blackhawk 25,600 26,020 420 1.6%
Rodeo‐Crockett 12,160 12,480 320 2.6%
Rural East County (1) 20,320 20,880 560 2.8%
Remainder 4,380 4,500 120 2.7%
Total 1,120,460 1,193,320 72,860 6.5%
(1) Population based on ABAG Projections 2013 for 2017.
CHANGE 2017 to 2027
Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; U.S. Census 2010; Brion Economics, Inc.
110
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 12
Table 2‐2Population by Age Group by City 2017 and 2027Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017City/AreaBirth to 2 Years Old3 to 4 Years Old5 to 12 Years Old TotalChildren 12 and Under as % of PopulationBirth to 2 Years Old3 to 4 Years Old5 to 12 Years Old TotalBirth to 2 Years Old3 to 4 Years Old5 to 12 Years Old TotalAntioch4,534 3,602 13,043 21,179 19.5%4,767 3,788 13,715 22,269 234 186 672 1,091Brentwood2,105 1,929 7,672 11,706 21.5%2,190 2,006 7,980 12,175 84 77 308 469Clayton262 261 1,283 1,806 16.0%269 268 1,317 1,8547 7 34 48Concord5,436 4,077 12,487 22,000 16.5%6,034 4,526 13,862 24,422 599 449 1,375 2,422Danville1,170 1,193 5,675 8,037 17.6%1,203 1,227 5,836 8,267 33 34 162 229El Cerrito (1)1,036 792 2,266 4,094 13.3%1,075 822 2,351 4,248 39 30 85 154Hercules976 745 2,700 4,421 15.6%1,112 849 3,077 5,037 136 104 376 616Lafayette704 690 2,997 4,391 16.6%733 717 3,117 4,567 28 28 120 176Martinez1,334 1,010 3,726 6,070 13.7%1,376 1,041 3,842 6,259 41 31 116 189Moraga285 348 1,610 2,243 13.3%298 363 1,681 2,342 13 15 71 98Oakley1,876 1,444 5,505 8,825 21.1%2,108 1,623 6,184 9,915 232 178 680 1,090Orinda439 458 2,229 3,127 17.1%455 474 2,307 3,236 15 16 78 109Pinole955 700 2,593 4,248 13.7%996 729 2,704 4,429 41 30 110 181Pittsburg (1)4,265 3,421 10,864 18,550 19.9%4,658 3,737 11,867 20,262 393 316 1,002 1,711Pleasant Hill (1) 1,313 1,069 3,438 5,820 14.0%1,356 1,104 3,551 6,011 43 35 113 191Richmond (1) 5,857 4,390 13,845 24,092 18.2%6,312 4,731 14,921 25,964 455 341 1,075 1,871San Pablo1,736 1,339 4,259 7,334 20.7%1,841 1,421 4,519 7,781 106 82 260 447San Ramon3,393 3,108 10,670 17,172 22.2%3,575 3,275 11,243 18,094 182 167 573 922Walnut Creek 2,065 1,712 6,266 10,042 11.5%2,194 1,818 6,656 10,668 129 107 391 626Alamo‐Blackhawk 517 547 3,009 4,073 15.9%525 555 3,059 4,1398 9 49 67Rodeo‐Crockett 386 321 1,142 1,850 15.2%396 330 1,172 1,899 10 8 30 49Rural East County (1) 692 586 2,492 3,770 18.6%711 602 2,561 3,874 19 16 69 104Remainder13911641166615.2%143119423685431118Total by Age (2) 41,476 33,857 120,185 195,517 17.4% 44,327 36,125 127,945 208,397 2,851 2,269 7,760 12,880Note: 2 year olds include up to 35 mo. 25% of 5 year olds are included in Preschool age, and 75% of 5 year olds are included in school age demand.(1)(2) Population projections based on ABAG Projections 2013 for 2017 and children as % of population based on the breakdown from the U.S. Census 2010.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; U.S. Census 2010; Brion Economics, Inc.2017 2027 CHANGE 2017 to 2027El Cerrito includes data for the unincorporated area of Kensington; Pittsburg includes data for unincorporated area of Bay Point; Pleasant Hill includes data for unincorporated area of Pacheco; Richmond includes data for unincorporated area of El Sobrante; Rural East County includes Discovery Bay.111
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 13
Table 2‐3Child Care Demand Summary Table for 2017 and 2027Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 Years Old3 to 4 Years Old5 to 12 Years OldTotal DemandCity/Area as % of Total DemandBirth to 2 Years Old3 to 4 Years Old5 to 12 Years OldTotal DemandCity/Area as % of Total DemandAntioch1,505 2,392 4,531 8,428 11.2% 1,583 2,515 4,764 8,862 11.1%Brentwood687 1,258 2,618 4,564 6.1% 714 1,309 2,723 4,747 5.9%Clayton104 207 417 728 1.0% 107 212 429 747 0.9%Concord1,657 2,486 4,185 8,329 11.1% 1,840 2,760 4,646 9,246 11.5%Danville348 710 1,657 2,715 3.6% 358 730 1,705 2,793 3.5%El Cerrito (1)329 504 840 1,673 2.2% 342 523 871 1,736 2.2%Hercules382 584 1,030 1,996 2.7% 435 665 1,173 2,274 2.8%Lafayette191 375 953 1,520 2.0% 199 390 992 1,581 2.0%Martinez443 671 1,328 2,443 3.3% 457 692 1,369 2,519 3.1%Moraga90 220 499 809 1.1% 94 229 521 844 1.1%Oakley672 1,034 2,118 3,824 5.1% 755 1,162 2,380 4,296 5.4%Orinda97 203 589 889 1.2% 101 210 609 920 1.1%Pinole295 432 963 1,689 2.2% 307 450 1,004 1,761 2.2%Pittsburg (1)1,413 2,268 3,514 7,195 9.6% 1,544 2,477 3,838 7,859 9.8%Pleasant Hill (1)402 654 1,128 2,185 2.9% 415 676 1,165 2,256 2.8%Richmond (1)1,945 2,915 4,622 9,482 12.6% 2,096 3,142 4,981 10,219 12.7%San Pablo550 848 1,441 2,840 3.8% 583 900 1,529 3,013 3.8%San Ramon1,047 1,918 3,357 6,322 8.4% 1,103 2,021 3,537 6,661 8.3%Walnut Creek733 1,215 2,200 4,148 5.5% 779 1,291 2,337 4,406 5.5%Alamo‐Blackhawk97 205 715 1,016 1.4% 98 208 727 1,033 1.3%Rodeo‐Crockett120 199 441 760 1.0% 123 204 453 779 1.0%Rural East County (1) 2614428851,5882.1%2684549091,6312.0%Total13,368 21,739 40,034 75,141 100.0% 14,301 23,220 42,664 80,184 100.0%Note: 2 year olds include up to 35 mo. 25% of 5 year olds are included in Preschool age, and 75% of 5 year olds are included in school age demand.(1)Sources: ABAG 2013; Census 2010; Brion Economics, Inc.City/Area20172027El Cerrito includes data for the unincorporated area of Kensington; Pittsburg includes data for unincorporated area of Bay Point; Pleasant Hill includes data for unincorporated area of Pacheco; Richmond includes data for unincorporated area of El Sobrante; Rural East County includes Discovery Bay.112
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 14
Table 2‐4
Child Care Supply Summary Table for 2017 ‐ Total Number of Spaces by Age
Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017
Birth to 2
Years Old
3 to 4
Years Old
5 to 12
Years Old Total Supply
City/Area as %
of Total Supply
Antioch 354 1,535 1,119 3,008 7.6%
Brentwood 240 1,183 806 2,229 5.6%
Clayton 27 230 220 477 1.2%
Concord 430 2,742 2,513 5,685 14.3%
Danville 67 736 846 1,649 4.1%
El Cerrito (1) 108 850 339 1,297 3.3%
Hercules 55 165 429 649 1.6%
Lafayette 92 674 324 1,090 2.7%
Martinez 177 681 784 1,642 4.1%
Moraga 32 558 208 798 2.0%
Oakley 125 527 285 937 2.4%
Orinda 14 343 138 495 1.2%
Pinole 34 187 203 424 1.1%
Pittsburg (1) 239 1,893 1,566 3,698 9.3%
Pleasant Hill (1)172 788 983 1,943 4.9%
Richmond (1)607 2,248 2,122 4,977 12.5%
San Pablo 133 428 1,021 1,582 4.0%
San Ramon 220 1,226 1,542 2,988 7.5%
Walnut Creek 152 1,463 1,429 3,044 7.7%
Alamo‐Blackhawk 10 257 154 421 1.1%
Rodeo‐Crockett 88 237 36 361 0.9%
Rural East County (1)22 134 226 382 1.0%
Total 3,398 19,085 17,293 39,776 100.0%
Note: 2 year olds include up to 35 mo. 25% of 5 year olds are included in Preschool age, and 75% of 5
year olds are included in school age demand.
(1)
Sources: CocoKids (formerly Contra Costa Child Care Council); Brion Economics, Inc.
City/Area
El Cerrito includes data for the unincorporated area of Kensington; Pittsburg includes data for
unincorporated area of Bay Point; Pleasant Hill includes data for unincorporated area of Pacheco;
Richmond includes data for unincorporated area of El Sobrante; Rural East County includes
Discovery Bay.
113
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 15
Table 2‐5
Total Infant Supply and Demand by City ‐ 2017
Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017
Total
Supply
Total
Demand
Total
Shortfall
% of Demand
Met
Antioch 354 1,505 (1,151) 23.5%
Brentwood 240 687 (447) 34.9%
Clayton 27 104 (77) 26.0%
Concord 430 1,657 (1,227) 25.9%
Danville 67 348 (281) 19.3%
El Cerrito (1)108 329 (221) 32.8%
Hercules 55 382 (327) 14.4%
Lafayette 92 191 (99) 48.0%
Martinez 177 443 (266) 39.9%
Moraga 32 90 (58) 35.5%
Oakley 125 672 (547) 18.6%
Orinda 14 97 (83) 14.4%
Pinole 34 295 (261) 11.5%
Pittsburg (1)239 1,413 (1,174) 16.9%
Pleasant Hill (1)172 402 (230) 42.8%
Richmond (1)607 1,945 (1,338) 31.2%
San Pablo 133 550 (417) 24.2%
San Ramon 220 1,047 (827) 21.0%
Walnut Creek 152 733 (581) 20.7%
Alamo‐Blackhawk 10 97 (87) 10.3%
Rodeo‐Crockett 88 120 (32) 73.6%
Rural East County (1)22 261 (239)8.4%
Total 3,398 13,368 (9,970) 25.4%
(1)
Sources: ABAG 2013; Census 2010; Brion Economics, Inc.
City/Area
2017
El Cerrito includes data for the unincorporated area of Kensington; Pittsburg
includes data for unincorporated area of Bay Point; Pleasant Hill includes data for
unincorporated area of Pacheco; Richmond includes data for unincorporated
area of El Sobrante; Rural East County includes Discovery Bay.
114
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 16
Table 2‐6
Total Preschool Supply and Demand by City ‐ 2017
Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017
Total
Supply
Total
Demand
Shortfall/
Surplus
% of Demand
Met
Antioch 1,535 2,392 (857) 64.2%
Brentwood 1,183 1,258 (75) 94.0%
Clayton 230 207 23 111.3%
Concord 2,742 2,486 256 110.3%
Danville 736 710 26 103.7%
El Cerrito (1)850 504 346 168.7%
Hercules 165 584 (419) 28.3%
Lafayette 674 375 299 179.7%
Martinez 681 671 10 101.5%
Moraga 558 220 338 254.0%
Oakley 527 1,034 (507) 51.0%
Orinda 343 203 140 169.1%
Pinole 187 432 (245) 43.3%
Pittsburg (1)1,893 2,268 (375) 83.5%
Pleasant Hill (1)788 654 134 120.4%
Richmond (1)2,248 2,915 (667) 77.1%
San Pablo 428 848 (420) 50.4%
San Ramon 1,226 1,918 (692) 63.9%
Walnut Creek 1,463 1,215 248 120.4%
Alamo‐Blackhawk 257 205 52 125.5%
Rodeo‐Crockett 237 199 38 119.2%
Rural East County (1) 134 442 (308)30.3%
Total 19,085 21,739 (2,654) 87.8%
(1)
Sources: ABAG 2013; Census 2010; Brion Economics, Inc.
City/Area
2017
El Cerrito includes data for the unincorporated area of Kensington; Pittsburg
includes data for unincorporated area of Bay Point; Pleasant Hill includes data
for unincorporated area of Pacheco; Richmond includes data for unincorporated
area of El Sobrante; Rural East County includes Discovery Bay.
115
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 17
Table 2‐7
Total School Age Supply and Demand by City ‐ 2017
Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017
Total
Supply
Total
Demand
Total
Shortfall
% of Demand
Met
Antioch 1,119 4,531 (3,412) 24.7%
Brentwood 806 2,618 (1,812) 30.8%
Clayton 220 417 (197) 52.7%
Concord 2,513 4,185 (1,672) 60.0%
Danville 846 1,657 (811) 51.0%
El Cerrito (1)339 840 (501) 40.4%
Hercules 429 1,030 (601) 41.7%
Lafayette 324 953 (629) 34.0%
Martinez 784 1,328 (544) 59.0%
Moraga 208 499 (291) 41.7%
Oakley 285 2,118 (1,833) 13.5%
Orinda 138 589 (451) 23.4%
Pinole 203 963 (760) 21.1%
Pittsburg (1)1,566 3,514 (1,948) 44.6%
Pleasant Hill (1)983 1,128 (145) 87.1%
Richmond (1)2,122 4,622 (2,500) 45.9%
San Pablo 1,021 1,441 (420) 70.8%
San Ramon 1,542 3,357 (1,815) 45.9%
Walnut Creek 1,429 2,200 (771) 65.0%
Alamo‐Blackhawk 154 715 (561) 21.5%
Rodeo‐Crockett 36 441 (405) 8.2%
Rural East County (1) 226 885 (659)25.5%
Total 17,293 40,034 (22,741) 43.2%
(1)
Sources: ABAG 2013; Census 2010; Brion Economics, Inc.
City/Area
2017
El Cerrito includes data for the unincorporated area of Kensington; Pittsburg
includes data for unincorporated area of Bay Point; Pleasant Hill includes data for
unincorporated area of Pacheco; Richmond includes data for unincorporated area
of El Sobrante; Rural East County includes Discovery Bay.
116
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 18
Table 2‐8
Total Supply and Demand by City for Children 0 to 12 Years Old ‐ 2017
Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017
Total
Supply
Total
Demand
Total
Shortfall
% of Demand
Met
Antioch 3,008 8,428 (5,420) 35.7%
Brentwood 2,229 4,564 (2,335) 48.8%
Clayton 477 728 (251) 65.5%
Concord 5,685 8,329 (2,644) 68.3%
Danville 1,649 2,715 (1,066) 60.7%
El Cerrito (1)1,297 1,673 (376) 77.5%
Hercules 649 1,996 (1,347) 32.5%
Lafayette 1,090 1,520 (430) 71.7%
Martinez 1,642 2,443 (801) 67.2%
Moraga 798 809 (11) 98.6%
Oakley 937 3,824 (2,887) 24.5%
Orinda 495 889 (394) 55.7%
Pinole 424 1,689 (1,265) 25.1%
Pittsburg (1)3,698 7,195 (3,497) 51.4%
Pleasant Hill (1)1,943 2,185 (242) 88.9%
Richmond (1)4,977 9,482 (4,505) 52.5%
San Pablo 1,582 2,840 (1,258) 55.7%
San Ramon 2,988 6,322 (3,334) 47.3%
Walnut Creek 3,044 4,148 (1,104) 73.4%
Alamo‐Blackhawk 421 1,016 (595) 41.4%
Rodeo‐Crockett 361 760 (399) 47.5%
Rural East County (1) 382 1,588 (1,206) 24.1%
Total 39,776 75,141 (35,365) 52.9%
(1)
Sources: ABAG 2013; Census 2010; Brion Economics, Inc.
City/Area
2017
El Cerrito includes data for the unincorporated area of Kensington; Pittsburg
includes data for unincorporated area of Bay Point; Pleasant Hill includes data for
unincorporated area of Pacheco; Richmond includes data for unincorporated area
of El Sobrante; Rural East County includes Discovery Bay.
117
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 19
Table 2‐9
Number and Type of Child Care Providers by City in 2017
Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017
Family Child Licensed License‐Exempt
City/Area Care Homes Centers Centers Total
Antioch 110 16 7 133
Brentwood 55 27 1 83
Clayton 4 3 0 7
Concord 114 43 13 170
Danville 14 21 0 35
El Cerrito (1)33 16 0 49
Hercules 20 4 1 25
Lafayette 3 14 1 18
Martinez 19 16 3 38
Moraga 4 7 2 13
Oakley 54 7 1 62
Orinda 6 6 1 13
Pinole 13 6 0 19
Pittsburg (1)63 26 12 101
Pleasant Hill (1)36 18 3 57
Richmond (1)111 37 15 163
San Pablo 42 11 7 60
San Ramon 69 22 0 91
Walnut Creek 35 33 2 70
Alamo‐Blackhawk 4 7 0 11
Rodeo‐Crockett 5 6 0 11
Rural East County (1)10 2 2 14
Countywide 824 348 71 1,243
(1)
Sources: CocoKids (formerly Contra Costa Child Care Council); Brion Economics, Inc.
El Cerrito includes data for the unincorporated area of Kensington; Pittsburg includes data
for unincorporated area of Bay Point; Pleasant Hill includes data for unincorporated area of
Pacheco; Richmond includes data for unincorporated area of El Sobrante; Rural East County
includes Discovery Bay.
118
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 20
Table 2‐10
Summary of Supply and Demand of Child Care by Age Group and by City: 2017
Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017
Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total,
City/Area 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years
Antioch (1,151) (857) (2,008) (3,412) (5,420)
Brentwood (447) (75) (522) (1,812) (2,335)
Clayton (77) 23 (54) (197) (251)
Concord (1,227) 256 (971) (1,672) (2,644)
Danville (281) 26 (255) (811) (1,066)
El Cerrito (1)(221) 346 125 (501) (376)
Hercules (327) (419) (746) (601) (1,347)
Lafayette (99) 299 200 (629)(430)
Martinez (266) 10 (256)(544)(801)
Moraga (58) 338 280 (291)(11)
Oakley (547) (507) (1,054) (1,833) (2,887)
Orinda (83) 140 57 (451)(394)
Pinole (261) (245)(506)(760) (1,265)
Pittsburg (1)(1,174) (375) (1,549) (1,948) (3,497)
Pleasant Hill (1)(230) 134 (96)(145)(242)
Richmond (1)(1,338) (667) (2,005) (2,500) (4,505)
San Pablo (417) (420)(837)(420) (1,258)
San Ramon (827) (692) (1,519) (1,815) (3,334)
Walnut Creek (581) 248 (333)(771) (1,104)
Alamo‐Blackhawk (87) 52 (35)(561)(595)
Rodeo‐Crockett (32) 38 7 (405)(399)
Rural East County (1)(239) (308)(547)(659) (1,206)
Total County (9,970) (2,654) (12,625) (22,741) (35,365)
Percent of Total 28.2% 7.5% 35.7% 64.3% 100.0%
Percent of Demand Met 25.4% 87.8% 64.0% 43.2% 52.9%
Note: 2 year olds include up to 35 mo. 25% of 5 year olds are included in Preschool age, and 75% of 5 year olds
are included in school age demand.
(1)
Source: Brion Economics, Inc.
Child Care Surplus (Shortage) at 2017
El Cerrito includes data for the unincorporated area of Kensington; Pittsburg includes data for
unincorporated area of Bay Point; Pleasant Hill includes data for unincorporated area of Pacheco;
Richmond includes data for unincorporated area of El Sobrante; Rural East County includes Discovery Bay.
Birth to 2
Years Old
3 to 4
Years Old
119
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 21
Table 2‐11
Summary of Future Supply and Demand of Child Care by Age Group and City: 2027
Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017
Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total,
City/Area 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years
Antioch (1,229) (980) (2,209) (3,645) (5,854)
Brentwood (474) (126)(600) (1,917) (2,518)
Clayton (80) 18 (62) (209) (270)
Concord (1,410) (18) (1,427) (2,133) (3,561)
Danville (291) 6 (285) (859) (1,144)
El Cerrito (1)(234) 327 93 (532) (439)
Hercules (380) (500)(881) (744) (1,625)
Lafayette (107) 284 177 (668) (491)
Martinez (280) (11)(291) (585) (877)
Moraga (62) 329 267 (313) (46)
Oakley (630) (635) (1,264) (2,095) (3,359)
Orinda (87) 133 46 (471) (425)
Pinole (273) (263)(537) (801) (1,337)
Pittsburg (1)(1,305) (584) (1,889) (2,272) (4,161)
Pleasant Hill (1)(243) 112 (131) (182) (313)
Richmond (1)(1,489) (894) (2,383) (2,859) (5,242)
San Pablo (450) (472)(923) (508) (1,431)
San Ramon (883) (795) (1,678) (1,995) (3,673)
Walnut Creek (627) 172 (454) (908) (1,362)
Alamo‐Blackhawk (88) 49 (40) (573) (612)
Rodeo‐Crockett (35) 33 (2) (417) (418)
Rural East County (1)(246) (320)(566) (683) (1,249)
Total County (10,903) (4,135) (15,037) (25,371) (40,408)
Percent of Total 27.0% 10.2% 37.2% 62.8% 100.0%
Percent of Demand Met 23.8% 82.2% 59.9% 40.5% 49.6%
Note: 2 year olds include up to 35 mo. 25% of 5 year olds are included in Preschool age, and 75% of 5 year olds
are included in school age demand.
(1)
Source: Brion Economics, Inc.
Child Care Surplus (Shortage) at 2027
El Cerrito includes data for the unincorporated area of Kensington; Pittsburg includes data for unincorporated
area of Bay Point; Pleasant Hill includes data for unincorporated area of Pacheco; Richmond includes data for
unincorporated area of El Sobrante; Rural East County includes Discovery Bay.
Birth to 2
Years Old
3 to 4
Years Old
120
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 22
3. State‐Mandated Needs Assessment
In preparing the 2017 Needs Assessment for Contra Costa County, Brion Economics, Inc. (BEI)
followed the LPC Child Care Needs Assessment: Instruction Guide for Completing the Aggregate
County Report. We used the suggested data sources, as well as additional sources of
information as needed. Below is an explanation of the tables, as numbered in the table format
found in the LPC Child Care Needs Assessment. The table numbers correlate to the section
numbers in the Needs Assessment report form generated by the LPC and document how the
numbers in the Needs Assessment report were derived. The formal needs assessment can be
found in Appendix B.
Table 3‐1 shows the total population, and number of children ages 0 to 12 in Contra Costa
County. The total population data is based on ABAG’s Projections 2013 for 2017, which is the
most recent data available. Totals for each age group—Infants (0 to 2 years), Preschool (3 to 4
years), and School Age (5 to 12 years)—are listed at the bottom, and are based on the
breakdown of population by age based on data from the 2010 U.S. Census, which is the most
recent data available. For this study, 25% of 5 year olds are included in the Preschool category
and 75% are included in School Age.
Table 3‐1 also shows the percentage of each age as compared to total children ages 0 to 12
years and to the population as a whole. By group, Infants make up 21.2% of children ages 0 to
12 and 3.7% of the County's population, Preschoolers comprise 17.3% of children ages 0 to 12
and 3.0% of the County's population, and School Age children make up 61.5% of children ages 0
to 12 years and 10.7% of the County's population.
Table 3‐2 shows the breakdown of race/ethnicity for the population ages 0 to 12 years old.
Children who are Hispanic/Latino make up 35.0% of the 0 to 12 population in Contra Costa
County, followed by White children at 31.7% of the population and Asian American with 12.5%.
Data in Table 3‐2 is based on data from the California Department of Education.
121
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 23
Child Population by Language reflects the primary language spoken (other than English) by
children in grades K to 12 in Contra Costa County and is summarized in Table 3‐3. Data on
language spoken is from the California Department of Education's DataQuest database
(www.cde.ca.gov ). This data set is not available for children ages 0 to 5 years old, but it is
assumed that the K to 12 data is reflective of the language spoken by households with younger
children in the County. Spanish makes up the greatest percentage (22.9%) of primary language
spoken, followed by Filipino (1.3%), and Mandarin (1.2%). Overall, 28.5% of children in Contra
Costa County speak a primary language other than English.
Table 3‐1
Children by Age, 0‐12 Years Old for 2017
Contra Costa County Needs Assessment ‐ 2017 Update
Age in Years (1)
2017
Population
% of Children
0‐12 Years
% of Total
Population
2012
Population
% Population
Change 2012 to
2017
0 13,363 6.8% 1.2% 12,473 7.1%
1 13,560 6.9% 1.2% 12,764 6.2%
2 14,553 7.4% 1.3% 13,586 7.1%
3 15,222 7.8% 1.4% 14,269 6.7%
4 14,826 7.6% 1.3% 13,926 6.5%
5 15,232 7.8% 1.4% 14,275 6.7%
6 15,424 7.9% 1.4% 14,427 6.9%
7 15,368 7.9% 1.4% 14,362 7.0%
8 15,368 7.9% 1.4% 14,443 6.4%
9 15,436 7.9% 1.4% 14,778 4.5%
10 15,811 8.1% 1.4% 14,831 6.6%
11 15,495 7.9% 1.4% 14,582 6.3%
12 15,858 8.1%1.4%14,785 7.3%
Total Ages 0‐12 195,517 100.0% 17.4% 183,502 6.5%
Total Contra Costa County Population 1,120,460 1,049,025 6.8%
Total Infants (0‐2 years) 41,476 21.2% 3.7% 38,823 6.8%
Total Preschool (3‐4 years) (2) 33,857 17.3% 3.0% 31,764 6.6%
Total School Age (5‐12 years) 120,185 61.5% 10.7% 112,914 6.4%
(1) Population estimates are from "ABAG Projections 2013" for 2017. Percent age breakdown based on U.S. Census 2010.
(2) The 2012 Needs Assessment had different age groupings: Preschool included 5 year olds, 75% of which are now
included in School Age. 25% of 5 year olds are counted as Preschool in this study.
Sources: ABAG; U.S. Census 2010; Brion Economics, Inc.
122
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 24
Table 3‐2
Children Ages 0‐12 Years by Race/Ethnicity for 2017
Contra Costa County Needs Assessment ‐ 2017 Update
Race/Ethnicity
No. of Children
0‐12 Years
% of Total Children
0‐12 Years
Hispanic/Latino 68,431 35.0%
American Indian/Alaskan Native 587 0.3%
Asian American 24,440 12.5%
Pacific Islander 1,173 0.6%
Filipino 8,212 4.2%
African American 18,183 9.3%
Multiracial 10,558 5.4%
White, Not Hispanic 61,979 31.7%
Not reported 1,955 1.0%
Total 195,517 100.0%
(1) Data from California Department of Education; 2016‐17.
Sources: California Department of Education; Brion Economics, Inc.
Table 3‐3
Children In Grades K‐12 by Language Spoken (Excluding English) for 2016‐17
Contra Costa County Needs Assessment ‐ 2017 Update
Language
Number of
Children K‐12
Percentage of Children
who Speak Languages
Other Than English
Percentage of
Total Children
Spanish 40,678 67.17%22.93%
Filipino 2,306 3.81%1.30%
Mandarin 2,040 3.37%1.15%
Cantonese 1,211 2.00%0.68%
Farsi 1,167 1.93%0.66%
Vietnamese 1,133 1.87%0.64%
Arabic 1,032 1.70%0.58%
Korean 943 1.56%0.53%
Other 10,047 16.59%N/A
Total 60,557 100.00% 28.5%
Sources: California Department of Education DataQuest Report for 2016‐17 for Contra
Costa County; Brion Economics, Inc.
123
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 25
The number of children with an Individual Family Service Plan (IFSP) or Individualized Education
Plan (IEP) is broken down by age group in Table 3‐4. IFSPs are for families with children
younger than 3 years and IEPs are for children ages 3 and up. Data for Infants and Preschoolers
was provided by Care Parent Network in Contra Costa County. For School Age children, data is
not available as of 2017. There are currently 860 Infants with IFSPs, and 1,700 Preschoolers
with IEPs in Contra Costa County.
Table 3‐5 should provide data on the number of children in Child Protective Services by age
group and the number of CPS children referred for child care. Unfortunately, this data could
not be obtained for this study for Contra Costa County.
The number of children in families on CalWORKs by age group is shown in Table 3‐6. Data for
CalWORKs Stage 1 show a total of 976 children receiving assistance, with 322 infants and 654
children ages 3 to 12. CalWORKs Stage 1 data was provided by Contra Costa County ‐
Employment and Human Services Department. The data for CalWORKs Stages 2 and 3 is
provided by CocoKids. There are a total of 2,037 children in CalWORKs Stages 2 and 3 for
children ages 0 to 12 years old, for a total of 3,013 children assisted by CalWORKs.
Table 3‐4
Children with an IFSP or IEP by Age Group for 2017
Contra Costa County Needs Assessment ‐ 2017 Update
Age 0‐2 Years 3‐4 Years 5‐12 Years Total
Percent of
Total
Total (IFSP or IEP) (1) 860 1,700 NA 2,560 1.3%
Data provided by Deborah Penry, Care Parent Network, for 2017.
(1) Children 3 years and up have Individualized Education Plans (IEPs) and children under 3 have
Individual Family Services Plans (IFSPs).
Sources: Care Parent Network; Brion Economics, Inc.
Table 3‐5
Children in Child Protective Services System and Number Referred‐2017
Contra Costa County Needs Assessment ‐ 2017 Update
Age 0‐2 Years 3‐4 Years 5‐12 Years Total
Number of Children in Child Protective Services (1)n/a n/a n/a n/a
Number of Children Referred for Child Care Services n/a n/a n/a n/a
(1) Data for Child Protective Services was not available for this study.
Sources: California Child Welfare Indicators Project, UC Berkeley; Brion Economics, Inc.
124
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 26
Table 3‐7 calculates the number of children in families by income category and age group.
Based on the American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates (2016), the percentage of families
with incomes below the poverty level in the past 12 months for children under 5 years (13.5%)
is applied to the total number of Infants (0 to 2 years) and Preschoolers (3 to 4 years). The
percentage of families with incomes below the poverty level in the past 12 months for children
ages 5 to 17 years (12.6%) is applied to School Age children (5 to 12 years). These percentages
are multiplied by the total number of children in each age group to calculate the number of
children in families with incomes below the poverty level. There are currently approximately
5,600 Infants, 4,600 Preschoolers, and 15,100 School Age children in families with incomes
below the poverty level in Contra Costa County, for a total of 15,000 children 0 to 12, or 12.9%
of all children.
In addition, Table 3‐7 calculates the number of children in families earning less than 70% of
State Median Income (SMI). This data is from the Early Learning Needs Assessment Tool by the
American Institutes for Research and based on ACS data for 2016. For Infants, 37.1% or 15,400
live in families earning less than 70% of SMI. For Preschool age children, this number is
approximately 37.6% and 12,700 children, and for School Age, it is 36.8% or 44,300 children.
Overall, approximately 72,400 children in Contra Costa County live in families earning less than
70% of SMI; this is 37% of all children ages 0 to 12. Lastly, Table 3‐7 also calculates the number
of children by age group who live in families earning more than 70% SMI, which totals 123,114
children.
Table 3‐6
Children in Families on CalWORKs by Age Group for 2017
Contra Costa County Needs Assessment ‐ 2017 Update
Total
Age 0‐2 Years 3‐4 Years 5‐12 Years 0‐12 Years
CalWORKs Stage 1 (1)322 288 366 976
CalWORKs Stage 2 (2)291 333 428 1,052
CalWORKs Stage 3 (2)117 210 658 985
Total CalWORKs 730 831 1,452 3,013
(1) CalWORKs Stage 1 data provided by Contra Costa County ‐ Employment & Human Services
Department, June 2018. 3‐4 year olds may include some 5 year olds in the only data available.
(2) Data on CalWORKs Stage 2 and 3 provide by Margaret Weigart‐Jacobs, CocoKids, 2017.
Sources: CocoKids; Contra Costa County ‐ Employment and Human Services Department;
Brion Economics, Inc.
125
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 27
Data for children from migrant families is shown in Table 3‐8. If 50% or more of a family’s
income comes from migrant labor, they are considered a migrant family in terms of this data,
which was provided by the California Migrant Education Program, located in the San Joaquin
County Office of Education. As of 2017, there are 4 children ages 0 to 12 years old from
migrant families in Contra Costa County, all of whom are School Age.
Table 3‐9 estimates the number of children by age group whose families work and are eligible
for subsidized child care and development. Applying the Labor Force Participation Rates from
Table 3‐7
Number of Children in Families by Income Category and Age Group
Contra Costa County Needs Assessment ‐ 2017 Update
Age 0‐2 Years 3‐4 Years 5‐12 Years Total
Total Children by Age Group 41,476 33,857 120,185 195,517
% of Families with Children Whose Income was
In the Past Year Below Poverty Level (1) 13.5% 13.5% 12.6% 12.9%
# of Families with Children Whose Income was
In the Past Year Below Poverty Level 5,599 4,571 15,143 25,313
% of Children in Families earning less than 70% of State Median Income (2) 37.1% 37.6% 36.8% 37.0%
# of Children in Families Earning less than 70% of State Median Income 15,396 12,744 44,264 72,404
Children in Families with Incomes Above 70% SMI (2) 26,080 21,113 75,921 123,114
(1) This data is from the American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates 2016.
(2) This data is from the Early Learning Needs Assessment Tool compiled by American Institutes for Research.
The percentage used here is based on numbers from the American Community Survey for Contra Costa County, according to
the American Institutes for Research for 2016. The children in families earning less than 70% of State Median Income
also include the children living below the poverty level.
Sources: ABAG; American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates 2016; American Institutes for Research; Brion Economics, Inc.
Table 3‐8
Number of Children in Migrant Families for 2017
Contra Costa County Needs Assessment ‐ 2017 Update
Age 0‐2 Years 3‐4 Years 5‐12 Years Total
Children in Migrant Worker Families (1) 0044
Percent Distribution 0% 0% 100% 100%
Sources: San Joaquin County Office of Education; Brion Economics, Inc.
(1) Data for Contra Costa County provided by Manuel Nunez, Director II, Migrant Education, San
Joaquin County Office of Education, 2018.
126
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 28
the ACS 5‐Year Survey (2016) for children in households with two working parents or a single
parent that works to the number of families earning less than 70% of SMI (see Table 3‐7)
calculates the number of children eligible for subsidized care. It is estimated that 47,461
children ages 0 to 12 or 24.3 % qualify for subsidized care in Contra Costa County.
Child care demand for children in households with working parents is calculated in Table 3‐10.
The total number of children by age group is multiplied by the Labor Force Participation Rates
(63.9% for children under 6 years and 66.6% for children 5 to 17 years9) to calculate the number
of children with working parents (either two working parents or a single parent who works).
The number of children with working parents is then multiplied by the percentage of children
who need licensed care by age group (50% for Infants, 100% for Preschool, and 50% for School
Age). These percentages of demand were developed by the Local Planning Council based on
local knowledge and conditions. Based on these calculations, it is estimated that 75,141
children ages 0 to 12 years require licensed care in Contra Costa County or 38.4% of children
overall.
9 This is based on the age breakdown provided by the U.S. Census. LFPRs reported for children under 6 years old
are applied to Infants and Preschool; LFPRs reported for children 6 to 17 years old are applied to School Age.
Table 3‐9
Number of Children in Families at or Below 70% of SMI with Working Parents
Contra Costa County Needs Assessment ‐ 2017 Update
Age 0‐2 Years 3‐4 Years 5‐12 Years Total
Total Number of Children by Age Group 41,476 33,857 120,185 195,517
Children at or Below 70% of SMI (1) 15,396 12,744 44,264 72,404
Labor Force Participation Rates (2) 63.9% 63.9% 66.6%
Children at or Below 70% of SMI with Working Parents 9,838 8,143 29,480 47,461
(1) Number of children from AIR data, 2016.
(2) Labor force participation rates from American Community Survey, 2016.
Sources: ABAG; American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates 2016; American
Institutes for Research 2016; Brion Economics, Inc.
127
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 29
Table 3‐11 and 3‐12 (one table which refers to Sections 11 and 12 in the Needs Assessment
form) calculates the demand for part‐time Preschool for children that have at least one non‐
working parent (Section 11) and also demand for part‐time Preschool for low‐income children
(Section 12). The total number of 3 and 4 year olds is shown; this figure is then reduced by the
number of children in working families. This results in 12,144 children that are ages 3 and 4
years10 and have at least one non‐working parent. Applying the 37.6% of families below 70%
SMI to that figure results in 4,571 children ages 3 and 4 in families earning less than 70% of SMI
and with one non‐working parent. Because this table calculates children with at least one non‐
working parent, this is used to consider demand for part‐time Preschool care instead of full‐
time care. This figure represents children that may require subsidies for part‐time child care.
Part‐time care is considered important for kindergarten‐readiness and for all of the benefits of
early care and education, but does not represent “child care” for all families in terms of the
Needs Assessment, which focuses on the need for full‐time child care. It should be noted that
some of these parents may desire or need their Preschool age child to be in full‐time care as
well for reasons other than employment.
10 In this study, Preschool age children include 25% of 5 year olds.
Table 3‐10
Estimated Number of Children in Families Where All Parents/Guardians Work 2017
Contra Costa County Needs Assessment ‐ 2017 Update
Age 0‐2 Years 3‐4 Years 5‐12 Years Total
Number of Children by Age Group 41,476 33,857 120,185 195,517
Labor Force Participation Rates 63.9% 63.9% 66.6% 66.0%
Children With Working Parents 26,599 21,713 80,698 129,009
% Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 50%58%
Children Needing Licensed Care 13,368 21,739 40,034 75,141
Sources: ABAG; American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates 2016; American
Institutes for Research 2016; Brion Economics, Inc.
128
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 30
Licensed capacity at centers and family child care homes is shown in Section 13. Table 3‐13
presents the number of licensed child care center spaces by age. As shown, there are a total of
24,595 spaces in child care centers, with 60% defined as Preschool.
The calculations used to derive the number of licensed spaces at Family Child Care Homes
(FCCH) are also shown in Table 3‐13. CocoKids provided the number of licensed FCCHs. Family
Child Care home spaces by age are defined by licensing regulations.
As of August 2017, there are 491 small FCCHs and 333 large FCCHs. For small FCCHs, it is
assumed that each one has an average of 2 Infant spaces, 4 Preschool spaces, and 2 School Age
spaces.11 This equals a total of 982 infant spaces, 1,964 Preschool spaces, and 982 School Age
spaces for a total of 3,928 spaces at small FCCHs in Contra Costa County. For large FCCHs it is
assumed that each one has an average of 3 infant spaces, 6 Preschool spaces, and 5 School Age
spaces. This equals a total of 951 Infant spaces, 1,902 Preschool spaces, and 1,505 School Age
spaces in the County for a total of 4,358 spaces for children at large FCCHs. This provides a
total of 8,286 licensed spaces at all Family Child Care Homes in the County. It is important to
note that all FCCHs do not always fill all of their licensed spaces and at these rates. This is an
estimate of total potential supply of FCCHs spaces.
11 These distributions are averages, based on licensing requirements by the State; actual FCCHs may have their
own preference on distribution. For instance some FCCHs may choose not to serve Infants and/or School Age
children.
Table 3‐11 and 3‐12
Demand for Part Day State Preschool for 3 and 4 Year Olds ‐ 2017
Contra Costa County Needs Assessment ‐ 2017 Update
Item 3‐4 Years Old Notes
Total Preschool Children Countywide (1)33,857
Number of Children in Working Families 21,713
Number of 3‐& 4‐Year Olds With At Least One Non‐Working Parent 12,144 Section 11
% of Children in Families earning less than 70% of State Median Income 37.6%
Number of 3‐& 4‐Year Olds With At Least One Non‐Working Parent
Earning Less than 70% SMI 4,571 Section 12
(1) Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds.
Sources: American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates 2016; ABAG; Brion Economics, Inc.
129
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 31
Table 3‐14 shows the maximum reimbursement rates, and average cost of child care for part‐
time and full‐time care at licensed centers and Family Child Care Homes. Reimbursement rates
are from the California Department of Education, for 2017. The average child care Preschool
space at a center is $210 per week, for full‐time care, with maximum reimbursement rates of
$338 for full‐time care and $261 per week for part‐time care. In FCCHs, the average Preschool
cost for full‐time care is $174 per week, while the maximum state reimbursement rate is $229
per week for full‐time care and $179 per week for part‐time care. Average rates for Infant and
School Age care are also shown. Average costs refer to data from the California Child Care
Resource & Referral Network 2015, which is the most recent available. Rates by location in the
county may vary greatly.
Table 3‐13
Contra Costa County Needs Assessment ‐ 2017 Update
Age
# of
Providers 0‐2 Years 3‐4 Years 5‐12 Years Total
Child Care Centers
Licensed Child Care Centers 348 1,459 14,861 8,275 24,595
Percent Distribution 6% 60% 34% 100%
License‐Exempt Centers 77 6 358 6,531 6,895
Percent Distribution 0.1% 5% 95% 100%
Total Center Spaces by Age 425 1,465 15,219 14,806 31,490
5% 48% 47% 100%
FCCHs
Spaces at Small FCCH (1)491 982 1,964 982 3,928
Spaces at Large FCCH (1)333 951 1,902 1,505 4,358
Total FCCH Spaces by Age 824 1,933 3,866 2,487 8,286
Percent Distribution 23% 47% 30% 100%
TOTAL CHILD CARE SUPPLY 1,249 3,398 19,085 17,293 39,776
Percent Distribution 9% 48% 43% 100%
(1) Assumes 8 licensed spaces for small FCCHs and 14 spaces for large FCCHs.
Sources: CocoKids; Brion Economics, Inc.
Capacity at Licensed and License‐Exempt Child Care Centers and Family Child Care Homes (FCCHs)
130
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 32
The capacity to serve children who are eligible for subsidized care is calculated in Table 3‐15.
The American Institutes for Research Early Learning Needs Assessment Tool for 2016 report
provided numbers for CSPP, CCTR Alternative Payment, Handicap, Migrant, and FCCHEN. Data
from CocoKids provided Stage 1 CalWORKs, Stage 2 and 3 CalWORKs, Head Start and Early Head
Start numbers for Contra Costa County. As of the 2016 /17 academic year, there were 14,004
children ages 0 to 12 enrolled in some form of subsidized care in the County.
Table 3‐16 determines the shortfalls and surpluses in child care availability for the various
populations included in the Needs Assessment. One data item that is calculated is the unmet
need for child care for children by age group who require full‐time care because they have
working parents. This is calculated by taking the number of total children with working parents
who need licensed care, as calculated in Table 3‐10, and subtracting that from the number of
licensed spaces for that age group.
Table 3‐14
Weekly Cost of Care by Age Group and Facility Type
Contra Costa County Needs Assessment ‐ 2017 Update
Year of Infants Preschool School Age
Age Data 0‐2 Years 3‐4 Years 5‐12 Years
Center‐Based Care
Center Full‐Time Maximum Reimbursement Rates (1) 2017 $416 $338 $216
Center Full‐Time Average (2) 2015 $288 $210 na
Center Part‐Time Maximum Reimbursement Rates (1) 2017 $310 $261 $142
Family Child Care Homes
FCCH Full‐Time Maximum Reimbursement Rates (1) 2017 $252 $229 $171
FCCH Full‐Time Average (2) 2015 $190 $174 na
FCCH Part‐Time Maximum Reimbursement Rates (1) 2017 $195 $179 $138
(1) Maximum reimbursement data from http://www3.cde.ca.gov/rcscc/index.aspx. CDE data was viewed
October 2017 and current as of January 1, 2017.
(2) Full time average weekly costs for centers and FCCHs from California Childcare Resource and Referral
Network:
Sources: California Department of Education; California Child Care Resource & Referral Network;
Brion Economics, Inc.
https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/rrnetwork/pages/204/attachments/original/1499103375/All_Counties_Fi
nal.pdf?1499103375
131
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 33
The results show shortages of 9,970 infant spaces, 2,654 Preschool spaces, and 22,741 School
Age spaces for a total shortage of 35,365 spaces. Table 3‐16 also calculates unmet need for
children who need full‐time care and are eligible for subsidies. It shows that there are almost
58,400 children who qualify for subsidized care between the ages of 0 to 12 years and for which
there is not an available subsidized child care space. Currently 19% of children 0 to 12 who
qualify for subsidies are served with some sort of subsidized care or about 1 child out of 5.
There is also a shortage of almost 4,600 part‐time Preschool spaces for children ages 3 to 4
years who need subsidies and would attend for enrichment purposes.
Table 3‐15
Income Eligible Children Enrolled in Programs
Contra Costa County Needs Assessment ‐ 2017 Update
Year of Infants Preschool School Age
Age Data 0‐2 Years 3‐4 Years 5‐12 Years Total
Center‐Based (General) Program (CCTR) (1)2016 387 36 288 711
CSPP (1)2016 na 1,359 65 1,424
FCCHEN (1)2016 0 1 2 3
Migrant (1)2016 0 0 0 0
Handicap Program (1)2016 0 0 0
Alternative Payment (1)2016 142 160 67 369
CalWORKs Stage 1 (2)2017 322 288 366 976
CalWORKs Stage 2 (2)2017 291 333 428 1,052
CalWORKs Stage 3 (2)2017 117 210 658 985
Head Start (2)2017 na 1,380 na 1,380
Early Head Start (2)2017 573 na na 573
Other (ASES and other school age license‐
exempt programs)2017 6,531 6,531
Total 1,832 3,767 8,405 14,004
Percent Distribution 13% 27%60% 100%
Demand for Subsidized Care by Age (See Table 9)
Children at or Below 70% of SMI with Working
Parents 9,838 8,143 29,480 47,461
Surplus/(Shortage) of Subsidized Care (8,006) (4,376) (21,075) (33,457)
Percent of Demand Met 19% 46%29% 30%
(1) Data from American Institutes for Research Early Learning Needs Assessment Tool for 2016.
(2) Head Start, Early Head Start, and CalWORKs Stages 1, 2 and 3 data provided by Margaret Weigart Jacobs, CocoKids.
Sources: American Institutes of Research 2016; CocoKids; Brion Economics, Inc.
132
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 34
Table 3‐16
Countywide Unmet Need for Subsidized Care by Type of Care and By Age (1)
Contra Costa County Needs Assessment ‐ 2017 Update
Infants Preschool School Age
Type of Care Needed 0‐2 Years 3‐4 Years 5‐12 Years Total
Need for Full‐Time Care for Working
Parents ‐ Surplus/(Shortage) (9,970) (2,654) (22,741) (35,365)
% of Unmet Need for Full‐Time Working
Parents (% of children for whom there
are no spaces)75% 12% 57% 47%
Full‐Time Care Because of Work and
Eligible for State Subsidy (total number of
eligible children from low‐income
working families)15,396 12,744 44,264 72,404
# of Available Subsidized Spaces 1,832 3,767 8,405 14,004
# of Eligible children for whom there is no
subsidy 13,564 8,977 35,859 58,400
% of Unmet Need for those who Work
and are Eligible for State Subsidy (% of
eligible children for whom there is no
subsidy)88% 70% 81% 81%
Demand (Unmet Need) for Part‐Time
preschool care for enrichment/school
readiness (2)8,377
Unmet Need as % of Demand for Part‐
Time preschool care for
enrichment/readiness 69%
Demand (Unmet Need) for Part‐Time
preschool care for enrichment/school
readiness and eligible for state subsidy
(3)4,571
Unmet Need as % of Demand for Part‐
Time preschool care for
enrichment/school readiness and eligible
for state subsidy 40%
(1) This table and its calculations are based on a detailed worksheet provided by the Child Care
Coordinators Association and was not developed by Brion Economics, Inc.
(2) This figure includes need for half‐day preschool for all families regardless of income with
at least one parent at home. This includes Head Start, CSPP, and other 1/2 day licensed programs.
(3) This is the number of 3 and 4 year olds with at least one non‐working parent and in
household earning less than 70% SMI. See Tables 11 & 12.
Source: Brion Economics, Inc.
133
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 35
Table 3‐17 summarizes the total child care supply and demand by age group for the entire
County. The top of the table calculates the existing demand for child care based on the total
number of children by age group in the County, and applies labor force participation rates to
those totals to determine the number of children with working parents. Percentages are then
applied to those numbers to determine the number of children by age group who require
licensed care.
In the County, there are 13,400 Infants, 21,700 Preschool children, and 40,000 School Age
children requiring licensed care, or a total of 75,100 children, 0 to 12 years old. Comparing this
to current supply, the total surplus/shortfall of licensed spaces by age group is calculated.
Currently in Contra Costa County, there is a shortage of almost 10,000 infant spaces, 2,700
Preschool spaces, and 22,700 School Age spaces, for a total shortfall of approximately 35,400
spaces for all children ages 0 to 12 years in the County. This shortage excludes supply provided
by programs run by City recreation and park programs, YMCAs, and other unlicensed child care.
Table 3‐17 also shows total shortfall for subsidized care. Shortages for subsidized spaces total
33,500 across all ages, with 30% of demand being met by existing supply.
134
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 36
Table 3‐17
Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 in Contra Costa County
Contra Costa County Needs Assessment ‐ 2017 Update
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
No. of
Providers
0‐2 Years or
Infant
3 to 4 Years or
Preschool
5 to 12 Years or
School Age
Total, 0 to 12
Years
EXISTING DEMAND
Estimated Total Children (1) 41,476 33,857 120,185 195,517
Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2) 64% 64% 67% 66%
Children With Working Parents 26,599 21,713 80,698 129,009
% Children Needing Licensed Care (3) 50% 100% 50% 58%
Total Demand for Child Care Spaces 13,368 21,739 40,034 75,141
% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group 18%29%53%100%
% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care 32% 64% 33% 38%
EXISTING SUPPLY (4)
Family Child Care Home Supply (5)
Licensed for 8 491 982 1,964 982 3,928
Licensed for 14 333 951 1,902 1,505 4,358
Child Care Center Supply 348 1,459 14,861 8,275 24,595
Other License Exempt Programs 77 (6)6 358 6,531 6,895
Current Child Care Supply 1,249 3,398 19,085 17,293 39,776
Percent Distribution 9%48%43%100%
EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(9,970) (2,654) (22,741) (35,365)
Percent Distribution 28%8%64%100%
Percentage of Demand Met
by Existing Facilities/Spaces 25%88%43%53%
DEMAND FOR SUBSIDIZED CARE
Children at or Below 70% of SMI with Working Parents 9,838 8,143 29,480 47,461
Surplus (or shortage) of Subsidized Care (8,006) (4,376) (21,075) (33,457)
Percent of Subsidized Demand Met 19% 46% 29% 30%
Note: County totals are based on the sum of the totals for each of the cities in the study.
(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months.
Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.
(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two
working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.
(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The
remaining children are assumed to be cared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by
the study's data committee and deviate somewhat from most of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.
(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.
(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are
preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school
age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.
Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.
Child Care as of 2017
Child Care Demand
Child Care Spaces
135
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 37
4. Child Care Provider Survey Findings
Summary of Key Findings
A quarter of the 1250 licensed child care programs in Contra Costa County responded to an
invitation to an online survey designed to explore child care supply, demand, and facilities
issues. Of these:
1. Private and Faith‐Based Locations ‐ Child care center facility ownership was most often
within the private or faith‐based sector.
2. Strong Ownership ‐ 64% of center‐based programs and 72% of Family Child Care Homes
(FCCHs) own their facilities.
3. Stability ‐ The average tenure of centers in a single location was 23 years. The average
tenure of FCCHs was 12 years.
4. Overall Good Facility Conditions ‐ Center directors reported facilities overall in
adequate or good repair. About 7% anticipated imminent need to address structural
issues. A quarter of the FCCHs had facility renovations underway at the time of the
survey.
5. Enrollments ‐ 76% of centers and 69% of FCCHs are within 90% of their target
enrollments.
6. Expansion ‐ More than a third of centers and FCCHs would consider expansion. The
most frequently identified challenges by centers was finding a site and qualified staff.
For FCCHs the greatest challenge was cost, a site, and qualified staff.
Introduction
The Contra Costa County Local Planning Council contracted with Brion Economics, Inc. to
conduct a child care needs assessment and facilities study. This included a supply and demand
analysis and survey research. Brion Economics and Davis Consultant Network conducted two
online surveys of child care providers. One was directed to center directors, and the other to
licensed family child care providers. The family child care home provider (FCCH) survey was
provided in both Spanish and English.
The surveys were designed to:
136
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 38
1. Collect information related to child care supply and demand in Contra Costa County;
2. Better understand the status of early learning facilities;
3. Identify providers with interest in program expansion; and
4. Understand issues which related to expansion.
All Contra Costa County licensed and license‐exempt child care and preschool providers were
invited via a personalized email to respond to the linked survey.
Sample
CocoKids, the Contra Costa County Child Care Resource and Referral Services agency, provided
a list of 1,250 licensed child care providers. The 849 contacts with email addresses (68% of all
licensees) were invited to respond to the survey. Fifty‐eight percent of contacted center
directors and 32% of family child care home (FCCHH) providers completed the survey,
representing 25% of all licensed providers. This was considered a very strong response rate.
Responses were collected between September 25, 2017 and January 30, 2018.
License Type Licensed w/Emails Responses % of Total Licensed Response Rate
Center 445 179 102 23% 58%
Family Child Care Home 805 670 204 25% 30%
TOTAL 1,250 849 307 25% 36%
137
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 39
Responses were collected from all Contra Costa County municipalities and regions.
Collectively, responding programs care for nearly 9,500 children in Contra Costa County.
Reporting Centers care for 671 infants, 4,498 preschool age children, and 2,530 school age
children.
Reporting FCCHHs care for nearly 400 infants, 800 preschool age children, and 600 school age
children.
West
13%
Central
58%
East
23%
Unincorp
orated/N
ot
Answered
6%
Responding Centers by Region
West
25%
Central
31%
East
40%
Unincorp
orated
4%
Responding FCCHHs by Region
Region City Centers FCCHs
West
El Cerrito 3
13
(13%)
4
51
(25%)
Hercules 1 9
Pinole 2 2
Richmond 5 31
San Pablo 2 5
Central
Alamo 0
59
(58%)
1
64
(31%)
Clayton 0 1
Concord 18 25
Danville 7 7
Lafayette 6 2
Martinez 4 2
Moraga 0 1
Orinda 0 2
Pleasant Hill 8 9
San Ramon 1 5
Walnut Creek 15 9
East
Antioch 6
24
(22%)
35
81
(40%)
Brentwood 14 15
Oakley 1 16
Pittsburg 3 15
Unincorporated/No Answer 6 8
Total 102 204
138
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 40
Child Care Center Findings
Public Funding
Fifty‐eight percent of reporting sites have some public funding. This included four state
preschools, three Head Start programs, and 45 other sites that offer state‐subsidized care for
eligible families through Cal‐Works or the California Alternative Payment (CAP) program.
Building Type, Ownership, and Tenure
Responding center directors have programs housed in a variety of facility types, with most
centers being housed in converted residential buildings (25%), on faith‐based campuses (23%),
in a modular building (22%), or in a non‐modular building constructed for child care (18%).12
Only 16% of responding sites were situated in public facilities of which 10% were housed by a
school district, 3% in a city‐owned facility, and 3% in a community college or federal building.
12 Please note, respondents could select multiple building types, therefore the percentages add up to more than
100%.
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Infants
Pre‐School
School‐Aged
Children Enrolled in Respondent Programs by Age and Type
Centers FCCs
2
3
3
10
11
19
23
24
25
Multi‐Family Residential
City Owned Building
College or Federal Building
School District Owned
Converted Commercial
Non‐Modular Building Constructed Specifically for Child Care
Modular
Faith‐Based Host Location
Converted Residential Building
Number of Facility Types Reported
139
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 41
Center directors reported that their program had been housed in its current location from 1 to
75 years, with an average tenure of 23 years. The period of greatest center expansion was
1988‐2007. The greatest stability in facility ownership has been through faith‐based
organizations and private ownership.
Thirty‐six percent of programs rent their facility. Reported rents ranged from $1 to $15,474 per
month.13 Rent per square foot was calculated for the 13 renters that reported both figures. It
ranges from $0.55 to $3.91 per square foot, with an average of $1.71 per square foot. Two
centers report they are losing their leases, and another seven have concerns that their lease
may not be renewed.
13 On 3.16.18, an email was sent to the director of this site requesting verification.
7.5
14
17
20
20
22
23
24
26
26
27
Multi‐Family Housing
City Owned Building
College or Federal Building
Non‐Modular Building Constructed Specifically for Child…
Rented facility
School District Owned
Owned by program
Modular
Converted Commercial
Converted Residential Building
Faith‐Based Host Location
Average Tenure in Years by Facility Type or Status
140
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 42
Site Conditions, Repairs, and Renovations
One in five sites are actively involved in site repairs or renovations. Projects mentioned
included plumbing (new water heaters, sewage repairs); site expansion; installation of
playground equipment; roofing; painting; landscaping; and insulation. Cost was the main factor
for deferred maintenance.
Overall, sites reported well‐maintained facilities. The category most frequently reported as
having repair due was the building exterior (stucco, siding, parking, exterior lighting). Some
respondents noted that they are housed in older buildings.
Waitlists & Enrollment Targets
Respondents were asked “How well are you meeting your target enrollment for each of the following?”
Depending on type of spaces, 71 to 84% of responding programs were within 90% of their target
4
2
3
3
1
0
1
$.50‐$1.00
$1.00‐$1.50
$1.50‐$2.00
$2.00‐$2.50
$2.50‐$3.00
$3.00‐$3.50
$3.50‐$4.00
Frequencies of Rents by $/Sq. Ft.
7%
5%
4%
4%
7%
1%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Exterior (stucco/siding, parking, exterior lighting)
ADA Accessibility
Interior Finishes (lighting, floor coverings, painting)
Other Functions (plumbing, electrical, kitchen, heating,…
Building Structure (foundation, framing, roof)
Fire/Earthquake Safety
Adequacy of Building Components
Good or Excellent Adequate Due for Repair Urgent NA or Unknown
141
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 43
enrollments. Programs for school age care and full‐time infant/toddler care were most often near
capacity.
Fifty‐eight percent of sites reported that they maintain a waitlist.14
Infant/Toddler
(0‐24 months)
Preschool
(ages 2‐5 years)
School Age
(over 5 years of age)
Total 798 1,789 189
Range 1 to 500 1 to 1,000 1 to 50
Outlier 298 789 189
Thirteen of reporting sites had expanded in the past five years to accommodate 76 more
infant/toddler spaces, 38 preschool spaces, and 205 before or after school spaces. Their
reported expenses to accommodate the expansion included: permitting fees in the $500 to
$600 range; furnishings in the $1,000 to $10,000 range; facility rental; and expenses related to
additional staff. Some were required to participate in public hearings or getting school district
approval. Sites that found available space reported few challenges. Retrofitting for requisite
plumbing fixtures was reported by two as a major expense.
Public Funding
Fifty‐eight percent of centers reported some public funding. This included four state
preschools, three Head Start programs, and 45 sites that enrolled 239 children with CocoKids
managed subsidies. This funding includes both the CalWORKs and California Alternative
14 One Head Start director from Concord reported waitlists of 500 infant/toddlers and 1,000 preschool aged
children. She has been emailed requesting more information. Her numbers were deleted from the bottom row of
the table above.
71%
73%
74%
76%
82%
84%
29%
27%
26%
24%
18%
16%
Part‐time infant/toddler spaces (n=34)
Full‐time preschool spaces (n=74)
Part‐time preschool spaces (n=72)
Full‐time infant/toddler spaces (n=42)
After‐school spaces (n=44)
Before‐school spaces (n=38)
Reporting Centers Meeting Enrollment Targets
On/Near Target Below Target
142
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 44
Payment (CAP) subsidy programs. Sixty percent of sites reported that the public funding
adequately covered the cost of care. Where the subsidy does not meet expenses, sites
supplement with parent fees, higher fees from non‐subsidized families, fundraising, or they
take a loss.
Interest in Expansion
One question asked “Would you or your organization/business consider expanding to serve
more children in Contra Costa County at this or another location? (Note: this question is not
limited to the site you have been describing in previous responses.) Of the 86 directors who
answered this question, they were fairly evenly divided between those that would like to
expand, those who would consider expansion, and those with no interest in expansion.
Of the nine sites that are considering expanding within the year, only one anticipated no
barriers to proceeding. The most anticipated challenges were difficulty finding space, finding
qualified staff, having the time and/or expertise to manage an expansion, and having the funds
to expand. Nine directors offered suggestions for available sites.
36%
30%
34%
Interested in Expansion?
Yes, we would like to expand
We might consider expanding
No, we are not interested in expansion
9
6
5
7
6
3
11
Within a year
1‐2 years
2‐5 years
Not sure
By When Might You Expand?
YES!Maybe
143
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 45
The following centers granted permission to be listed in this report as interested in expansion.
Region Center
West County 1. Hope Preschool, Richmond
Central County 2. St. Michael's Preschool, Concord
3. Little Bridges Child Care, Danville
4. Center of Gravity, Pleasant Hill
5. Gan B'nai Shalom Preschool, Walnut Creek
6. Walnut Avenue Community Christian Preschool, Walnut Creek
7. My Spanish Village Preschools, Inc., Walnut Creek
East County 8. Sunshine Valley Childcare Center and Preschool, Antioch
9. Baby Yale Academy, Brentwood
Closing Comments
The survey ended with an open‐ended question “Do you have anything else you would like to
tell us as we consider ways to ensure the adequate supply of child care facilities in Contra Costa
County for the years to come?”
Consider Distribution of Facilities We need a quality preschool in the area I am currently located, but
we are being forced to move.
Help with Affordable Facilities Finding space in this area is very expensive and hard to find.
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
3
5
Licensing issues
Challenge of finding contractors
Lack of subsidized funding
Don't want to tackle the city permitting process
Lack owner's approval for renovations
We don't anticipate any challenges or barriers and will be…
State reimbursement rate insufficient to cover costs
Lack of funding for expansion
Lack time and/or expertise to manage an expansion project
Lack of availability of qualified staff for expansion
Difficulty finding an available site
Anticipated Challenges to Expansion
144
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 46
It would be great if there were incentives for small business owners
to open/expand sites. We are non‐profit and cannot seem to find a
location that would work for us to expand, this has been challenging
but without getting a real estate agent which I am not sure is the
direction I want to go in, I'm not sure of another way. Thank you!
We all need funding but more importantly we need spaces to
rent/lease that we can afford. Rents are so high. It is shameful that
we cannot afford to help children and families.
Help with Early Start I would like to find out how to get about getting a contract for Early
start.
Infant & Toddler Care I would like to add an infant room for ages 6 weeks‐12 months.
Our County desperately needs more infant care!
There seems to be a need in our area for infant care. We had looked
at the possibility of starting one here years ago but the cost of
starting an infant care scared away our church board from going any
further with it.
There's a huge need for 0‐3‐year old children.
Is there really a shortage? I believe there are adequate spaces. Many sites I know of are not full.
I believe at some time ago there was also a push for more sites
(many in home daycares were open) this caused many sites to close
because children were spread out too thin. This questionnaire seems
to be aimed at this again.
Yes, we currently need new children to serve.
Let's Partner The Center of Gravity is committed to bringing high quality early
education to Contra Costa County and making sure it is obtainable to
all families. We are open to partnering to make that happen.
Staffing Need continuous help with finding qualifying staff.
Support for Expansion We providers need support for expanding and serve more children
Thank you Continue to support schools and staff as you currently do! Thank
you!!
145
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 47
Family Child Care Provider Findings
About Family Child Care (FCCH)
The State of California requires licensing of child care offered in caregivers’ homes. Family Child
Care Homes (FCCHs). The licenses are classified for either a small, up to 8 children, or large
family child care home up to 14 children. These classifications define maximum enrollments,
depending on the ages of children.
Small FCCHs can select to have a maximum of: four infants or six children with no more than
three who are infants; or up to eight children when one is school‐aged and no more than two
infants are in care.
The maximum enrollments of large FCCHs require an assistant and are limited to twelve
children when no more than four are infants or up to fourteen children when one child is
school‐aged and no more than three infants are in care.
These variations in configuration provide flexibility for FCCH providers, but limit assessment of
available spaces by age.
FCCH Survey Respondents
1. Of the completed surveys, 191 (88%) were collected through the English version and 25
(12%) from the Spanish translation.
2. Licensed capacity was evenly divided between small (53%) and large (47%) homes.
3. Respondents were currently providing care to nearly 400 infants, 800 preschool
children, and just over 600 school‐aged children.
4. The caregivers reported being in operation between 0 and 44 years, with an average of
12 years. The average number of years in the current location was 6 years.
5. 72% of the respondents owned their homes. Of the 28% who rent, they pay between
$1,200 and $4,500 monthly, with an average rent of $1,360 per month. Only two
providers anticipated problems renewing the lease.
146
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 48
Waitlists & Enrollment Targets
Respondents were asked “How well are you meeting your target enrollment for each of the
following?” Depending on type of spaces, 60 to 72% of responding FCCHHs were meeting or
nearly meeting their target enrollments. The group least likely to be at capacity was full‐time
preschool, for which 40% of respondents reported that they were below their targets
Overall FCCHs were less likely than centers to meet their target enrollments in all categories
except part‐time infant/toddler care, where they outperformed centers. This suggests the
FCCHs are meeting a demand for this niche.
The survey asked “Approximately, how many children are on your wait list?” by age group.
Eighty FCCHs (39%) had waitlists, which totaled to 358 children.
Of those 158 sites with any infants currently enrolled, 40% (63) reported a total of 214
infants on their waitlist.
Of the 179 sites with any preschool age children enrolled, 20% (35) reported a total of
115 children on their waitlists.
Of the 124 sites with any school age children enrolled, 10% (12) reported a total of 26
school‐aged children on their waitlists.
The waitlist findings support national and California trends in greatest supply shortage for
infant care.
60%
70%
71%
72%
72%
74%
40%
30%
29%
28%
28%
26%
Full‐time preschool spaces
Part‐time preschool spaces
Before‐school spaces
Full‐time infant/toddler spaces
After‐school spaces
Part‐time infant/toddler spaces
Reporting FCCHs Meeting Enrollment Targets
On/Near Target Below Target
147
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 49
Site Repairs and Renovations
Nearly one in four (23%) of respondents reported that they were currently undergoing repairs
or renovations to improve their home for the child care program. The renovations included
landscape plantings, fencing, hardscape, climbing structures, exterior storage structures,
painting, interior flooring, bathroom upgrades, lighting, and heating and air conditioning repair.
Nearly half had researched renovations which they decided not to pursue. The most frequently
reported barrier was a lack of funds.
Interest in Expansion
Thirty‐six percent of responding small FCCHs and 42% of large FCCHs expressed interested in
expansion.
Of the 44 sites considering expanding within the next year, 25% don’t anticipate any barriers to
expansion. The barriers to expansion most frequently cited were lack of funding, difficulty
finding a site, and difficulty finding staff. In addition to the offered selection of possible
barriers, respondents offered additional reasons: high city permitting fees, being at licensed
217
115
26
Infant (158 FCCHs) Preschool (179 FCCHs) School Age (124 FCCHs)
Number of Children on Waitlist by Age
39
24
35
37
18
40
No
I might consider expansion
Yes
Would you consider expansion?
Large FCCs Small FCCs
148
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 50
capacity, preferring to operate as a FCCH rather than a center, low enrollments, fire marshal
disallowing use of upstairs space, and objections of neighbors.
The following FCCHs gave permission to be listed in this report as having interest in expansion.
Region City FCCH Name
West
El Sobrante
1. Little Earth Seeds
2. Lulu's Day Care
Hercules 3. Kathy Duchaussee, Loving Arms Family Daycare
Richmond
4. Nina's Day Care
5. Veronicas Family Daycare
6. S Family Day Care
7. Little hands Family Child Care
8. Dee's Tiny Tots University
9. Kera's Family Quality Child Care
10. Anielka Family Day Care
11. Ricon de Luz
12. Lollipops Family Daycare
13. Nina's Day Care
14. Carmen Diaz, Little Omar's Daycare
San Pablo
15. Tiny Footprints
16. Le'Sade Learning Academy
17. Tiny Footprints
Central Concord
18. Kesha Family Day Care
19. Gin's Family Child Care
20. Passion Polanco’s Family Child Care
21. Imagination Station Preschool
4
5
6
7
10
10
13
19
44
Lack owner's approval for renovations
Lack time and/or expertise to manage an…
Licensing issues
Don't want to tackle the city permitting…
State reimbursement rates
Lack of subsidized funding
Lack of availability of qualified staff for…
Difficulty finding an available site
Lack of funding
Reported Barriers to Expansion
149
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 51
22. Orellana's Daycare
23. Nazli Sajjad
24. Nekessa Joy Yanila, Little Montessori Home
25. Linda Matus, Nana's Place
26. Biana Kaplun
Lafayette 27. De Colores Daycare
Orinda 28. Rebecca Van Voorhis‐Gilbert, Orinda Afternoons
Pleasant Hill 29. Thelma Escobar
San Ramon
30. Hope Win Academy
31. Little Stars Day Care
32. Norma's Kiddie Preschool, San Ramon
33. ABC SunnyCare
34. Lil Bears Preschool
35. Crayoland Family Daycare
Walnut Creek
36. Kids Kastle Childcare
37. Mary's Family Child Care & Preschool
East
Antioch
38. 2nd Home Family Day Care
39. Janell Collins
40. Training Children Childcare & Learning Center
41. Giggles & Scribbles Family Daycare
42. One of a Kind Childcare
43. Little Peeps
44. Pringle's Christian Child Care Home
45. 2 Cousins Day Care
46. LaDasha Biagas‐Wilson, 123 Ready Set Grow Academy
47. Seasons Family Daycare
48. Perry's House
49. Tiny Precious Lambs Family Child Care
50. Magical Moments Loving Daycare
51. Little Ones Early Head Start
52. Tasheena Family Childcare
53. Michelle's Little Blossoms Daycare
54. LOL Tots Daycare
55. Ree Ree's Little Scholars
56. Happy Faces Childcare
57. Rosa'dar care
58. Vilmary’s Day Care
Bay Point
59. Luv Muffins Daycare
60. Mundo FUNtastico
61. Nimberly’s daycare
Brentwood 62. Learning Through Play Family Daycare
150
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 52
63. Pegah
64. Kinder College Preschool/Childcare
65. Tailila Scott, Momma Tees child care
66. Keiki Care 123
Oakley
67. Angela Engel (Angela's Angels)
68. Dynasty Rose Family Child Care
69. Alisa's "Beary Special Family" Childcare
70. Happy Hearts
71. God's Little Angels Daycare & Preschool
Pittsburg
72. Frances Robinson (Franny the Nanny Daycare)
73. Misty Little Angels
74. Kamari's Family Daycare
75. Happy Days Family Childcare & Preschool
76. Gibson Family Childcare
77. Patricia's Daycare
Other Comments
The survey concluded with an open‐ended question “Do you have anything else you would like
to tell us as we consider ways to ensure an adequate supply of child care facilities in Contra
Costa County for the years to come?” The most frequent comment was gratitude for all
assistance provided to the child care community. That was followed by a desire for referrals
from CocoKids. Others observed the low profit margin for caregivers and suggested help with
financing, free or low‐cost teacher training, free or low‐cost educational materials, and help
with expansion and promotions. One person suggested all FCCHs have publicly available quality
ratings.
1
2
3
3
4
4
5
10
11
Public quality ratings
Help with promotions
Assistance with expansion
Free or low cost educational supplies
Free or low cost training
Child care subsidies
Financing (loans and grants)
More referrals
Thank you!
Open‐Ended Comments
151
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 53
5. Stakeholder Survey
Introduction
The Contra Costa County Local Planning and Advisory Council of Early Care and Education (LPC)
in partnership with First 5 Contra Costa, Contra Costa County Office of Education (CCCOE), and
Contra Costa County Conservation and Development Department contracted with Brion
Economics, Inc. (BEI) to conduct a child care needs assessment and facilities study. This work
included a supply and demand analysis and survey research. Brion Economics and Davis
Consultant Network conducted two types of surveys: a child care provider survey and a
stakeholder survey. This document summarized the findings for the latter.
Summary of Key Findings
1. Faith‐based organizations and school districts are strategic partners for expansion of
child care facilities. Most own their facilities and have complementary facility uses.
2. Cities in general have not broadly explored their potential role in facilitating
expansion of child care facilities, with a few noted exceptions such as Concord’s
reduction of fees for licensed family child care providers. City planners are potential
partners who hold local knowledge of potential sites and could be approached to
help develop collaborative solutions.
3. There is widespread awareness that many sectors will need to be engaged to
address the development of child care facilities to meet the projected demand.
Sample and Method
The survey was designed to:
Build awareness of the projected shortages of child care facilities in Contra Costa
County;
To understand existing strategies in place to develop child care facilities; to seek
perceptions of where responsibilities lie; and
To identify real properties with potential to house early learning programs.
This survey was focused on opinions from various sectors in the County to solicit a wide range
of ideas on how to address the existing early learning facilities shortage. By design, the
stakeholders were not limited to a discrete set of respondents. Both targeted and open
152
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 54
engagement strategies were used. School Superintendents and facilities personnel were invited
by direct email invitation by County Superintendent of Schools, Karen Sakata. Staff from county
and city planning departments were invited to respond and distribute the survey through
personalized email invitations from members of the Board of Supervisors. Davis Consultant
Network developed lists and sent invitations to 16 large employers, 52 faith‐based
organizations, 76 real estate development firms, and 18 non‐profit organizations. The LPC and
First 5 Contra Costa County were offered the web link to distribute through their
communication networks. Seventy‐five (75) survey responses were collected between January
30, 2018 and June 6, 2018. This report summarizes responses received, which have not been
independently verified.
Figure 1: Survey respondents self‐identified by their sector related to child care
facilities, land use or real estate in Contra Costa County.
Sector Individual Responses
Real Estate Developer 1
Local Business 1
Community College District 1
County of Contra Costa 1
Non‐Profit 4
Interested Individual 10
Local School Districts 13
City Planners 14
Faith‐Based Organizations 29
Total 74
Stakeholder Survey Findings by Sector
Faith‐Based Organizations
Sample
The research team developed a list of faith‐based organizations (FBOs) from an internet search of
members of the Contra Costa Interfaith Coalition and the Multi‐Faith Action Coalition. Twenty‐eight
individual responses were received from 24 different entities.
153
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 55
Figure 2: Number of responding faith‐based organizations by city. (n=24 FBOs)
We asked if each respondent if their congregation owned their facility. With ownership comes
greater control over facility usage. Eighty‐three percent (n=20) of reported FBOs own their
facilities.
One‐third of the reporting congregations (n = 8) currently provide space for licensed weekday
child care. Half of the respondents (n = 14 respondents representing 12 congregations) thought
there was some likelihood (“very likely”, “likely” and “somewhat likely”) that their congregation
would consider incorporating new or additional space for child care. One was currently looking
for a suitable child care operator and two others indicated a commitment to serve the
community and be responsive to emerging needs.
When asked if they would rent space to an independent child care operator, the number likely
to offer space dropped to 37% (n = 11 respondents representing 9 congregations). Reasons
offered for this included: avoidance of competition for existing on‐site child care; competing
uses, such as offering space for a school for special needs children; and limited resources to
develop license‐qualified spaces.
154
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 56
Figure 3: Responses by FBOs to question “In your opinion, how likely is it that your congregation
would consider incorporating new or additional space for child care either within its current
facilities or on its grounds within the next ten years?” (n=24 congregations)
City Planners
Sample
Contra Costa Supervisors sent email requests to city managers and city planning departments
inviting them to respond to the survey. The research team sent a third reminder to city
planning offices of cities that had not yet responded. Fourteen individual responses were
collected from the following 12 of the 19 Contra Costa County municipalities. These were:
Brentwood; Clayton; Concord; El Cerrito; Hercules; Lafayette; Oakley; Orinda; Pinole; Pittsburg;
Pleasant Hill; and Walnut Creek. Additionally, staff from Danville answered some survey
questions in a telephone interview when the research team was verifying email addresses for
the survey invitation.
Addressing Child Care in Planning
Several questions were asked about existing planning strategies to provide for the development
of child care facilities. Three‐quarters of the responding cities (n = 10) reported addressing
child care in their general plan. The cities of Clayton15, Pinole16, and Walnut Creek17 offer
incentives to developers of multi‐family residences to include child care. Clayton, Concord, and
Danville charge child care development fees.
15 The City of Clayton offers either a density bonus or other concession or incentive to residential projects which
include child care facilities. See:
https://library.municode.com/ca/clayton/codes/municipal_code?nodeId=TIT17ZO_CH17.90AFHODEBORE_17.90.0
60CHCAFA
16 New multi‐family residential developments within Pinole that include on‐site day care as a community benefit
may be eligible for residential density or intensity bonuses.
17 Walnut Creek offers a density bonus when planning department is scoring proposed developments that include
child care. See: Walnut Creek Muni Code section 10‐2.3.1007 Density Bonus for Child Care Facilities. See:
http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/WalnutCreek/#!/walnutcreek10/WalnutCreek1002C.html#10
6
6
8
4
Likely or very likely
Somewhat likely
Not at all likely
No response
Likeliness to Add Child Care
155
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 57
Figure 4: Summary chart of cities reported use of various strategies to encourage child care facilities. (n=12)
The responding city staff were asked their opinions of the likelihood that their jurisdiction
would consider various strategies to ensure sufficiency of child care facilities. Modest optimism
was offered by 79% of respondents who thought their jurisdiction would be “somewhat likely”
to participate in some type of county‐wide facilities child care funding plan. Planners
considered developer impact fees the most likely funding strategy to be considered, but
support for that was still quite modest. No city staff were aware of any major child care
planning or policy efforts in their city. Concord staff noted that they have reduced application
fees and requirements for small and large licensed family child care programs in their city.
Figure 5: Summary chart of responses to a series of questions asking respondents opinion of the likelihood of their jurisdiction
considering specific funding strategies. (n=14)
0
3
3
9
Employers incentives for on‐site child care
Child care impact fee
Multi‐family residence development incentives
Address in General Plan
Planning Dept. Strategies for Child Care
1
11
3
1
1
1
1
2
5
5
5
6
2
8
8
8
8
8
Participate in county‐wide child care facilities financing plan
Developer impact fees
Parcel taxes
Special benefit assessments
Integrated finance districts or other community facilities
district
Bond financing
Opinions of Likelihood to Pursue Funding Strategies
Likely Somewhat Likely Not at all Likely No Opinion
156
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 58
Potential Sites for Child Care Facilities
Several questions were asked about potential sites for new child care facilities.
Brentwood, Concord, Oakley, and Pleasant Hill identified several planned or in‐
construction projects that will include child care.
Clayton, Concord, Oakley, and Pittsburg identified several currently‐proposed
development projects that could possibly accommodate child care in the facilities or on
their grounds.
Pleasant Hill and Oakley identified city‐owned sites with potential for constructing child
care facilities.
Clayton, Oakley, and Pinole identified sites within their jurisdictions with potential to
accommodate child care facilities.
Public School Districts (K‐12 & Community College)
Sample
County Superintendent of Schools Karen Sakata distributed three direct invitations to all the district
superintendents requesting that a member of their staff respond to the survey. The research team sent
an additional reminder to district facilities personnel from districts that had not yet responded to the
initial two requests. Responses were received from 12 of the invited 25 school districts (which included
primary, secondary, joint, county office, and community college districts). Responding districts/schools
included: Acalanes Union High; Byron Union; Canyon; Contra Costa Community College; Contra Costa
Mauzy School; John Swett Unified; Liberty Union; Martinez Unified; Moraga; Orinda Union; Pittsburg
Unified; and Walnut Creek.
Existing & Potential On‐Site Child Care
Districts were asked if they provided on‐site child care. See table below. Martinez Unified School
District had previously offered a Head Start program which is no longer housed by the district. Bryon
Union, the Mauzy School, John Swett Unified and Pittsburg Unified all reported that they have potential
rooms, portables or land which might be converted for early education programs.
157
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 59
On‐Site Child Care Offered by Child Age
School District 0‐2
years
3‐4 years
(District
Provided)
3‐4 years
(Privately
Provided)
5‐12
years
Potential for
Expansion
Acalanes Union High
Byron Union
Canyon
Contra Costa Community College District
Contra Costa County Mauzy School
John Swett Unified
Liberty Union High
Martinez Unified
Moraga
Orinda Union
Pittsburg Unified
Walnut Creek
Real Estate Developers
Sample
Invitations were sent by the research team to 76 real estate development entities active in the
county. Only one responded.
Challenges
This developer had previously considered including child care in a project, but it proved too
challenging. “Current city and muni fees [municipal fees] have increased substantially in recent
years. Hard cost escalation during that same time has also been double‐digit growth, year over
year. Accommodating child care facilities is economically next to impossible due to these two
items.” When asked for suggestions to meet the growing demand for child care, the developer
stated: “Designate sites for child care facilities and incentivize developers to develop those sites
as child care. Requiring developers to put child care in new multi‐family projects is going to
result in higher lease rates for tenants. Rising construction costs and city/muni fees have
resulted in margins already being below industry standard levels. Requiring day care centers in
new multi‐family developments will either result in the projects not being developed due to not
being economically feasible or increased rental rates for tenants.”
158
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 60
Other Respondents & Comments
Twenty‐six other respondents from the non‐profit or private sector identified six other
potential child care sites.
The survey ended with an open‐ended question seeking questions and comments. Some
notable responses included the following.
1. Can cities offer facilities for child care at discounted rates?
2. Develop a clearinghouse of potential sites that child care providers can consider.
3. Consider expedited licensing for expansion of existing or development of new sites.
4. Offer educational sessions on financing options.
5. Plan to link child care and senior facilities.
Who has the Responsibility to Solve?
A closing question asked, “Who or what entities do you believe are responsible to ensure a
continued supply of quality early learning and child care in Contra Costa County?” The public
sector at all levels of government was most frequently identified as responsible: the state,
county, First 5, County Office of Education, local school districts and city government. It was
commonly recognized that any solution would require collaboration across levels of
government and between the public and private sectors. See chart below.
Figure 6: Response to question “Who or what entities do you believe are responsible to ensure a
continued supply of quality early learning and child care in Contra Costa County?” (n=72)
18
19
27
27
27
28
29
32
35
39
39
40
41
45
Other Private Business
Real Estate Developers
Non‐Profit Sector
Parents
Philanthropy
Faith Based Organizations
Large Employers
City Government
Local School Districts
Child Care Providers
Contra Costa County Office of Education
Contra Costa County First 5 Commission
Contra Costa County Government
State of California
Selected Entities Responsible
159
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 61
Identified Potential New Child Care Locations
Several questions asked if the respondent knew of any potential sites for child care. The map and chart
below summarize suggested sites.
160
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 62
New Expansion
A Contra Costa County Office of Education, Mauzy School School District
B St. Ignatius of Antioch Catholic Church FBO
Brentwood C Kiddie Academy, 8680 Brentwood Boulevard Private
Byron D Byron Union, Discovery Rooms School District
Clayton E St. John’s Episcopal Church FBO
F Concord Child Care Center Child Care
G Bright Stars Daycare, Large Family Daycare Child Care
of Contra Costa County owns parcels of land throughout the county County
Lafayette I Lafayette‐Orinda Presbyterian Church FBO
Martinez J Martinez Early Childhood Center FBO
K The SE corner of Laurel Rd. and Main St. is a small parcel that Private
L Shea Homes has a small facility at the Summer Lakes Subdivis Private
MFirst Academy
Orinda N First Church of Christ, Scientist FBO
O Elementary & Middle School campuses owned by the West Co School District
P Appian 80 Shopping Center, Tara Hills Drive, West of Appian W Private
Q Pittsburg Unified School District
R Civic Center Offices, NW Corner of Hwy 4 & Railroad Ave City
S St. Andrews Presbyterian Church FBO
T 250 Cleaveland Rd. ‐ 0.25 acres vacant land Private
U Woodsworth Lane ‐ 0.20 acres vacant land (no address) Private
V Hookston Rd. ‐ 0.14 acres vacant land Private
W Faith Lutheran Church, 50 Cleaveland FBO
X Fountainhead Day Care ‐ 1715 Oak Park Blvd Child Care
Y Kidz Kastle ‐ 1925 Oak Park Blvd Child Care
Rodeo Z John Swett Unified, Rodeo Hills Elementary School District
Walnut Creek AA Walnut Creek Church of Christ FBO
Concord
Oakley
Pinole
Pittsburg
Pleasant Hill
Map City Location Type Planned Possibility For
Alamo
161
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 63
Contributors
We would like to thank all those who responded to our survey. Special thanks to the following who
granted permission to be acknowledged in this report.
Name Agency
Julie Andereggen Golden Hills Community Church
Matthew Belasco First Church of Christ, Scientist, Orinda
Bruce Burns St. Paul's Episcopal Church
Melissa Cady Concord United Methodist Church
Joel Carico First Church of Christ, Scientist, Orinda
Gloria Faircloth Grace Episcopal Church
Mindy Gentry City of Clayton
Debbie Gold Temple Beth Hillel
Ernie Hess St Andrew's Presbyterian Church
Debbie Hill City of Brentwood
Dave Humphrey Temple Isaiah
Rabbi Dean Kertesz Temple Beth Hillel
Phelicia Lang Golden Hills Community Church
Sungho Lee Concord United Methodist Church
Rev. Will McGarvey Interfaith Council of CCC
Charles Miller St. John Vianney Catholic Church
Marie Morgan Unity of Walnut Creek
Natalie Oleas Family Justice Center
Mike Pawlowski Martinez Unified School District
Jaime Polson Lafayette‐Orinda Presbyterian Church
Heather Posner Temple Isaiah
Kristin Powell Unity of Walnut Creek
Beverly Price St. Paul's Episcopal Church
Camilla Rand Contra Costa County Community Services Bureau
Winston Rhodes City of Pinole
Father Robert Rien St. Ignatius of Antioch Catholic Church
Hector Rojas City of Pittsburg
Rev. Eric Sherlock Danville Congregational Church
Laura Simpson City of Concord
The Rev. Dr. Deborah White Grace Episcopal Church
Colleen Wilson St. John’s Episcopal Church
City of Hercules
City of Oakley
City of Walnut Creek
Concord Childcare Center
Liberty Union School District
St. John Vianney Catholic Church
162
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 64
Additional City Data
City staff from the following cities offered some sources for additional information regarding
land‐use projects proposed or in development, as well as how to access their general plans.
City List of Projects in the Pipeline General Plan References of Child Care
Brentwood www.brentwoodca.gov/gov/cd/planning/curren
t.asp
The general commercial designation allows for concentrations of a
variety of mixed use and service type businesses, including day
care centers.
www.brentwoodca.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=2
6394
Clayton Email Community Development Director, Mindy
Gentry at mgentry@ci.clayton.ca.us to request.
Concord Email Planning Manager Laura Simpson at
Laura.Simpson@cityofconcord.org
El Cerrito www.el‐cerrito.org/718/General‐Plan
Lafayette
www.lovelafayette.org/?splash=http%3a%2f%2f
lafayette.icitywork.com%2f&____isexternal=tru
e
Oakley www.oakleyinfo.com
Encouraged in all residential zones and specifically mentioned in
the Growth Management Element. www.ci.oakley.ca.us/wp‐
content/uploads/2015/07/2016‐Update‐Complete_2‐2‐16.pdf
Pittsburg https://app.smartsheet.com/b/publish?EQBCT=
0af19f7941c94a9f8407285ae7e06827
Pleasant Hill Interactive Planning Projects Map on City
Website www.ci.pleasant‐hill.ca.us/DocumentCenter/Home/View/314
Walnut Creek www.walnut‐
creek.org/home/showdocument?id=4970
WC General Plan 2025 ‐ Chapter 4, page 4‐3: "Single‐family
residential units, churches, schools, parks, public/semi‐public
buildings, accessory uses, and day‐care facilities are permitted in
all residential land use districts provided they meet the
requirements of the underlying zone and applicable general plan
policies."
163
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 65
APPENDIX A :
NEEDS ASSESSMENT TABLES BY CITY
AND COUNTY
164
Final Report
Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017
Appendix A Table Index
Table 1 Summary of Demographics by City and Age: 2017 to 2027
Table 2 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for City of Antioch
Table 3 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for City of Antioch
Table 4 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for City of Brentwood
Table 5 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for City of Brentwood
Table 6 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for City of Clayton
Table 7 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for City of Clayton
Table 8 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for City of Concord
Table 9 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for City of Concord
Table 10 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for Town of Danville
Table 11 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for Town of Danville
Table 12 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for City of El Cerrito
Table 13 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for City of El Cerrito
Table 14 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for City of Hercules
Table 15 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for City of Hercules
Table 16 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for City of Lafayette
Table 17 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for City of Lafayette
Table 18 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for City of Martinez
Table 19 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for City of Martinez
Table 20 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for Town of Moraga
Table 21 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for Town of Moraga
Table 22 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for City of Oakley
Table 23 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for City of Oakley
Table 24 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for City of Orinda
Table 25 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for City of Orinda
Table 26 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for City of Pinole
Table 27 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for City of Pinole
Table 28 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for City of Pittsburg
Table 29 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for City of Pittsburg
Table 30 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for City of Pleasant Hill
Table 31 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for City of Pleasant Hill
Table 32 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for City of Richmond
Table 33 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for City of Richmond
Table 34 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for City of San Pablo
Table 35 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for City of San Pablo
Table 36 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for City of San Ramon
Table 37 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for City of San Ramon
Table 38 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for City of Walnut Creek
Table 39 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for City of Walnut Creek
Table 40 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for Region of Alamo‐Blackhawk
Table 41 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for Region of Alamo‐Blackhawk
Table 42 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for Region of Rodeo‐Crockett
Table 43 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for Region of Rodeo‐Crockett
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.18 8/29/2018
66
165
Final Report
Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017
Appendix A Table Index
Table 44 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for East Rural Contra Costa County
Table 45 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for East Rural Contra Costa County
Table 46 Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017 for Contra Costa County
Table 47 Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027 for Contra Costa County
Table 48 Demographic Forecast by Area in 2017
Table 49 Demographic Forecast by Area in 2027
Table 50 Child Care Supply by Type and Age 2017
Source: Brion Economics, Inc.
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.18 8/29/2018
67
166
Final ReportTable 1Summary of Demographics by City and Age: 2017 to 2027Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 20172017 2027 2017 2027 2017 2027 2017 2027 2017 2027Population108,720 114,320 54,380 56,560 11,300 11,600 133,320 148,000 45,580 46,880Percent of Total County9.7% 9.6% 4.9% 4.7% 1.0% 1.0% 11.9% 12.4% 4.1% 3.9%Net Change '17 to '275,600 2,180 300 14,680 1,300 Percent Change '17 to '275%4%3%11%3%Population by Age0‐35 Months4,534 4,767 2,105 2,190 262 269 5,436 6,034 1,170 1,2033‐4 years3,602 3,788 1,929 2,006 261 268 4,077 4,526 1,193 1,2275‐9 years7,798 8,199 4,569 4,752 743 763 7,720 8,570 3,345 3,44010‐12 years5,245 5,515 3,103 3,228 5405554,7675,2922,3302,396Total Children 0‐12 years21,179 22,269 11,706 12,175 1,806 1,854 22,000 24,422 8,037 8,267Percent of Total County10.8% 10.7% 6.0% 5.8% 0.9% 0.9% 11.3% 11.7% 4.1% 4.0%Net Change '17 to '271,091 469 48 2,422 229 Percent of Population by Age0‐35 Months4.2% 4.2% 3.9% 3.9% 2.3% 2.3% 4.1% 4.1% 2.6% 2.6%3‐4 years3.3% 3.3% 3.5% 3.5% 2.3% 2.3% 3.1% 3.1% 2.6% 2.6%5‐9 years7.2% 7.2% 8.4% 8.4% 6.6% 6.6% 5.8% 5.8% 7.3% 7.3%10‐12 years4.8%4.8%5.7%5.7%4.8%4.8%3.6%3.6%5.1%5.1%Total Children 0‐12 years19.5% 19.5% 21.5% 21.5% 16.0% 16.0% 16.5% 16.5% 17.6% 17.6%Note county total does not equal sum of cities/areas due to rounding.Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Sources: ABAG Projections '13; Brion Economics, Inc.ContinuedConcordDanvilleCity/AreaAntiochBrentwoodClaytonPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201868167
Final ReportTable 1Summary of Demographics by City and Age: 2017 to 2027Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017PopulationPercent of Total CountyNet Change '17 to '27Percent Change '17 to '27Population by Age0‐35 Months3‐4 years5‐9 years10‐12 yearsTotal Children 0‐12 yearsPercent of Total CountyNet Change '17 to '27Percent of Population by Age0‐35 Months3‐4 years5‐9 years10‐12 yearsTotal Children 0‐12 yearsCity/AreaContinued2017 2027 2017 2027 2017 2027 2017 2027 2017 202730,760 31,920 28,420 32,380 26,420 27,480 44,380 45,760 16,860 17,6002.7% 2.7% 2.5% 2.7% 2.4% 2.3% 4.0% 3.8% 1.5% 1.5%1,160 3,960 1,060 1,380 740 4%14%4%3%4%1,036 1,075 976 1,112 704 733 1,334 1,376 285 298792 822 745 849 690 717 1,010 1,041 348 3631,516 1,573 1,653 1,883 1,806 1,878 2,284 2,355 947 9887507781,0481,1941,1911,2391,4421,4876636924,094 4,248 4,421 5,037 4,391 4,567 6,070 6,259 2,243 2,3422.1% 2.0% 2.3% 2.4% 2.2% 2.2% 3.1% 3.0% 1.1% 1.1%154 616 176 189 98 3.4% 3.4% 3.4% 3.4% 2.7% 2.7% 3.0% 3.0% 1.7% 1.7%2.6% 2.6% 2.6% 2.6% 2.6% 2.6% 2.3% 2.3% 2.1% 2.1%4.9% 4.9% 5.8% 5.8% 6.8% 6.8% 5.1% 5.1% 5.6% 5.6%2.4%2.4%3.7%3.7%4.5%4.5%3.2%3.2%3.9%3.9%13.3% 13.3% 15.6% 15.6% 16.6% 16.6% 13.7% 13.7% 13.3% 13.3%Note county total does not equal sum of cities/areas due to rounding.Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Sources: ABAG Projections '13; Brion Economics, Inc.ContinuedMartinezMoragaEl CerritoHerculesLafayettePrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201869168
Final ReportTable 1Summary of Demographics by City and Age: 2017 to 2027Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017PopulationPercent of Total CountyNet Change '17 to '27Percent Change '17 to '27Population by Age0‐35 Months3‐4 years5‐9 years10‐12 yearsTotal Children 0‐12 yearsPercent of Total CountyNet Change '17 to '27Percent of Population by Age0‐35 Months3‐4 years5‐9 years10‐12 yearsTotal Children 0‐12 yearsCity/AreaContinued2017 2027 2017 2027 2017 2027 2017 2027 2017 202741,780 46,940 18,320 18,960 31,040 32,360 93,000 101,580 41,440 42,8003.7% 3.9% 1.6% 1.6% 2.8% 2.7% 8.3% 8.5% 3.7% 3.6%5,160 640 1,320 8,580 1,360 12%3%4%9%3%1,876 2,108 439 455 955 996 4,265 4,658 1,313 1,3561,444 1,623 458 474 700 729 3,421 3,737 1,069 1,1043,251 3,653 1,321 1,367 1,501 1,565 6,776 7,401 2,150 2,2202,2532,5329099401,0921,1384,0884,4651,2891,3318,825 9,915 3,127 3,236 4,248 4,429 18,550 20,262 5,820 6,0114.5% 4.8% 1.6% 1.6% 2.2% 2.1% 9.5% 9.7% 3.0% 2.9%1,090 109 181 1,711 191 4.5% 4.5% 2.4% 2.4% 3.1% 3.1% 4.6% 4.6% 3.2% 3.2%3.5% 3.5% 2.5% 2.5% 2.3% 2.3% 3.7% 3.7% 2.6% 2.6%7.8% 7.8% 7.2% 7.2% 4.8% 4.8% 7.3% 7.3% 5.2% 5.2%5.4%5.4%5.0%5.0%3.5%3.5%4.4%4.4%3.1%3.1%21.1% 21.1% 17.1% 17.1% 13.7% 13.7% 19.9% 19.9% 14.0% 14.0%Note county total does not equal sum of cities/areas due to rounding.Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Sources: ABAG Projections '13; Brion Economics, Inc.ContinuedOrindaPinolePittsburgPleasant HillOakleyPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201870169
Final ReportTable 1Summary of Demographics by City and Age: 2017 to 2027Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017PopulationPercent of Total CountyNet Change '17 to '27Percent Change '17 to '27Population by Age0‐35 Months3‐4 years5‐9 years10‐12 yearsTotal Children 0‐12 yearsPercent of Total CountyNet Change '17 to '27Percent of Population by Age0‐35 Months3‐4 years5‐9 years10‐12 yearsTotal Children 0‐12 yearsCity/AreaContinued2017 2027 2017 2027 2017 2027 2017 2027 2017 2027132,100 142,360 35,440 37,600 77,500 81,660 87,240 92,680 25,600 26,02011.8% 11.9% 3.2% 3.2% 6.9% 6.8% 7.8% 7.8% 2.3% 2.2%10,260 2,160 4,160 5,440 420 8%6%5%6%2%5,857 6,312 1,736 1,841 3,393 3,575 2,065 2,194 517 5254,390 4,731 1,339 1,421 3,108 3,275 1,712 1,818 547 5558,547 9,211 2,678 2,841 6,784 7,148 3,792 4,028 1,645 1,6725,2985,7091,5811,6773,8864,0952,4742,6281,3641,38724,092 25,964 7,334 7,781 17,172 18,094 10,042 10,668 4,073 4,13912.3% 12.5% 3.8% 3.7% 8.8% 8.7% 5.1% 5.1% 2.1% 2.0%1,871 447 922 626 67 4.4% 4.4% 4.9% 4.9% 4.4% 4.4% 2.4% 2.4% 2.0% 2.0%3.3% 3.3% 3.8% 3.8% 4.0% 4.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.1% 2.1%6.5% 6.5% 7.6% 7.6% 8.8% 8.8% 4.3% 4.3% 6.4% 6.4%4.0%4.0%4.5%4.5%5.0%5.0%2.8%2.8%5.3%5.3%18.2% 18.2% 20.7% 20.7% 22.2% 22.2% 11.5% 11.5% 15.9% 15.9%Note county total does not equal sum of cities/areas due to rounding.Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Sources: ABAG Projections '13; Brion Economics, Inc.ContinuedAlamo‐Blackhawk (3)RichmondSan PabloSan RamonWalnut CreekPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201871170
Final ReportTable 1Summary of Demographics by City and Age: 2017 to 2027Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017PopulationPercent of Total CountyNet Change '17 to '27Percent Change '17 to '27Population by Age0‐35 Months3‐4 years5‐9 years10‐12 yearsTotal Children 0‐12 yearsPercent of Total CountyNet Change '17 to '27Percent of Population by Age0‐35 Months3‐4 years5‐9 years10‐12 yearsTotal Children 0‐12 yearsCity/AreaContinued2017 2027 2017 2027 2017 2027 2017 202712,160 12,480 20,320 20,880 4,380 4,500 1,120,460 1,193,3201.1% 1.0% 1.8% 1.7% 0.4% 0.4% 100.0% 100.0%320 560 120 72,860 3%3%3%7%386 396 692 711 139 143 41,4760321 330 586 602 116 119 33,857 36,125681 699 1,459 1,499 245 252 73,209 77,9584624741,0341,06216617146,97749,9871,850 1,899 3,770 3,874 666 685 195,517 208,3970.9% 0.9% 1.9% 1.9% 0.3% 0.3% 100.0% 100.0%49 104 18 12,880 3.2% 3.2% 3.4% 3.4% 3.2% 3.2%3.7%3.7%2.6% 2.6% 2.9% 2.9% 2.6% 2.6%3.0%3.0%5.6% 5.6% 7.2% 7.2% 5.6% 5.6%6.5%6.5%3.8%3.8%5.1%5.1%3.8%3.8%4.2%4.2%15.2% 15.2% 18.6% 18.6% 15.2% 15.2%17.4%17.4%Note county total does not equal sum of cities/areas due to rounding.Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Sources: ABAG Projections '13; Brion Economics, Inc.Total Contra Costa CountyRodeo‐Crockett (4) Rural East C.C. County (5) RemainderPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201872171
Final ReportTable 2Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for City of AntiochContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. ofBirth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, ANTIOCH‐EXISTING ProvidersInfant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1) 4,534 3,602 8,136 13,043 21,179Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2) 66% 66% 66% 69% 68%Children With Working Parents 3,010 2,392 5,402 9,062 14,464% Children Needing Licensed Care (3) 50% 100% 72% 50% 58%Children Needing Licensed Care 1,505 2,392 3,897 4,531 8,428Total Demand for Child Care Spaces 1,505 2,392 3,897 4,531 8,428% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group 18% 28% 46%54% 100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care 33% 66% 48% 35% 40%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 8 71 142 284 426 142 568 Licensed for 14 39 117 234 351 195 546 Available Child Care Center Spaces 16 95 993 1,088 182 1,270 License Exempt 7‐ 24 24 600 624 Total Number of Providers 133Current Child Care Spaces 354 1,535 1,889 1,119 3,008 Percent Distribution 12% 51% 63% 37% 100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(1,151) (857) (2,008) (3,412) (5,420)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 24% 64% 48% 25% 36%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201873172
Final ReportTable 3Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for City of AntiochContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, ANTIOCH‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (1,151) (857) (2,008) (3,412) (5,420)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 2027 4,767 3,788 8,555 13,715 22,269Labor Force Participation Rates 66% 66% 66% 69% 68%Children with Working Parents 3,165 2,515 5,680 9,529 15,209Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 72% 50% 58%Total Demand at 2027 1,583 2,515 4,098 4,764 8,862Current Child Care Supply at 2017 354 1,535 1,889 1,119 3,008Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027 (1,229) (980) (2,209) (3,645) (5,854)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces 22% 61% 46% 23% 34%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027(1)78 123 201 233 434(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County.A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201874173
Final ReportTable 4Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for City of BrentwoodContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. of Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, BRENTWOOD‐EXISTING Providers Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1) 2,105 1,929 4,034 7,672 11,706Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2) 65% 65% 65% 68% 67%Children With Working Parents 1,374 1,258 2,632 5,237 7,869% Children Needing Licensed Care (3) 50% 100% 74% 50% 58%Children Needing Licensed Care 687 1,258 1,945 2,618 4,564Total Demand for Child Care Spaces 687 1,258 1,945 2,618 4,564% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group 15% 28% 43%57% 100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care 33% 65% 48% 34% 39%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 8 38 76 152 228 76 304 Licensed for 14 17 51 102 153 85 238 Available Child Care Center Spaces 27 113 929 1,042 545 1,587 License Exempt 1‐ ‐ ‐ 100 100 Total Number of Providers83Current Child Care Spaces240 1,183 1,423 806 2,229 Percent Distribution11%53%64%36%100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(447)(75)(522) (1,812) (2,335)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 35%94%73%31%49%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents.Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumedcared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are schoolFor large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschoolSources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, IncCCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201875174
Final ReportTable 5Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for City of BrentwoodContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, BRENTWOOD‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (447) (75) (522) (1,812) (2,335)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 2027 2,190 2,006 4,195 7,980 12,175Labor Force Participation Rates 65% 65% 65% 68% 67%Children with Working Parents 1,429 1,309 2,738 5,447 8,185Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 74% 50% 58%Total Demand at 2027 714 1,309 2,023 2,723 4,747Current Child Care Supply at 2017 240 1,183 1,423 806 2,229Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027 (474) (126) (600) (1,917) (2,518)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces 34% 90% 70% 30% 47%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027 28 50 78 105 183(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County.A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, IncCCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201876175
Final ReportTable 6Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for City of ClaytonContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. ofBirth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, CLAYTON‐EXISTING Providers Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1) 262 261 523 1,283 1,806Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2) 79% 79% 79% 65% 69%Children With Working Parents 208 207 414 835 1,249% Children Needing Licensed Care (3) 50% 100% 75% 50% 58%Children Needing Licensed Care 104 207 311 417 728Total Demand for Child Care Spaces 104 207 311 417 728% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group 14% 28% 43%57% 100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care 40% 79% 59% 33% 40%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 8 1 2 4 6 2 8 Licensed for 14 3 9 18 27 15 42 Available Child Care Center Spaces 3 16 208 224 203 427 License Exempt 0‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ Total Number of Providers 7Current Child Care Spaces 27 230 257 220 477 Percent Distribution 6% 48% 54% 46% 100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(77) 23 (54) (197) (251)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 26% 111% 83% 53% 66%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, IncCCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201877176
Final ReportTable 7Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for City of ClaytonContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, CLAYTON‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (77) 23 (54) (197) (251)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 2027 269 268 537 1,317 1,854Labor Force Participation Rates 79% 79% 79% 65% 69%Children with Working Parents 213 212 425 857 1,283Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 75% 50% 58%Total Demand at 2027 107 212 319 429 747Current Child Care Supply at 2017 27 230 257 220 477Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027 (80) 18 (62) (209) (270)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces 25% 108% 81% 51% 64%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027 (1) 3 5 8 11 19(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County. A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, IncCCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201878177
Final ReportTable 8Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for City of ConcordContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. of Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, CONCORD‐EXISTING Providers Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1) 5,436 4,077 9,513 12,487 22,000Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2)61%61%61%67%64%Children With Working Parents3,3152,4865,8008,371 14,171% Children Needing Licensed Care (3)50%100%71%50%59%Children Needing Licensed Care1,6572,4864,1434,1858,329Total Demand for Child Care Spaces1,6572,4864,1434,1858,329% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group20%30%50%50%100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care30%61%44%34%38%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 880160 320 480 160 640 Licensed for 1434103 206 309 165 474 Available Child Care Center Spaces43167 1,912 2,079 1,126 3,205 License Exempt13‐ 304 304 1,062 1,366 Total Number of Providers 170Current Child Care Spaces 430 2,742 3,172 2,513 5,685 Percent Distribution8% 48% 56% 44% 100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(1,227) 256 (971) (1,672) (2,644)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 26% 110% 77% 60% 68%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, IncCCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201879178
Final ReportTable 9Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for City of ConcordContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, CONCORD‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (1,227) 256 (971) (1,672) (2,644)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 2027 6,034 4,526 10,560 13,862 24,422Labor Force Participation Rates 61% 61% 61% 67% 64%Children with Working Parents 3,680 2,760 6,439 9,293 15,732Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 71% 50% 59%Total Demand at 2027 1,840 2,760 4,599 4,646 9,246Current Child Care Supply at 2017 430 2,742 3,172 2,513 5,685Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027 (1,410) (18) (1,427) (2,133) (3,561)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces 23% 99% 69% 54% 61%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027 (1) 182 274 456 4,646 5,102(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County.A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, IncCCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201880179
Final ReportTable 10Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for Town of DanvilleContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. of Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, DANVILLE‐EXISTINGProviders Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1)1,1701,1932,3635,6758,037Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2)59%59%59%58%59%Children With Working Parents6967101,4063,3154,720% Children Needing Licensed Care (3)50%100%75%50%58%Children Needing Licensed Care3487101,0581,6572,715Total Demand for Child Care Spaces3487101,0581,6572,715% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group13%26%39%61%100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care30%59%45%29%34%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 81122 44 66 22 88 Licensed for 1439 18 27 15 42 Available Child Care Center Spaces2136 674 710 809 1,519 License Exempt0‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ Total Number of Providers35Current Child Care Spaces67 736 803 846 1,649 Percent Distribution4%45%49%51%100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(281)26(255)(811) (1,066)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 19%104%76%51%61%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, IncCCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201881180
Final ReportTable 11Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for Town of DanvilleContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, DANVILLE‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (281) 26 (255) (811) (1,066)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 2027 1,203 1,227 2,430 5,836 8,267Labor Force Participation Rates 59% 59% 59% 58% 59%Children with Working Parents 716 730 1,446 3,409 4,855Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 75% 50% 58%Total Demand at 2027 358 730 1,088 1,705 2,793Current Child Care Supply at 2017 67 736 803 846 1,649Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027 (291) 6 (285) (859) (1,144)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces 19% 101% 74% 50% 59%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027 (1) 10 20 30 1,705 1,735(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County.A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, IncCCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201882181
Final ReportTable 12Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for City of El CerritoContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. of Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, EL CERRITO‐EXISTING Providers Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1) 1,036 792 1,828 2,266 4,094Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2) 64% 64% 64% 74% 69%Children With Working Parents 659 504 1,163 1,680 2,842% Children Needing Licensed Care (3) 50% 100% 72% 50% 59%Children Needing Licensed Care 329 504 833 840 1,673Total Demand for Child Care Spaces 329 504 833 840 1,673% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group 20% 30% 50%50% 100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care 32% 64% 46% 37% 41%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 8 10 20 40 60 20 80 Licensed for 14 23 71 142 213 105 318 Available Child Care Center Spaces 16 17 668 685 114 799 License Exempt 1‐ ‐ ‐ 100 100 Total Number of Providers 50Current Child Care Spaces 108 850 958 339 1,297 Percent Distribution8% 66% 74% 26% 100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(221) 346 125 (501) (376)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 33% 169% 115% 40% 78%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, IncCCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201883182
Final ReportTable 13Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for City of El CerritoContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, EL CERRITO‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (221) 346 125 (501) (376)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 2027 1,075 822 1,897 2,351 4,248Labor Force Participation Rates 64% 64% 64% 74% 69%Children with Working Parents 684 523 1,206 1,743 2,949Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 72% 50% 59%Total Demand at 2027 342 523 865 871 1,736Current Child Care Supply at 2017 108 850 958 339 1,297Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027 (234) 327 93 (532) (439)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces32%163%111%39%75%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027(1)121931871903(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County.A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, IncCCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201884183
Final ReportTable 14Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for City of HerculesContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. of Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, HERCULES‐EXISTING Providers Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1) 976 745 1,721 2,700 4,421Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2)78%78%78%76%77%Children With Working Parents7645841,3482,0603,408% Children Needing Licensed Care (3)50%100%72%50%59%Children Needing Licensed Care3825849661,0301,996Total Demand for Child Care Spaces3825849661,0301,996% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group19%29%48%52%100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care39%78%56%38%45%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 8612 24 36 12 48 Licensed for 141443 86 129 65 194 Available Child Care Center Spaces4‐ 55 55 288 343 License Exempt1‐ ‐ ‐ 64 64 Total Number of Providers 25Current Child Care Spaces 55 165 220 429 649 Percent Distribution8% 25% 34% 66% 100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(327) (419) (746) (601) (1,347)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 14% 28% 23% 42% 33%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201885184
Final ReportTable 15Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for City of HerculesContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, HERCULES‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (327) (419) (746) (601) (1,347)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 2027 1,112 849 1,961 3,077 5,037Labor Force Participation Rates 78% 78% 78% 76% 77%Children with Working Parents 871 665 1,536 2,347 3,883Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 72% 50% 59%Total Demand at 2027 435 665 1,101 1,173 2,274Current Child Care Supply at 2017 55 165 220 429 649Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027 (380) (500) (881) (744) (1,625)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces 13% 25% 20% 37% 29%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027(1)53 81 135 1,173 1,308(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County. A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201886185
Final ReportTable 16Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for City of LafayetteContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. of Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, LAFAYETTE‐EXISTING Providers Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1) 704 690 1,394 2,997 4,391Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2) 54% 54% 54% 64% 61%Children With Working Parents 383 375 758 1,907 2,665% Children Needing Licensed Care (3) 50% 100% 75% 50% 57%Children Needing Licensed Care 191 375 566 953 1,520Total Demand for Child Care Spaces 191 375 566 953 1,520% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group 13% 25% 37%63% 100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care 27% 54% 41% 32% 35%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 8 1 2 4 6 2 8 Licensed for 14 2 6 12 18 10 28 Available Child Care Center Spaces 14 78 652 730 312 1,042 License Exempt 16 6 12 ‐ 12 Total Number of Providers18Current Child Care Spaces92 674 766 324 1,090 Percent Distribution8%62%70%30%100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(99)299200(629)(430)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 48%180%135%34%72%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201887186
Final ReportTable 17Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for City of LafayetteContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, LAFAYETTE‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (99) 299 200 (629) (430)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 2027 733 717 1,450 3,117 4,567Labor Force Participation Rates 54% 54% 54% 64% 61%Children with Working Parents 398 390 788 1,984 2,772Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 75% 50% 57%Total Demand at 2027 199 390 589 992 1,581Current Child Care Supply at 2017 92 674 766 324 1,090Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027 (107) 284 177 (668) (491)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces 46% 173% 130% 33% 69%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027(1)815233861(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County. A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201888187
Final ReportTable 18Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for City of MartinezContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. of Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, MARTINEZ‐EXISTING Providers Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1) 1,334 1,010 2,344 3,726 6,070Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2)66%66%66%71%69%Children With Working Parents8876711,5582,6564,214% Children Needing Licensed Care (3)50%100%72%50%58%Children Needing Licensed Care4436711,1141,3282,443Total Demand for Child Care Spaces4436711,1141,3282,443% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group18%27%46%54%100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care33%66%48%36%40%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 81326 52 78 26 104 Licensed for 14618 36 54 30 84 Available Child Care Center Spaces16133 569 702 578 1,280 License Exempt3‐ 24 24 150 174 Total Number of Providers 38Current Child Care Spaces 177 681 858 784 1,642 Percent Distribution 11% 41% 52% 48% 100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(266) 10 (256) (544) (801)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 40% 101% 77% 59% 67%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201889188
Final ReportTable 19Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for City of MartinezContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, MARTINEZ‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (266) 10 (256) (544) (801)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 2027 1,376 1,041 2,417 3,842 6,259Labor Force Participation Rates 66% 66% 66% 71% 69%Children with Working Parents 914 692 1,606 2,739 4,345Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 72% 50% 58%Total Demand at 2027 457 692 1,149 1,369 2,519Current Child Care Supply at 2017 177 681 858 784 1,642Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027 (280) (11) (291) (585) (877)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces 39% 98% 75% 57% 65%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027(1)14 21 35 41 76(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County. A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201890189
Final ReportTable 20Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for Town of MoragaContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. of Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, MORAGA‐EXISTINGProviders Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1)2853486331,6102,243Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2)63%63%63%62%62%Children With Working Parents1802204009981,398% Children Needing Licensed Care (3)50%100%77%50%58%Children Needing Licensed Care90220310499809Total Demand for Child Care Spaces90220310499809% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group11%27%38%62%100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care32%63%49%31%36%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 848 16 24 8 32 Licensed for 140‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ Available Child Care Center Spaces724 542 566 ‐ 566 License Exempt2‐ ‐ ‐ 200 200 Total Number of Providers13Current Child Care Spaces32 558 590 208 798 Percent Distribution4%70%74%26%100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(58)338280(291)(11)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 36%254%190%42%99%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201891190
Final ReportTable 21Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for Town of MoragaContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, MORAGA‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (58) 338 280 (291) (11)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 2027 298 363 661 1,681 2,342Labor Force Participation Rates 63% 63% 63% 62% 62%Children with Working Parents 188 229 417 1,042 1,460Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 77% 50% 58%Total Demand at 2027 94 229 323 521 844Current Child Care Supply at 2017 32 558 590 208 798Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027 (62) 329 267 (313) (46)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces 34% 243% 182% 40% 94%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027(1)410142236(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County. A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201892191
Final ReportTable 22Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for City of OakleyContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. ofBirth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, OAKLEY‐EXISTING Providers Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1) 1,876 1,444 3,320 5,505 8,825Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2) 72% 72% 72% 77% 75%Children With Working Parents 1,343 1,034 2,377 4,237 6,614% Children Needing Licensed Care (3) 50% 100% 72% 50% 58%Children Needing Licensed Care 672 1,034 1,706 2,118 3,824Total Demand for Child Care Spaces 672 1,034 1,706 2,118 3,824% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group 18% 27% 45%55% 100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care 36% 72% 51% 38% 43%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 83774 148 222 74 296 Licensed for 141751 102 153 85 238 Available Child Care Center Spaces7‐ 277 277 26 303 License Exempt1‐ ‐ ‐ 100 100 Total Number of Providers62Current Child Care Spaces125 527 652 285 937 Percent Distribution13%56%70%30%100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(547)(507) (1,054) (1,833) (2,887)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 19%51%38%13%25%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201893192
Final ReportTable 23Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for City of OakleyContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017OAKLEY‐FUTURE Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (547) (507) (1,054) (1,833) (2,887)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 2027 2,108 1,623 3,730 6,184 9,915Labor Force Participation Rates 72% 72% 72% 77% 75%Children with Working Parents 1,509 1,162 2,671 4,760 7,431Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 72% 50% 58%Total Demand at 2027 755 1,162 1,916 2,380 4,296Current Child Care Supply at 2017 125 527 652 285 937Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027 (630) (635) (1,264) (2,095) (3,359)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces 17% 45% 34% 12% 22%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027(1)83 128 211 2,380 2,591(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County. A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201894193
Final ReportTable 24Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for City of OrindaContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. of Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, ORINDA‐EXISTING Providers Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1) 439 458 897 2,229 3,127Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2) 44% 44% 44% 53% 50%Children With Working Parents 194 203 397 1,178 1,575% Children Needing Licensed Care (3) 50% 100% 76% 50% 56%Children Needing Licensed Care 97 203 300 589 889Total Demand for Child Care Spaces 97 203 300 589 889% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group 11% 23% 34%66% 100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care 22% 44% 33% 26% 28%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 8 4 8 16 24 8 32 Licensed for 14 2 6 12 18 10 28 Available Child Care Center Spaces 6 ‐ 315 315 ‐ 315 License Exempt 1‐ ‐ ‐ 120 120 Total Number of Providers 13Current Child Care Spaces14 343 357 138 495 Percent Distribution3% 69% 72% 28% 100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(83) 140 57 (451) (394)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 14% 169% 119% 23% 56%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201895194
Final ReportTable 25Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for City of OrindaContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, ORINDA‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (83) 140 57 (451) (394)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 2027 455 474 929 2,307 3,236Labor Force Participation Rates 44% 44% 44% 53% 50%Children with Working Parents 201 210 411 1,219 1,630Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 76% 50% 56%Total Demand at 2027 101 210 311 609 920Current Child Care Supply at 2017 14 343 357 138 495Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027 (87) 133 46 (471) (425)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces 14% 163% 115% 23% 54%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027(1)3 7 10 21 31(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County.A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201896195
Final ReportTable 26Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for City of PinoleContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. ofBirth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, PINOLE‐EXISTINGProvidersInfant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1)9557001,6552,5934,248Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2)62%62%62%74%69%Children With Working Parents5904321,0221,9262,947% Children Needing Licensed Care (3)50%100%71%50%57%Children Needing Licensed Care2954327279631,689Total Demand for Child Care Spaces2954327279631,689% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group17%26%43%57%100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care31%62%44%37%40%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 8510 20 30 10 40 Licensed for 14824 48 72 40 112 Available Child Care Center Spaces6‐ 119 119 153 272 License Exempt0‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ Total Number of Providers 19Current Child Care Spaces 34 187 221 203 424 Percent Distribution8% 44% 52% 48% 100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(261) (245) (506) (760) (1,265)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 12% 43% 30% 21% 25%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201897196
Final ReportTable 27Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for City of PinoleContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, PINOLE‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (261) (245) (506) (760) (1,265)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 2027 996 729 1,725 2,704 4,429Labor Force Participation Rates 62% 62% 62% 74% 69%Children with Working Parents 615 450 1,065 2,007 3,072Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 71% 50% 57%Total Demand at 2027 307 450 758 1,004 1,761Current Child Care Supply at 2017 34 187 221 203 424Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027 (273) (263) (537) (801) (1,337)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces 11% 42% 29% 20% 24%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027(1)13 18 31 41 72(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County. A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/201898197
Final ReportTable 28Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for City of PittsburgContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. of Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, PITTSBURG‐EXISTING Providers Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1) 4,265 3,421 7,686 10,864 18,550Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2) 66% 66% 66% 65% 65%Children With Working Parents 2,827 2,268 5,094 7,028 12,123% Children Needing Licensed Care (3) 50% 100% 72% 50% 59%Children Needing Licensed Care 1,413 2,268 3,681 3,514 7,195Total Demand for Child Care Spaces 1,413 2,268 3,681 3,514 7,195% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group 20% 32% 51%49% 100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care 33% 66% 48% 32% 39%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 8 42 84 168 252 84 336 Licensed for 14 21 63 126 189 105 294 Available Child Care Center Spaces 26 92 1,599 1,691 198 1,889 License Exempt 12‐ ‐ ‐ 1,179 1,179 Total Number of Providers101Current Child Care Spaces239 1,893 2,132 1,566 3,698 Percent Distribution6%51%58%42%100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(1,174)(375) (1,549) (1,948) (3,497)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 17%83%58%45%51%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.18 8/28/201899198
Final ReportTable 29Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for City of PittsburgContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, PITTSBURG‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (1,174) (375) (1,549) (1,948) (3,497)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 2027 4,658 3,737 8,395 11,867 20,262Labor Force Participation Rates 66% 66% 66% 65% 65%Children with Working Parents 3,087 2,477 5,564 7,677 13,241Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 72% 50% 59%Total Demand at 2027 1,544 2,477 4,021 3,838 7,859Current Child Care Supply at 2017 239 1,893 2,132 1,566 3,698Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027 (1,305) (584) (1,889) (2,272) (4,161)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces 15% 76% 53% 41% 47%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027(1)130 209 340 324 664(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County. A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.18 8/28/2018100199
Final ReportTable 30Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for City of Pleasant HillContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. of Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, PLEASANT HILL‐EXISTING Providers Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1) 1,313 1,069 2,382 3,438 5,820Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2) 61% 61% 61% 66% 64%Children With Working Parents 804 654 1,458 2,257 3,715% Children Needing Licensed Care (3) 50% 100% 72% 50% 59%Children Needing Licensed Care 402 654 1,056 1,128 2,185Total Demand for Child Care Spaces 402 654 1,056 1,128 2,185% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group 18% 30% 48%52% 100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care 31% 61% 44% 33% 38%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 8 20 40 80 120 40 160 Licensed for 14 16 48 96 144 80 224 Available Child Care Center Spaces 18 84 612 696 518 1,214 License Exempt 3‐ ‐ ‐ 345 345 Total Number of Providers 57Current Child Care Spaces 172 788 960 983 1,943 Percent Distribution9% 41% 49% 51% 100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(230) 134 (96) (145) (242)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 43% 120% 91% 87% 89%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.18 8/28/2018101200
Final ReportTable 31Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for City of Pleasant HillContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, PLEASANT HILL‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (230) 134 (96) (145) (242)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 2027 1,356 1,104 2,460 3,551 6,011Labor Force Participation Rates 61% 61% 61% 66% 64%Children with Working Parents 830 676 1,506 2,331 3,837Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 72% 50% 59%Total Demand at 2027 415 676 1,091 1,165 2,256Current Child Care Supply at 2017 172 788 960 983 1,943Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027 (243) 112 (131) (182) (313)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces 41% 117% 88% 84% 86%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027(1)13 21 35 37 72(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County.A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.18 8/28/2018102201
Final ReportTable 32Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for City of RichmondContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. ofBirth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, RICHMOND‐EXISTING ProvidersInfant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1)5,8574,390 10,247 13,845 24,092Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2)66%66%66%67%67%Children With Working Parents3,8902,9156,8059,244 16,049% Children Needing Licensed Care (3)50%100%71%50%59%Children Needing Licensed Care1,9452,9154,8604,6229,482Total Demand for Child Care Spaces1,9452,9154,8604,6229,482% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group21%31%51%49%100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care33%66%47%33%39%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 859118 236 354 118 472 Licensed for 1452158 316 474 250 724 Available Child Care Center Spaces37331 1,696 2,027 248 2,275 License Exempt15‐ ‐ ‐ 1,506 1,506 Total Number of Providers163Current Child Care Spaces607 2,248 2,855 2,122 4,977 Percent Distribution12%45%57%43%100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(1,338)(667) (2,005) (2,500) (4,505)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 31%77%59%46%52%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.18 8/28/2018103202
Final ReportTable 33Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for City of RichmondContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, RICHMOND‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (1,338) (667) (2,005) (2,500) (4,505)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 2027 6,312 4,731 11,043 14,921 25,964Labor Force Participation Rates 66% 66% 66% 67% 67%Children with Working Parents 4,192 3,142 7,334 9,962 17,295Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 71% 50% 59%Total Demand at 2027 2,096 3,142 5,238 4,981 10,219Current Child Care Supply at 2017 607 2,248 2,855 2,122 4,977Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027 (1,489) (894) (2,383) (2,859) (5,242)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces 29% 72% 55% 43% 49%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027(1)151 226 377 359 736(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County.A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.18 8/28/2018104203
Final ReportTable 34Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for City of San PabloContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. ofBirth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, SAN PABLO‐EXISTING ProvidersInfant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1) 1,736 1,339 3,075 4,259 7,334Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2) 63% 63% 63% 68% 66%Children With Working Parents 1,100 848 1,948 2,883 4,831% Children Needing Licensed Care (3) 50% 100% 72% 50% 59%Children Needing Licensed Care 550 848 1,398 1,441 2,840Total Demand for Child Care Spaces 550 848 1,398 1,441 2,840% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group 19% 30% 49%51% 100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care 32% 63% 45% 34% 39%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 8 12 24 48 72 24 96 Licensed for 14 30 30 60 90 50 140 Available Child Care Center Spaces 11 79 320 399 242 641 License Exempt 7‐ ‐ ‐ 705 705 Total Number of Providers 60Current Child Care Spaces 133 428 561 1,021 1,582 Percent Distribution 8% 27% 35% 65% 100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(417) (420) (837) (420) (1,258)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 24% 50% 40% 71% 56%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018105204
Final ReportTable 35Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for City of San PabloContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, SAN PABLO‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (417) (420) (837) (420) (1,258)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 2027 1,841 1,421 3,262 4,519 7,781Labor Force Participation Rates 63% 63% 63% 68% 66%Children with Working Parents 1,167 900 2,067 3,059 5,126Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 72% 50% 59%Total Demand at 2027 583 900 1,484 1,529 3,013Current Child Care Supply at 2017 133 428 561 1,021 1,582Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027 (450) (472) (923) (508) (1,431)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces 23% 48% 38% 67% 53%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027(1)34 52 85 88 173(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County.A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018106205
Final ReportTable 36Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for City of San RamonContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. ofBirth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, SAN RAMON‐EXISTING ProvidersInfant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1)3,3933,1086,502 10,670 17,172Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2)62%62%62%63%62%Children With Working Parents2,0941,9184,0126,714 10,725% Children Needing Licensed Care (3)50%100%74%50%59%Children Needing Licensed Care1,0471,9182,9653,3576,322Total Demand for Child Care Spaces1,0471,9182,9653,3576,322% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group17%30%47%53%100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care31%62%46%31%37%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 850100 200 300 100 400 Licensed for 141963 126 189 65 254 Available Child Care Center Spaces2257 900 957 1,377 2,334 License Exempt0‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ Total Number of Providers91Current Child Care Spaces220 1,226 1,446 1,542 2,988 Percent Distribution7%41%48%52%100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(827)(692) (1,519) (1,815) (3,334)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 21%64%49%46%47%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018107206
Final ReportTable 37Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for City of San RamonContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, SAN RAMON‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (827) (692) (1,519) (1,815) (3,334)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 2027 3,575 3,275 6,851 11,243 18,094Labor Force Participation Rates 62% 62% 62% 63% 62%Children with Working Parents 2,206 2,021 4,227 7,074 11,301Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 74% 50% 59%Total Demand at 2027 1,103 2,021 3,124 3,537 6,661Current Child Care Supply at 2017 220 1,226 1,446 1,542 2,988Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027 (883) (795) (1,678) (1,995) (3,673)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces 20% 61% 46% 44% 45%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027(1)56 103 159 180 339(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County.A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018108207
Final ReportTable 38Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for City of Walnut CreekContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. ofBirth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, WALNUT CREEK‐EXISTING Providers Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1) 2,065 1,712 3,777 6,266 10,042Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2) 71% 71% 71% 70% 71%Children With Working Parents 1,466 1,215 2,681 4,400 7,080% Children Needing Licensed Care (3) 50% 100% 73% 50% 59%Children Needing Licensed Care 733 1,215 1,948 2,200 4,148Total Demand for Child Care Spaces 733 1,215 1,948 2,200 4,148% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group 18% 29% 47%53% 100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care 35% 71% 52% 35% 41%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 8 14 28 56 84 28 112 Licensed for 14 21 63 126 189 105 294 Available Child Care Center Spaces 33 61 1,281 1,342 1,196 2,538 License Exempt 2‐ ‐ ‐ 100 100 Total Number of Providers 70Current Child Care Spaces 152 1,463 1,615 1,429 3,044 Percent Distribution 5% 48% 53% 47% 100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(581) 248 (333) (771) (1,104)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 21% 120% 83% 65% 73%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. (3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018109208
Final ReportTable 39Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for City of Walnut CreekContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, WALNUT CREEK‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (581) 248 (333) (771) (1,104)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 2027 2,194 1,818 4,012 6,656 10,668Labor Force Participation Rates 71% 71% 71% 70% 71%Children with Working Parents 1,557 1,291 2,848 4,674 7,522Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 73% 50% 59%Total Demand at 2027 779 1,291 2,069 2,337 4,406Current Child Care Supply at 2017 152 1,463 1,615 1,429 3,044Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027 (627) 172 (454) (908) (1,362)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces 20% 113% 78% 61% 69%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027(1)46 76 121 137 259(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County.A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018110209
Final ReportTable 40Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for Region of Alamo‐BlackhawkContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. ofBirth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, ALAMO‐BLACKHAWK‐EXISTING Providers Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1) 517 547 1,063 3,009 4,073Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2) 37% 37% 37% 48% 45%Children With Working Parents 194 205 398 1,430 1,828% Children Needing Licensed Care (3) 50% 100% 76% 50% 56%Children Needing Licensed Care 97 205 302 715 1,016Total Demand for Child Care Spaces 97 205 302 715 1,016% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group 10% 20% 30%70% 100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care 19% 37% 28% 24% 25%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 8 2 4 8 12 4 16 Licensed for 14 2 6 12 18 10 28 Available Child Care Center Spaces 7 ‐ 237 237 140 377 License Exempt 0‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ Total Number of Providers 11Current Child Care Spaces 10 257 267 154 421 Percent Distribution2% 61% 63% 37% 100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(87) 52 (35) (561) (595)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 10% 126% 89% 22% 41%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018111210
Final ReportTable 41Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for Region of Alamo‐BlackhawkContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, ALAMO‐BLACKHAWK‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (87) 52 (35) (561) (595)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 20275255551,0813,0594,139Labor Force Participation Rates37%37%37%48%45%Children with Working Parents1972084051,4531,858Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care50%100%76%50%56%Total Demand at 2027982083077271,033Current Child Care Supply at 201710257267154421Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027(88)49(40)(573)(612)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces10%123%87%21%41%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027(1)2351217(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County. A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018112211
Final ReportTable 42Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for Region of Rodeo‐CrockettContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. of Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, RODEO‐CROCKETT‐EXISTING Providers Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1) 386 321 708 1,142 1,850Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2)62%62%62%77%71%Children With Working Parents2391994388821,320% Children Needing Licensed Care (3)50%100%73%50%58%Children Needing Licensed Care120199318441760Total Demand for Child Care Spaces120199318441760% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group16%26%42%58%100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care31%62%45%39%41%EXISTING SUPPLY(4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 836 12 18 6 24 Licensed for 1426 12 18 10 28 Available Child Care Center Spaces676 213 289 20 309 License Exempt0‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ Total Number of Providers 11Current Child Care Spaces 88 237 325 36 361 Percent Distribution 24% 66% 90% 10% 100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(32) 38 7 (405) (399)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 74% 119% 102% 8% 48%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018113212
Final ReportTable 43Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for Region of Rodeo‐CrockettContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, RODEO‐CROCKETT‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (32) 38 7 (405) (399)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 2027 396 330 726 1,172 1,899Labor Force Participation Rates 62% 62% 62% 77% 71%Children with Working Parents 245 204 449 906 1,355Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 73% 50% 58%Total Demand at 2027 123 204 327 453 779Current Child Care Supply at 2017 88 237 325 36 361Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027 (35) 33 (2) (417) (418)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces 72% 116% 99% 8% 46%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027(1)3 5 8 12 20(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County.A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018114213
Final ReportTable 44Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for East Rural Contra Costa CountyContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. of Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, EAST RURAL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY‐EXISTING Providers Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years EXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1) 692 586 1,278 2,492 3,770Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2)75%75%75%71%73%Children With Working Parents5224429641,7702,734% Children Needing Licensed Care (3)50%100%73%50%58%Children Needing Licensed Care2614427038851,588Total Demand for Child Care Spaces2614427038851,588% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group16%28%44%56%100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care38%75%55%36%42%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 8816 32 48 16 64 Licensed for 1426 12 18 10 28 Available Child Care Center Spaces2‐ 90 90 ‐ 90 License Exempt2‐ ‐ ‐ 200 200 Total Number of Providers 14Current Child Care Spaces22 134 156 226 382 Percent Distribution6%35%41%59%100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(239)(308)(547)(659) (1,206)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 8%30%22%26%24%(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018115214
Final ReportTable 45Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for East Rural Contra Costa CountyContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, EAST RURAL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (239) (308) (547) (659) (1,206)Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 2027 711 602 1,313 2,561 3,874Labor Force Participation Rates 75% 75% 75% 71% 73%Children with Working Parents 536 454 990 1,819 2,809Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care 50% 100% 73% 50% 58%Total Demand at 2027 268 454 722 909 1,631Current Child Care Supply at 2017 22 134 156 226 382Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027 (246) (320) (566) (683) (1,249)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces 8% 30% 22% 25% 23%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027(1)712192444(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County.A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018116215
Final ReportTable 46Existing Child Care Demand and Supply in 2017for Contra Costa CountyContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017No. ofBirth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY‐EXISTING Providers Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 YearsEXISTING DEMANDEstimated Total Children (1) 41,476 33,857 75,332 120,185 195,517Avg. Labor Force Participation Rates (2) 64% 64% 64% 67% 66%Children With Working Parents 26,599 21,713 48,311 80,698 129,009% Children Needing Licensed Care (3) 50% 100% 73% 50% 58%Children Needing Licensed Care 13,368 21,739 35,108 40,034 75,141Total Demand for Child Care Spaces 13,368 21,739 35,108 40,034 75,141% Distribution of Total Demand for Spaces by Age Group18%29%47%53%100%% of Total Children Needing Licensed Care32%64%47%33%38%EXISTING SUPPLY (4)Family Child Care Homes Supply (5)Licensed for 8491982 1,964 2,946 982 3,928 Licensed for 14333951 1,902 2,853 1,505 4,358 Available Child Care Center Spaces3481,459 14,861 16,320 8,275 24,595 License Exempt716 358 364 6,531 6,895 Total Number of Providers1,243Current Child Care Spaces3,398 19,085 22,483 17,293 39,776 Percent Distribution9%48%57%43%100%EXISTING SURPLUS/(SHORTAGE)(9,970) (2,654) (12,625) (22,741) (35,365)Percent Distribution28%8%36%64%100%Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Facilities/Spaces 25%88%64%43%53%Note: County totals are based on the sum of the totals for each of the cities in the study.(1) Based on estimated number of children by area using ABAG Projections 2013. Infants include 2 year olds up to 35 months. Preschool includes 25% of 5‐year‐olds and School Age includes 75% of 5‐year‐olds.(2) Labor force participation rates are from the 2015 American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates and include children with two working parents or single working parents. Rates vary by age: under 6 years, and 6 and over.(3) Not all children with working parents are assumed to need licensed care: percentage assumptions under each age category are used. The remaining children are assumed to becared for by family members, nannies, friends, and unlicensed care. Percentages were decided upon by the study's data committee and deviate somewhat frommost of BEI’s Needs Assessments, particularly for Infant and School Age care.(4) Data on child care supply provided by Contra Costa Child Care Council (CocoKids), Aug 2017.(5) Family Child Care Home spaces by age are broken down by licensing regulations. It is assumed that for small FCCHs, 2 spaces are infant, 4 are preschool, and 2 are school age. For large FCCHs, it is assumed that of Licenses for 14 include 3 infant spaces, 6 preschool spaces, and 5 school age. Licenses for 12 breakdown to 4 infant and 8 preschool.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; American Community Survey 2015; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand as of 2017Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018117216
Final ReportTable 47Estimated Future Child Care Demand in 2027for Contra Costa CountyContra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Birth to 2 or 3 to 4 or Subtotal, 5 to 12 or Total, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY‐FUTURE Infant Preschool 0 to 4 Years School Age 0 to 12 Years Current Surplus/(Shortage) at 2017 (9,970) (2,654) (12,625) (22,741) (35,365)3,398 19,085 22,483 17,293 39,776Future Demand For Child Care at 2027Estimated Children at 202744,327 36,125 80,452 127,945 208,397Labor Force Participation Rates64%64%64%67%66%Children with Working Parents28,427 23,167 51,595 85,908 137,503Percent of Children Needing Licensed Care50%100%73%50%58%Total Demand at 202714,301 23,220 37,520 42,664 80,184Current Child Care Supply at 20173,398 19,085 22,483 17,293 39,776Surplus/(Shortage) at 2027(10,903) (4,135) (15,037) (25,371) (40,408)Percentage of Demand Met by Existing Spaces24%82%60%41%50%Total Net New Demand ‐ 2017 to 2027(1)9321,4812,4132,6315,043Note: County totals are based on the sum of the totals for each of the cities in the study.(1) A positive number means a net increase in demand for spaces from 2017 to 2027. This figure represents the amount of new child care that could be funded through impact fees or other financing mechanisms adopted by individual cities or the County.A negative number represents an overall loss of children in this age category from 2017 to 2027. Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; 2010 U.S. Census; Brion Economics, Inc.Child Care Demand and Supply by Age CategoriesPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018118217
Final ReportTable 48Demographic Forecast by Area in 2017Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 20172017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017Antioch Brentwood Clayton ConcordDanville El Cerrito Hercules LafayettePopulation (1,2) 108,720 54,380 11,300 133,320 45,580 30,760 28,420 26,420Percent Distribution 9.7% 4.9% 1.0% 11.9% 4.1% 2.7% 2.5% 2.4%Population by Age (2)0‐35 Months4,5342,1052625,4361,1701,0369767043‐4 years 3,6021,9292614,0771,1937927456905‐9 years7,7984,5697437,7203,3451,5161,6531,80610‐12 years5,2453,1035404,7672,3307501,0481,191Total Children 0‐12 years21,17911,7061,80622,0008,0374,0944,4214,391Percent Distribution10.8%6.0%0.9%11.3%4.1%2.1%2.3%2.2%Percent of Population by Age (2)0‐35 Months4.2%3.9%2.3%4.1%2.6%3.4%3.4%2.7%3‐4 years 3.3%3.5%2.3%3.1%2.6%2.6%2.6%2.6%5‐9 years7.2%8.4%6.6%5.8%7.3%4.9%5.8%6.8%10‐12 years4.8%5.7%4.8%3.6%5.1%2.4%3.7%4.5%Total Children 0‐12 years19.5%21.5%16.0%16.5%17.6%13.3%15.6%16.6%Labor Force Participation Rates (3)With children under 6 years66%65%79%61%59%64%78%54%With children 6‐17 years69%68%65%67%58%74%76%64%Households (1)34,32017,3404,12648,09416,51013,2489,45210,172Percent Distribution9%4%1%12%4%3%2%3%Employment (1)22,0069,9321,73258,90615,3467,2645,12611,108Percent Distribution6%3%0%15%4%2%1%3%(1) Based on ABAG Projections 2013, and children as % of population based on the breakdown from the U.S. Census 2010.(2) Based on age as percentage of population for the U.S. Census 2010. Preschool includes 25% of 5 year olds and School Age includes 75% of 5 year olds.(3) Rural East Contra Costa County Population by Age and LFPR is based on an average of the percentages for Oakley and Clayton. (4) LFPR for Remainder are same as for Rural East County as these rates are not available for a "remainder" area.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; American Community Survey 2015; U.S. Census 2010; Brion Economics, Inc.ContinuedCity/AreaPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018119218
Final ReportTable 48Demographic Forecast by Area in 2017Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Population (1,2)Percent DistributionPopulation by Age (2)0‐35 Months3‐4 years 5‐9 years10‐12 yearsTotal Children 0‐12 yearsPercent DistributionPercent of Population by Age (2)0‐35 Months3‐4 years 5‐9 years10‐12 yearsTotal Children 0‐12 yearsLabor Force Participation Rates (3)With children under 6 yearsWith children 6‐17 yearsHouseholds (1)Percent DistributionEmployment (1)Percent DistributionCity/AreaContinued2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017Martinez Moraga Oakley Orinda PinolePittsburg Pleasant Hill Richmond44,380 16,860 41,780 18,320 31,040 93,000 41,440 132,1004.0% 1.5% 3.7% 1.6% 2.8% 8.3% 3.7% 11.8%1,334 285 1,876 439 955 4,265 1,313 5,8571,010 348 1,444 458 700 3,421 1,069 4,3902,284 947 3,251 1,321 1,501 6,776 2,150 8,5471,4426632,2539091,0924,0881,2895,2986,0702,2438,8253,1274,24818,5505,82024,0923.1%1.1%4.5%1.6%2.2%9.5%3.0%12.3%3.0%1.7%4.5%2.4%3.1%4.6%3.2%4.4%2.3%2.1%3.5%2.5%2.3%3.7%2.6%3.3%5.1%5.6%7.8%7.2%4.8%7.3%5.2%6.5%3.2%3.9%5.4%5.0%3.5%4.4%3.1%4.0%13.7%13.3%21.1%17.1%13.7%19.9%14.0%18.2%66%63%72%44%62%66%61%66%71%62%77%53%74%65%66%67%17,3225,82412,7426,78410,81028,19217,25045,9424%1%3%2%3%7%4%12%23,2065,1884,9786,1188,30017,89621,67839,3286%1%1%2%2%5%6%10%(1) Based on ABAG Projections 2013, and children as % of population based on the breakdown from the U.S. Census 2010.(2) Based on age as percentage of population for the U.S. Census 2010. Preschool includes 25% of 5 year olds and School Age includes 75% of 5 year olds.(3) Rural East Contra Costa County Population by Age and LFPR is based on an average of the percentages for Oakley and Clayton. (4) LFPR for Remainder are same as for Rural East County as these rates are not available for a "remainder" area.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; American Community Survey 2015; U.S. Census 2010; Brion Economics, Inc.ContinuedPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018120219
Final ReportTable 48Demographic Forecast by Area in 2017Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Population (1,2)Percent DistributionPopulation by Age (2)0‐35 Months3‐4 years 5‐9 years10‐12 yearsTotal Children 0‐12 yearsPercent DistributionPercent of Population by Age (2)0‐35 Months3‐4 years 5‐9 years10‐12 yearsTotal Children 0‐12 yearsLabor Force Participation Rates (3)With children under 6 yearsWith children 6‐17 yearsHouseholds (1)Percent DistributionEmployment (1)Percent DistributionCity/AreaContinued2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017San Pablo San Ramon Walnut Creek Alamo‐Blackhawk Rodeo‐CrockettRural East C.C. County (3) Remainder (4)Total County or Average 35,440 77,500 87,240 25,600 12,160 20,320 4,380 1,120,4603.2% 6.9% 7.8% 2.3% 1.1% 1.8% 0.4% 100%1,736 3,393 2,065 517 386 692 139 41,4761,339 3,108 1,712 547 321 586 116 33,8572,678 6,784 3,792 1,645 681 1,459 245 73,2091,5813,8862,4741,3644621,03416646,9777,334 17,172 10,0424,0731,8503,770666195,5173.8%8.8%5.1%2.1%0.9%1.9%0.3%100%4.9%4.4%2.4%2.0%3.2%3.4%3.2%3.7%3.8%4.0%2.0%2.1%2.6%2.9%2.6%3.0%7.6%8.8%4.3%6.4%5.6%7.2%5.6%6.5%4.5%5.0%2.8%5.3%3.8%5.1%3.8%4.2%20.7% 22.2% 11.5%15.9%15.2%18.6%15.2%17.4%63%62%71%37%62%75.4%75.4%64.1%68%63%70%48%77%71.0%71.0%67.1%10,612 27,182 40,7929,0364,4827,3441,634399,2103%7%10%2%1%2%0%100%8,436 49,922 60,6068,4102,4623,8381,004392,7902%13%15%2%1%1%0%100%(1) Based on ABAG Projections 2013, and children as % of population based on the breakdown from the U.S. Census 2010.(2) Based on age as percentage of population for the U.S. Census 2010. Preschool includes 25% of 5 year olds and School Age includes 75% of 5 year olds.(3) Rural East Contra Costa County Population by Age and LFPR is based on an average of the percentages for Oakley and Clayton. (4) LFPR for Remainder are same as for Rural East County as these rates are not available for a "remainder" area.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; American Community Survey 2015; U.S. Census 2010; Brion Economics, Inc.Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018121220
Final ReportTable 49Demographic Forecast by Area in 2027Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 20172027 2027 2027 2027 2027 2027 2027 2027Antioch Brentwood Clayton Concord Danville El Cerrito Hercules LafayettePopulation (1,2)114,32056,56011,600148,00046,88031,92032,38027,480Percent Distribution10%5%1%12%4%3%3%2%Population by Age (1)0‐35 Months4,7672,1902696,0341,2031,0751,1127333‐4 years 3,7882,0062684,5261,2278228497175‐9 years8,1994,7527638,5703,4401,5731,8831,87810‐12 years5,5153,2285555,2922,3967781,1941,239Total Children 0‐12 years22,26912,1751,85424,4228,2674,2485,0374,567Percent Distribution10.7%5.8%0.9%11.7%4.0%2.0%2.4%2.2%Percent of Population by Age (1)0‐35 Months4.2%3.9%2.3%4.1%2.6%3.4%3.4%2.7%3‐4 years 3.3%3.5%2.3%3.1%2.6%2.6%2.6%2.6%5‐9 years7.2%8.4%6.6%5.8%7.3%4.9%5.8%6.8%10‐12 years4.8%5.7%4.8%3.6%5.1%2.4%3.7%4.5%Total Children 0‐12 years19.5%21.5%16.0%16.5%17.6%13.3%15.6%16.6%Labor Force Participation Rates (2)With children under 6 years66%65%79%61%59%64%78%54%With children 6‐17 years69%68%65%67%58%74%76%64%Households (1)36,06217,9384,21052,93816,93213,66810,66010,560Percent Distribution9%4%1%13%4%3%3%2%Employment (1)23,71210,7261,85664,90616,4647,7025,81011,790Percent Distribution6%3%0%15%4%2%1%3%(1) Based on ABAG Projections 2013, and children as % of population based on the breakdown from the U.S. Census 2010.(2) Based on age as percentage of population for the U.S. Census 2010. Preschool includes 25% of 5 year olds and School Age includes 75% of 5 year olds.(3) Rural East Contra Costa County Population by Age and LFPR is based on an average of the percentages for Oakley and Clayton. (4) LFPR for Remainder are same as for Rural East County as these rates are not available for a "remainder" area.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; American Community Survey 2015; U.S. Census 2010; Brion Economics, Inc.ContinuedCity/AreaPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018122221
Final ReportTable 49Demographic Forecast by Area in 2027Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Population (1,2)Percent DistributionPopulation by Age (1)0‐35 Months3‐4 years 5‐9 years10‐12 yearsTotal Children 0‐12 yearsPercent DistributionPercent of Population by Age (1)0‐35 Months3‐4 years 5‐9 years10‐12 yearsTotal Children 0‐12 yearsLabor Force Participation Rates (2)With children under 6 yearsWith children 6‐17 yearsHouseholds (1)Percent DistributionEmployment (1)Percent DistributionCity/AreaContinued20272027202720272027202720272027Martinez Moraga OakleyOrindaPinole Pittsburg Pleasant Hill Richmond45,76017,60046,94018,96032,360101,58042,800142,3604%1%4%2%3%9%4%12%1,3762982,1084559964,6581,3566,3121,0413631,6234747293,7371,1044,7312,355 988 3,653 1,367 1,565 7,401 2,220 9,2111,4876922,5329401,1384,4651,3315,7096,2592,3429,9153,2364,42920,2626,01125,9643.0%1.1%4.8%1.6%2.1%9.7%2.9%12.5%3.0%1.7%4.5%2.4%3.1%4.6%3.2%4.4%2.3%2.1%3.5%2.5%2.3%3.7%2.6%3.3%5.1%5.6%7.8%7.2%4.8%7.3%5.2%6.5%3.2%3.9%5.4%5.0%3.5%4.4%3.1%4.0%13.7%13.3%21.1%17.1%13.7%19.9%14.0%18.2%66%63%72%44%62%66%61%66%71%62%77%53%74%65%66%67%17,7486,03214,2746,99611,21830,68817,69249,1704%1%3%2%3%7%4%12%24,4965,4965,7866,4868,83819,64823,30442,7426% 1% 1% 2% 2% 5% 5% 10%(1) Based on ABAG Projections 2013, and children as % of population based on the breakdown from the U.S. Census 2010.(2) Based on age as percentage of population for the U.S. Census 2010. Preschool includes 25% of 5 year olds and School Age includes 75% of 5 year olds.(3) Rural East Contra Costa County Population by Age and LFPR is based on an average of the percentages for Oakley and Clayton. (4) LFPR for Remainder are same as for Rural East County as these rates are not available for a "remainder" area.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; American Community Survey 2015; U.S. Census 2010; Brion Economics, Inc.ContinuedPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018123222
Final ReportTable 49Demographic Forecast by Area in 2027Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Population (1,2)Percent DistributionPopulation by Age (1)0‐35 Months3‐4 years 5‐9 years10‐12 yearsTotal Children 0‐12 yearsPercent DistributionPercent of Population by Age (1)0‐35 Months3‐4 years 5‐9 years10‐12 yearsTotal Children 0‐12 yearsLabor Force Participation Rates (2)With children under 6 yearsWith children 6‐17 yearsHouseholds (1)Percent DistributionEmployment (1)Percent DistributionCity/AreaContinued20272027202720272027202720272027San Pablo San Ramon Walnut Creek Alamo‐Blackhawk Rodeo‐CrockettRural East C.C. County (3) Remainder (4)Total County or Average 37,60081,66092,68026,02012,48020,8804,5001,193,3203%7%8%2%1%2%0%100%1,8413,5752,19452539671114344,3271,4213,2751,81855533060211936,1252,8417,1484,0281,672699 1,49925277,9581,6774,0952,6281,3874741,06217149,9877,78118,09410,6684,1391,899 3,874685208,3973.7%8.7%5.1%2.0%0.9% 1.9%0.3%100.0%4.9%4.4%2.4%2.0%3.2% 3.4%3.2%3.7%3.8%4.0%2.0%2.1%2.6% 2.9%2.6%3.0%7.6%8.8%4.3%6.4%5.6% 7.2%5.6%6.5%4.5%5.0%2.8%5.3%3.8%5.1%3.8%4.2%20.7%22.2%11.5%15.9%15.2% 18.6% 15.2%17.4%63%62%71%37%62%75%75%64%68%63%70%48%77%71%71%67%11,24428,63043,1969,1524,5847,472 1,640422,7043%7%10%2%1%2%0%100%9,01453,75265,6509,1142,6244,1301,082425,1282%13%15%2%1%1%0%100%(1) Based on ABAG Projections 2013, and children as % of population based on the breakdown from the U.S. Census 2010.(2) Based on age as percentage of population for the U.S. Census 2010. Preschool includes 25% of 5 year olds and School Age includes 75% of 5 year olds.(3) Rural East Contra Costa County Population by Age and LFPR is based on an average of the percentages for Oakley and Clayton. (4) LFPR for Remainder are same as for Rural East County as these rates are not available for a "remainder" area.Sources: ABAG Projections 2013; American Community Survey 2015; U.S. Census 2010; Brion Economics, Inc.Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018124223
Final ReportTable 50Child Care Supply by Type and Age 2017Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017Total Number of Birth to 24 months or 2 to 5 Years or 6 to 13 Years orTotal City/AreaFacilities or Providers InfantPreschool School AgeSpaces Antioch71142284142568Brentwood387615276304Clayton12428Concord80160320160640Danville1122442288El Cerrito (2)1020402080Hercules612241248Lafayette12428Martinez13265226104Moraga4816832Oakley377414874296Orinda4816832Pinole510201040Pittsburg (2)428416884336Pleasant Hill (2)20408040160Richmond (2)59118236118472San Pablo1224482496San Ramon50100200100400Walnut Creek14285628112Alamo‐Blackhawk248416Rodeo‐Crockett3612624Rural East County (2)816321664TOTAL 4919821,964982 3,928(1) Breakdown of spaces by age for FCCHs is based on California state licensing requirements.(2) El Cerrito includes data for the unincorporated area of Kensington; Pittsburg includes data for unincorporated area of Bay Point; Pleasant Hill includes data for unincorporated area of Pacheco; Richmond includes data for unincorporated area of El Sobrante; Rural East County includesDiscovery Bay.Sources: CocoKids (formerly Contra Costa Child Care Council); Brion Economics, Inc. ContinuedSmall Family Child Care Homes (1)Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018125224
Final ReportTable 50Child Care Supply by Type and Age 2017Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017City/Area AntiochBrentwoodClaytonConcordDanvilleEl Cerrito (2)HerculesLafayetteMartinezMoragaOakleyOrindaPinolePittsburg (2)Pleasant Hill (2)Richmond (2)San PabloSan RamonWalnut CreekAlamo‐BlackhawkRodeo‐CrockettRural East County (2)TOTAL (1)(2)ContinuedTotal Number of Birth to 24 months or 2 to 5 Years or 6 to 13 Years orTotal Facilities or Providers Infant Preschool School AgeSpaces39117234195546175110285238391815423410320616547439181542237114210531814438665194261210286 183630840 0000175110285238261210288 244840112216312610529416489680224521583162507243030605014019631266525421631261052942612102826121028261210283339511,9021,505 4,358Breakdown of spaces by age for FCCHs is based on California state licensing requirements.El Cerrito includes data for the unincorporated area of Kensington; Pittsburg includes data for unincorporated area of Bay Point; Pleasant Hill includes data for unincorporated area of Pacheco; Richmond includes data for unincorporated area of El Sobrante; Rural East County includesDiscovery Bay.Sources: CocoKids (formerly Contra Costa Child Care Council); Brion Economics, Inc. ContinuedLarge Family Child Care Homes (1)Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018126225
Final ReportTable 50Child Care Supply by Type and Age 2017Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017City/Area AntiochBrentwoodClaytonConcordDanvilleEl Cerrito (2)HerculesLafayetteMartinezMoragaOakleyOrindaPinolePittsburg (2)Pleasant Hill (2)Richmond (2)San PabloSan RamonWalnut CreekAlamo‐BlackhawkRodeo‐CrockettRural East County (2)TOTAL (1)(2)ContinuedTotal Number of Birth to 24 months or 2 to 5 Years or 6 to 13 Years orTotal Facilities or Providers Infant Preschool School AgeSpaces1695993182 1,27027113929545 1,587316208203427431671,9121,126 3,2052136674809 1,519161766811479940552883431478652312 1,04216133569578 1,280724542056670277263036031503156011915327226921,599198 1,8891884612518 1,214373311,696248 2,275117932024264122579001,377 2,33433611,2811,196 2,538702371403776762132030920900903481,45914,8618,275 24,595Breakdown of spaces by age for FCCHs is based on California state licensing requirements.El Cerrito includes data for the unincorporated area of Kensington; Pittsburg includes data for unincorporated area of Bay Point; Pleasant Hill includes data for unincorporated area of Pacheco; Richmond includes data for unincorporated area of El Sobrante; Rural East County includesDiscovery Bay.Sources: CocoKids (formerly Contra Costa Child Care Council); Brion Economics, Inc. ContinuedChild Care CentersPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018127226
Final ReportTable 50Child Care Supply by Type and Age 2017Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017City/Area AntiochBrentwoodClaytonConcordDanvilleEl Cerrito (2)HerculesLafayetteMartinezMoragaOakleyOrindaPinolePittsburg (2)Pleasant Hill (2)Richmond (2)San PabloSan RamonWalnut CreekAlamo‐BlackhawkRodeo‐CrockettRural East County (2)TOTAL (1)(2)ContinuedTotal Number of Birth to 24 months or 2 to 5 Years or 6 to 13 Years or Total Facilities or Providers Infant Preschool School Age Spaces 7 0 24 600 6241 0 0 100 1000 000013 0 304 1,062 1,3660 00000 0 0 100 10010064641 660123 0 24 150 1742 0 0 200 2001 0 0 100 1001 0 0 120 1200 000012 0 0 1,179 1,1793 0 0 345 34515 0 0 1,506 1,5067 0 0 705 7050 00002 0 0 100 1000 00000 00002 0 0 200 20071 6 358 6,531 6,895Breakdown of spaces by age for FCCHs is based on California state licensing requirements.El Cerrito includes data for the unincorporated area of Kensington; Pittsburg includes data for unincorporated area of Bay Point; Pleasant Hill includes data for unincorporated area of Pacheco; Richmond includes data for unincorporated area of El Sobrante; Rural East County includesDiscovery Bay.Sources: CocoKids (formerly Contra Costa Child Care Council); Brion Economics, Inc. ContinuedLicense Exempt CentersPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018128227
Final ReportTable 50Child Care Supply by Type and Age 2017Contra Costa County Child Care Needs Assessment 2017City/Area AntiochBrentwoodClaytonConcordDanvilleEl Cerrito (2)HerculesLafayetteMartinezMoragaOakleyOrindaPinolePittsburg (2)Pleasant Hill (2)Richmond (2)San PabloSan RamonWalnut CreekAlamo‐BlackhawkRodeo‐CrockettRural East County (2)TOTAL (1)(2)ContinuedTotal Number of Birth to 24 months or 2 to 5 Years or 6 to 13 Years or Total Facilities or Providers Infant Preschool School Age Spaces 1333541,5351,119 3,008832401,183806 2,2297272302204771704302,7422,513 5,6853567736846 1,64949108850339 1,29725551654296491892674324 1,09038177681784 1,642133255820879862125527285937131434313849519341872034241012391,8931,566 3,69857172788983 1,9431636072,2482,122 4,977601334281,021 1,582912201,2261,542 2,988701521,4631,429 3,044111025715442111882373636114221342263821,2433,39819,08517,293 39,776Breakdown of spaces by age for FCCHs is based on California state licensing requirements.El Cerrito includes data for the unincorporated area of Kensington; Pittsburg includes data for unincorporated area of Bay Point; Pleasant Hill includes data for unincorporated area of Pacheco; Richmond includes data for unincorporated area of El Sobrante; Rural East County includesDiscovery Bay.Sources: CocoKids (formerly Contra Costa Child Care Council); Brion Economics, Inc.Total FCCHs and Centers in Contra Costa CountyPrepared by Brion Economics, Inc. CCC CIty Demand Model FINAL 8.28.188/28/2018129228
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 130
APPENDIX B:
NEEDS ASSESSMENT CALIFORNIA
STATE FORM
229
LOCAL CHILD CARE PLANNING COUNCIL (LPC) COUNTY NEEDS ASSESSMENT TEMPLATE (revised Nov 2014)
Ages 1a. Number Age Totals Ethnicity %Language 3a. Number 3b. %
<1 13,363 1.b 0‐2 yr olds:Hispanic or Latino 35.0%Spanish 40,678 22.93%
1 13,560 American Indian or Alaskan Native 0.3%Vietnamese 1,133 0.64%
2 14,553 Asian American 12.5%Cantonese 1,211 0.68%
3 15,222 1.c 3 & 4 yr olds:Pacific Islander 0.6%Filipino 2,306 1.30%
4 14,826 33,857 Filipino 4.2% Korean 943 0.53%
5 15,232 1.d 5‐12 yr olds:African American 9.3%Mandarin 2,040 1.15%
6‐12 108,761 120,185 White, Not Hispanic 31.7% Arabic 1,032 0.58%
Total:195,517 Multiracial/ethnic 5.4%Farsi 1,167 0.66%
Not reported 1.0%Other 10,047 NA
Section 1 Source: ABAG; U.S. Census 2010: American Community Survey.
25% of 5 year olds are counted as Preschool, the remaining 75% are included in School Age.
Section 2 Source: CA Dept of Education 2016‐17.
Section 3 Source: CA Dept of Education Dataquest Report 2016‐17 for Contra Costa County.
Age Group 4a. with IFSP 4b. with IEP 5a. In the CPS Sytem by Age Group
0‐2 860 n/a
3 & 4 1,700 n/a
5‐12 n/a n/a
Section 4 Sources: Care Parent Network.
Section 5 Sources: County Child Welfare Department.
Age Group Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3
0‐2 322 291 117
3 & 4 288 333 210
5‐12 366 428 658
Age Group
7.b At or below 70% State median income
(Eligible for State Subsidy)
0‐2 5,599 15,396
3 & 4 4,571 12,744
5‐12 15,143 44,264
4
Section 6 Source: CalWORKs Stage 1 data provided by Contra Costa County ‐ Employment & Human Services Dept, June 2018.
3‐4 year olds may include some 5 year olds in the only data available.
Data on CalWORKs Stage 2 and 3 provide by Margaret Weigart‐Jacobs, CocoKids, 2017.
Section 7 Source: American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates 2016;
Early Learning Needs Assessment Tool compiled by American Institutes for Research.
Section 8 Source: Manuel Nunez, Director II, Migrant Education, San Joaquin County Office of Education, 2018.
Ages 0‐2 Ages 3 and 4 yr olds
15,396 12,744
26,599 21,713
12,144
4,571
Section 9‐12 Source: ABAG; American Community Survey 5‐Year Estimates 2016.
Section 1: Number of Children in the County by Age
Cohorts
Section 2: Percent of Children K‐12 by
Race/Ethnicity
Section 3: Child Population (grades K‐12) by Threshold
Lanaguages
DEMOGRAPHICS
Section 8: Number of Children in Migrant Families (50% or more of income is from Migrant Work)
Demand Populations Ages 5‐12 yr olds
Section 9: Number of Children in
families with working parents who
are at or below 70% SMI 44,264
n/a
SPECIAL NEEDS
7.a At or Below Federal Poverty (Eligible
for Head Start)Above 70% SMI
26,080
21,113
Section 4: Number of Children Who Have an
Individualized Family Services Plan (IFSP) or an
Individualized Education Plan (IEP) by Age Group
5b. Referred for Child Care by
Age Group
Section 5: Number of Children Served in child Protective Services
n/a
n/a
75,921
INCOME
Section 6: Number of Children in Families Receiving CalWORKs by Age and Stage
Section 7: Estimated Number of Children by Income Category, by Age
Section 10: Number of children
with all parents in the workforce
(all income levels)
Section 11: Number of 3 & 4 yr olds with at least 1 non‐
working parent (all income levels)
Section 12: Number of 3 & 4 yr olds with at least 1 non‐
working parent in family at or below 70% SMI
80,698
41,476
DEMAND FOR CHILD CARE AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
Children in Migrant Families 0‐12
County: Contra Costa
Contact:Phone:
County Code:Date Submitted:
Email:
131
230
LOCAL CHILD CARE PLANNING COUNCIL (LPC) COUNTY NEEDS ASSESSMENT TEMPLATE (revised Nov 2014)
13a. Infants (0‐2) 13.c School‐Age (5‐12)
1,459
1,933
6
*Assumes 8 licensed spaces for small FCCHs and 14 spaces for large FCCHs.
** Number of spaces in License ‐exempt are self‐reported or estimated based on licensing capacity.
Section 13 Sources: CocoKids.
Center Regional
Market Rates
Center Full‐time
Maximum
Center Full‐Time
Average Center Part‐Time Maximum
Infant/Toddlers $416 $288 $310
Preschool $338 $210 $261
School‐Age $216 n/a $142
Family Child
Care Home
Regional Market
Rates
FCCH Full‐time
Maximum
FCCH Full‐Time
Average FCCH Part‐Time Maximum
Infant/Toddlers $252 $190 $195
Preschool $229 $174 $179
School‐Age $171 n/a $138
Section 14 Source: California Department of Education; California Child Care Resource & Referral Network.
Infant Toddlers (0‐2)
387
na
na
0
0
0
142
322
291
117
na
573
Section 15 Sources: American Institutes for Research Early Learning Needs Assessment Tool for 2016;
Head Start, Early Head Start, and CalWORKs Stages 1, 2 and 3 data provided by Margaret Weigart Jacobs, CocoKids.
Number %Number %Number
9,970 37%2,654 12% 22,741
15,396 100%12,744 100% 44,264
8,377 69%
4,571 100%
Section 16 Source: Calculation from data above.
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc.
358
8,275
2,487
6,531
Spaces
Licensed Centers
Section 13: Licensed Capcity for Age Groups
CAPACITY
Licensed Family Child Care Homes*
License‐Exempt Centers**
14,861
3,866
13.b Preschool (3 & 4)
333
0
n/a
Section 14: Weekly Regional Market Rates by Age and Type of Care
COST OF CARE: COUNTY REGIONAL MARKET RATES ALLOWED FOR STATE SUBSIDY
CHILDREN ENROLLED IN STATE AND FEDERALCHILD CARE AND DEVELOPMENT SUBSIDY PROGRAMS
Section 15: Children served in Subsidized Child Care and Development Subsidy Programs (point in time)
na
Center Part ‐Time Average
n/a
n/a
n/a
FCCH Part ‐Time Average
n/a
n/a
Alternative Payment (voucher)
CalWORKs Stage 1
CalWORKs Stage 2
CalWORKs Stage 3
Head Start
Early Head Start
Full‐Day Center (CCTR)
CA State Preschool (CSPP) Full‐day
FCCH Networks
Migrant
Handicap Program
CA State Preschool (CSPP) Part‐day
UNMET NEED
Section 16: County Unmet Need By Type of Care and Age Group
16a. Full‐time care for working parents
16b. Full‐time care for working familes eligible for
State subsidy
16c. Part time Preschool for enrichment / school
readiness (all incomes)
16d. Part time Preschool for enrichment/ school
readiness and eligible for state subsidy
366
658
na
na
288
65
2
0
0
67
na
0
428
Type of care needed Infant Toddler (0‐2)Preschool (3 & 4)School‐Age 5‐12
288
210
1,380
na
6,531Other (ASES and other after‐school license‐exempt)
Funding /Program Type Preschool (3 & 4 yr olds) School‐Age (5‐12)
36
1,359
1
160
132
231
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 133
APPENDIX C:
CENTER DIRECTOR PROVIDER SURVEY
AND FAMILY CHILD CARE PROVIDER
SURVEY IN ENGLISH AND SPANISH
232
Thank you for taking our survey.
Child care is so important. We want to be sure that it is available here in Contra Costa County for
all the families that will need it, now and in the future.
We are doing a study to help us plan. We have hired an independent research firm, Brion
Economics, Inc., who has designed this survey.
The survey asks for specifics about your program enrollments and site facility. What you tell us will
be available only to child care planning staff and the research consultant team. The consultants
will summarize all the responses and create a public report with trends by city and program type.
Your experience as a provider is critical! This survey should take no more than 15 minutes to
complete. All those who complete the survey will be entered into a raffle for $1000 in prizes ($300,
$200, $100 or $50 gift certificate for educational supplies).
Please do your best to answer all of the questions. If you have any questions regarding this survey,
please contact Cesca Wright at 530.220.4049 or cesca@davisconsultants.net.
Thank you for all you do for children and families in our community.
Ruth Fernández, Manager, Educational Services, Contra Costa County Office of Education and LPC
Coordinator
Margaret Wiegert-Jacobs, Director of the Learning Institute and Resource and Referral Department,
CocoKids
Introduction
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
134
233
Have we got the right person?
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
1. Are you the person from your organization or business who is most knowledgeable about the child care
facility and current enrollments?
*
Yes
No
135
234
Then who?
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
Name
Email address
Phone number
2. Please provide the name, email and phone number of the person who is most knowledgeable about your
facilities.
3. Choose the next page for exiting the survey.*
I'd like to leave a comment for the agencies studying the supply and demand for child care facilities in Contra Costa County
I'd like to exit without leaving a comment.
136
235
Single or Multiple Locations
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
4. Does your program manage only one or multiple child care center locations at this time?*
One location
Multiple locations
137
236
For Administrators of Multiple Sites
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
We will be asking questions about each site. Kindly provide the contact information for each site director. If this is challenging, please
call or email Cesca Wright so we can find a better solution. cesca@davisconsultants.net or 530.220.4049.
1st site name and city
1st Site Director's Name
1st Site Director's Email
2nd Site name and city
2nd Site Director's Name
2nd Site name and city
3rd site name and city
3rd Site Director's Name
3rd Site Director's Email
4th site name and city
4th Site Director's Name
4th Site Director's Email
5th site name and city
5th Site Director's Name
5th Site Director's Email
6th site name and city
6th Site Director's Name
6th Site Director's Email
7th site name and city
7th Site Director's Name
7th Site Director's Email
8th site name and city
5. Please list your sites, the name of the site director and her/his email.
138
237
8th Site Director's Name
8th Site Director's Email
9th site name and city
9th Site Director's Name
9th Site Director's Email
10th site name and city
10th Site Director's Name
10th Site Director's Email
6. Are you a site director as well?*
Yes
No
139
238
Verification of Site
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
Center or program name
7. What do you call your child care program? *
8. In what city are you located?
Antioch
Brentwood
Clayton
Concord
Danville
El Cerrito
Hercules
Lafayette
Martinez
Moraga
Oakley
Orinda
Pinole
Pittsburg
Pleasant Hill
Richmond
San Pablo
Walnut Creek
Unincorporated County
My center is not located in Contra
Costa County
9. Please check all the building types which apply to your facility.
Converted Residential Building
City Owned Building
School District Building
Converted Commercial Building
Modular Building
Building Constructed Specifically for Child Care
Faith-based campus (Church, Mosque, Synagogue,Temple, etc.)
Other (please specify)
10. Approximately, for how many years has this program been operating at this location?
140
239
11. Has your program participated in Quality Matters (QRIS) or the Contra Costa Countywide Professional
Development Program (PDP)?
Yes
No
141
240
Enrollments
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
Infant/Toddlers (ages 0-
24 months)
Preschool Children
(ages 2-4 years)
School-Aged Children (5
years and older)
12. What are your current enrollment numbers?
ON TARGET (We are
at our target capacity.)
CLOSE to TARGET
(We are within 90% of
our target capacity.)
BELOW TARGET
(We are below 90% of
our target capacity.)
NOT APPLICABLE
(We do not offer this.)
Full-time infant/toddler spaces
Part-time infant/toddler spaces
Full-time preschool spaces
Part-time preschool spaces
Before-school spaces
After-school spaces
13. How well are you meeting your target enrollment for each of the following?
14. Does your program have a wait list?*
Yes
No
142
241
Waitlist
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
Infant/Toddler (0-24
months)
Preschool (ages 2-5
years)
School Aged (over 5
years of age)
15. Approximately, how many children are on your wait list?
143
242
Growing Programs
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
16. Have you expanded the number of child care spaces at your center in the past 5 years?*
Yes
No
144
243
Cost of Expansion
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
Infant/Toddlers (ages 0-
24 months)
Preschool (ages 2-4
years)
Before/After School
(ages 5 years and older)
17. How many more childcare spaces did you add, by age group?
Permitting & Licensing
Fees
Construction Costs
Furniture and Equipment
Other costs (please
explain in text box below)
18. Approximately how much did the following components of the expansion cost?
19. Please explain any additional expansion costs.
20. Please check all of the planning processes you went through.
Building Permit
Use Permit
Zoning or General Plan Change
Public Hearings
Other (please specify)
21. Did you face any challenges to expansion? Please describe below.
145
244
Publicly Subsidized?
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
22. Does your program receive funding from any public sources, such as State Preschool, Head Start/Early
Start, ASES, 21st Century, or have children enrolled who receive subsidies from Coco Kids or Contra
Costa County?
*
Yes
No
146
245
For Programs with Public Funding
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
State Preschool
Head Start/Early Head
Start
After School Education &
Safety Program (ASES)
21st Century
Coco Kids or Contra Costa
County
OTHER
23. Approximately how many spaces are funded by each of these programs?
24. What percent of your subsidized spaces are filled?
25. Do current reimbursement rates cover the costs per space?
Yes
No
26. How do you cover the costs not reimbursed?
147
246
Please answer these to the best of your ability. It is not a test!
Size and Ownership Status
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
27. What is the gross square footage of the child care facility? (This is the square footage of the
building or portion of the buiding/s used for the program. It is does not include outside play space. This
information can be found on your center license.)
28. Does your organization own the building that houses the program?*
Yes
No
148
247
Your responses will be seen by Brion Economics. They will NOT be shared in any public document.
Rented Facilities
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
29. What sort of rental agreement do you have?
Month to month
Fixed term lease
Other (please specify)
30. What is the monthly rent or occupancy costs/charges? (If you don't know, but can name someone who
does, kindly provide their contact information.)
31. When does the lease expire?
If you anticipate issues, please explain.
32. Do you anticipate any problems renewing your lease or continuing to rent this space?
We plan to renew and don't anticipate problems.
We may have issues renewing.
Our lease will not be renewed and we know we have to relocate.
149
248
Renovations Underway?
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
Please describe renovations underway.
33. Do you currently have any significant repairs or renovations underway at this location?
No
Yes (please describe below)
Please itemize the repairs or renovations you have considered.
34. Have you received bids or estimates for repairs or renovations that have not yet been pursued?*
No
Yes (Please describe below)
150
249
Barriers to Repairs or Renovation
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
IF there were other reasons, please explain.
35. Is anything stopping you from making the repairs or renovations you have considered? (Please check
all that apply.)
We don't have any barriers and will be proceeding
No longer a priority
The costs were too high
Lacked owner's approval
Lacked time and/or expertise to manage the project
Did not want to tackle the city permitting process
Did not have the funds
License issues
151
250
Current Facility Condition
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
URGENT (has
safety issues that
could jeopardize
license renewal)
Due for
REPAIR/RENOVATION
soon
ADEQUATE
(showing some
wear and tear but
remains safe and
usable)
GOOD or
EXCELLENT
Not Applicable or
Unknown
Exterior (stucco/siding,
parking, exterior
lighting)
Building Structure
(foundation, framing,
roof)
Interior Finishes
(lighting, floor
coverings, painting)
ADA Accessibility
Fire/Earthquake
Safety
Other
Functions (plumbing,
electrical, kitchen,
heating, air
conditioning)
36. Please rate the current condition of the following components of the child care facility.
37. Please explain any items ranked "Urgent" or "Inadequate".
URGENT (has safety
issues that could
jeopardize license
renewal)
Due for
REPAIR/RENOVATION
Soon
ADEQUATE (showing
some wear, but remains
safe and usable)
GOOD or Excellent
Condition
Exterior lighting
Interior walls/paint
Interior lighting
Floor coverings
Play structures
38. Please rate the current condition of these aspects of the facility.
152
251
39. Please explain any items ranked "Urgent" or "Due for Repair" responses.
153
252
Expansion Possibilities
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
40. Would you or your organization/business consider expanding to serve more children in Contra Costa
County at this or another location? (Note: this question is not limited to the site you have been describing
in previous responses.)
*
Yes, we would like to expand
We might consider expansion
No, we are not interested in expansion
154
253
For those considering expansion
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
41. Please check all the types of spaces you would consider.
Part time
Full time
Mixed, full and part time
Infant/Toddler (0-24
months)
Preschool (2-5 years)
School-Aged (over 5
years)
42. How many additional spaces would you like to add?
43. By when might you expand?
Within a year
In 1-2 years
In 2-5 years
Not sure
155
254
44. Do you anticipate any of the following challenges for expansion or opening a new site? (Please check
all that apply.)
We don't anticipate any challenges or barriers and will be proceeding.
Difficulty finding an available site
Lack owner's approval for renovations
Lack time and/or expertise to manage an expansion project
Don't want to tackle the city permitting process
Lack of funding for expansion
Licensing issues
State reimbursement rate insufficient to cover costs
Lack of availability of qualified staff for expansion
Lack of subsidized funding
Other challenges or barriers (please specify)
If yes, how would you like it listed? (list the site or agency name.)
45. May we include the name of your organization or center site in a public list as one that
is interested in expansion?
Yes
No
156
255
Opportunities
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
Please describe the potential space/s you have in mind, and any contact information if available. Please note if your program is
pursuing this space.
46. Do you know of any potential buildings or sites (vacant lots, buildings, shared facilities, etc.) which
might be developed for child care/early learning facilities? If you are currently working at acquiring this
site, please note that in the comment notes, and we will not disclose that location.
*
Yes (please describe below)
No
157
256
Anything else?
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
47. Do you have anything else you would like to tell us as we consider ways to ensure the adequate supply
of child care facilities in Contra Costa County for the years to come?
Name
Email address
48. If you would like your name entered in the raffle to win a gift certificate for educational supplies, please
provide your name and email below.
158
257
Contra Costa County Child Care Center Director Survey
Thank you for assisting us in planning for long-term availability of local child care facilities.
159
258
! "
#
$%
&
'(%)
*'+))
',)) '$)) '%)
-
.
/
/
%+),,)0)01 2
3
4
5 6
7.
8
7
9 9
8
:
;
.
4
160
259
;
.
4
!
"
#
$
%
&
!
'(
) *
)
+,
+
-
- .
-
!
/
-.
,
0
)
(
1
#2 3
(
.
4
!
5
)
65/7
%
-
6-%-7
8
161
260
&
;
.
4
<
.
45&
9
.
+
#/:&
'+&
#/:&
$&'+
#/:&
+
#--'#$'&
!
;
(<
-;
(<
;
-;
$ ( ;
#( ;
=
!
(
(
(
>
%
8
162
261
?
+
;
.
4
<
.
4&
"
@
#2 3
A
%
(
+
/
163
262
!"!"#
$$ %& '"& %
/
;
.
4
(
)
2
+
6
(7
<
"
2
(
3
2
1
%
.
B
.
,
164
263
4
#2
(
.
"AC
1AC
4AC
9AC
=AC
>AC
@AC
AAC
165
264
/
0
;
.
4
-
.
9
%
(
(
8
6
.
. 7
-
*
=
!
. <
(
<
(
.
8
6-
.
. 7
166
265
$
/
/
;
.
4
3
2
>
!
(
,
#
$
B
.
.
',
B
',
<
2
D
%
,
%
(
'
167
266
&2
- .
;
.
4
@
#
'
!
8
A
2
8 3
,
2
2
3
2
168
267
2
;
.
4
-
,
(
-
) 2 3
(
<
.
45&
"
!
,
"
$
2
;
;4
169
268
1
%
(
(
(
2
#
$
B
.
.
% ((
(
.
',
B
(
',
<
2
2
D
%B
,
',
(
(
(
2
'
.
((
',
(
.
(
E (
((
(
2
',
(
. *
(
+
.
6
(7
(
3
,
6
7
4
)
.
(
-
.
2
8
170
269
+
;
.
4
-
.
<
3
(
(
.
-
(
9
%
,
(
.
6
3
. 3
( 3
7
.
(
<
(
,
E
3
3
8
6
.
. 7
171
270
/((
&
;
.
4
&
=
(
,
((
(
(
(
3
.
172
271
#
;
.
4
>
%
,
E
(
(
(
173
272
;
.
4
,
(
(
;
.
(
(
174
273
Gracias por hacer nuestra encuesta.
El cuidado infantil es importante. Queremos asegurarnos de que esté disponible aquí en el
Condado de Contra Costa para todas las familias que lo necesiten, ahora y en el futuro.
Estamos realizando un estudio para ayudarnos a planificar. Hemos contratado a una firma de
investigación independiente, Brion Economics, Inc., la misma que ha diseñado esta encuesta.
La encuesta pregunta de manera específica acerca de su programa. Lo que usted nos diga estará
disponible solamente para el personal de planificación de cuidado infantil y para el equipo
consultor de investigación. Los consultores resumirán todas las respuestas y crearán un reporte
público con las tendencias de acuerdo a cada ciudad y tipo de programa.
¡Su experiencia como proveedor es muy importante! Esta encuesta debe tomar no más de 15
minutos para completarla. Todos aquellos que completen la encuesta participaran en una rifa de
$750 en premios (tarjetas de regalos para materiales educativos por valor de $300, $200, $100 o
$50).
Por favor haga todo lo posible para responder a todas las preguntas. Si usted tiene alguna
pregunta sobre esta encuesta, por favor póngase en contacto con Cesca Wright al 530.220.4049 o a
cesca@davisconsultants.net.
Gracias por todo lo que hace por los niños y las familias de nuestra comunidad.
Ruth Fernández, Gerente, Servicios Educacionales – Oficina de Educación del Condado de Contra
Costa y Coordinadora LPC.
Margaret Wiegert-Jacobs, Directora del Instituto de Aprendizaje y Recursos y Departamento de
Referencia, CocoKids
Presentación
Encuesta para el Proveedor de Cuidado Infantil Familiar
175
274
El Lugar
Encuesta para el Proveedor de Cuidado Infantil Familiar
Nombre
1. ¿Cómo llama a su programa de Cuidado Infantil Familiar?*
2. ¿Por cuántos años ha tenido usted un Hogar con licencia para Cuidado Infantil Familiar? (Si usted
recién obtuvo su licencia, escriba “1”.)
3. ¿En qué ciudad está actualmente ubicado?
Antioch
Brentwood
Clayton
Concord
Danville
El Cerrito
Hercules
Lafayette
Martinez
Moraga
Oakley
Orinda
Pinole
Pittsburg
Pleasant Hill
Richmond
San Pablo
Walnut Creek
Área no incorporada del Condado
Mi hogar para cuidado infantil no está
ubicado en el Condado de Contra
Costa.
4. Aproximadamente, ¿por cuántos años ha estado este programa operando en esta ubicación? (Si es un
centro nuevo, por favor escriba “1”).
5. ¿Ha participado en Quality Matters (QRIS) o el Programa de Desarrollo para todo el Condado de Contra
Costa (PDP)?
Si
No
176
275
Insripciones
Encuesta para el Proveedor de Cuidado Infantil Familiar
Niños pequeños (edades
de 0-24 meses)
Niños en edad pre-
escolar (edades 2-4
años)
Niños en edad escolar (5
años o mayores)
6. Actualmente, ¿cuántos tiene registrados?
EN LA META
(estoy en mi meta
en cuanto a
capacidad)
EN LA META
POR DEBAJO DE
LA META (quiero
más niños en esta
edad)
NO APLICA (No
ofrecemos esto)
Espacios a tiempo completo para bebés/niños
pequeños
Espacio a medio tiempo para bebés/niños
pequeños
Espacios a tiempo completo para pre-escolar
Espacios a medio tiempo para pre-escolar
Espacios para antes de la escuela
Espacios para después de la escuela
7. ¿Qué tan bien está logrando su meta de registro por cada uno de los siguientes?
8. ¿Tiene una lista de espera?*
Sí
No
177
276
Lista de Espera y Estado de la Propiedad
Encuesta para el Proveedor de Cuidado Infantil Familiar
Bebés/niños pequeños
(0-24 meses)
Pre-escolar (edades de
2-5 años)
En edad escolar (más de
5 años de edad)
9. Aproximadamente, ¿cuántos niños están en su lista de espera?
10. ¿Alquila o es dueño de la casa para el cuidado familiar?*
Propia
Alquilada
178
277
Permítanos recordarle que sus respuestas solo las verán Brion Economics y el personal de COCO
Kids administrando este estudio. Sus respuestas NO serán compartidas en ningún documento
público.
Instalaciones en Alquiler
Encuesta para el Proveedor de Cuidado Infantil Familiar
11. ¿Qué tipo de contrato de alquiler tiene?
Mes a mes
Contrato a plazo fijo
Otro (por favor especifique)
12. Por favor ingrese un comentario.
13. ¿Cuándo termina el contrato de alquiler?
Si anticipa problemas, por favor explique.
14. ¿Anticipa usted algún problema para renovar su alquiler o continuar alquilando este espacio?
No anticipo problemas.
Puedo tener problemas renovándolo.
Sé que tendré que moverme
179
278
15. Aproximadamente, ¿qué porcentaje de su casa es utilizado para el programa de cuidado infantil?
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
180
279
¿Renovaciones en Curso?
Encuesta para el Proveedor de Cuidado Infantil Familiar
Por favor describa las renovaciones en curso.
16. Actualmente, ¿tiene usted importantes reparaciones o renovaciones trazadas para mejorar su hogar
para el programa de cuidado infantil?
No
Sí (por favor describa a continuación)
Por favor enumere las reparaciones o renovaciones que usted ha considerado.
17. ¿Ha recibido ofertas/presupuestos para las reparaciones/renovaciones para mejorar el espacio para el
cuidado infantil que no han sido llevadas a cabo?
*
No
Sí (Por favor describa a continuación)
181
280
Obstáculos para las Reparaciones/Renovaciones
Encuesta para el Proveedor de Cuidado Infantil Familiar
Si hubo otras razones, por favor explique.
18. ¿Hay algo que lo haya detenido de considerar hacer reparaciones o renovaciones? (Por favor marque
todas las que aplican)
No tenemos ningún obstáculo y vamos proceder
Ya no es una prioridad
Los costos son muy altos
No contamos con la aprobación del propietario
Faltó tiempo y/o experiencia para manejar el proyecto
No quería hacer frente al proceso de permiso ante la ciudad
No tuve los fondos
Problemas de licencia
182
281
Posibilidades de Expansión
Encuesta para el Proveedor de Cuidado Infantil Familiar
19. ¿Tiene usted licencia como un Hogar Grande para el Cuidado Infantil?*
Sí
No
20. ¿Consideraría ampliar para servir a más niños en el Condado de Contra Costa en esta ubicación o en
otra?
*
Sí, me gustaría ampliar
Podría considerar una ampliación
No, no estoy interesado en una ampliación
183
282
Para aquellos considerando una ampliación
Encuesta para el Proveedor de Cuidado Infantil Familiar
21. Favor de poner un número, 0 o mayor en el cuadro.
Medio tiempo
Tiempo completo
Mezcla de medio y tiempo completo
Bebés/niños pequeños
(de 0-24 meses)
Pre-escolar (2-5 años)
Edad escolar (más de 5
años)
22. ¿Cuántos espacios adicionales le gustaría agregar?
23. ¿Cuándo podría usted ampliar?
Dentro de un año
En 1 a 2 años
En 2 a 5 años
No estoy seguro
184
283
24. ¿Anticipa algunos de los siguientes retos para la ampliación o inauguración de un nuevo local? (Por
favor marque todos los que aplican)
No anticipamos ningún reto u obstáculo y vamos a proceder
Dificultad encontrando un lugar disponible
Falta la aprobación del dueño para las renovaciones
Falta la aprobación del dueño para las renovaciones
No quiero hacer frente al proceso de permisos ante la ciudad
Falta de financiamiento para la expansión
Problemas de licencia
State reimbursement rate insufficient to cover costs
La tasa de reembolso del estado insuficiente para cubrir costos
Falta de disponibilidad de personal calificado para la expansión
Otros retos u obstáculos (por favor especificar)
Si contestó Sí, ¿cómo le gustaría aparecer? (mencionando el lugar o el nombre de la agencia)
25. ¿Podemos incluir su nombre en una lista pública de Proveedores de Cuidado Familiar con interés en
una posible expansión?
Sí
No
185
284
Oportunidades
Encuesta para el Proveedor de Cuidado Infantil Familiar
Por favor describa el(los) espacio(s) potencial(es) que usted tiene en mente y cualquier Información de contacto si estuviera
disponible. Por favor anote si su programa está persiguiendo este espacio.
26. ¿Sabe de cualquier edificación potencial (lotes baldíos, edificaciones, instalaciones compartidas, etc.)
que podrían desarrollarse para centro de educación temprana/cuidado infantil? Si usted está actualmente
trabajando para adquirir este lugar, por favor escriba eso en los comentarios, y nosotros no divulgaremos
esa ubicación.
Sí (por favor describa a continuación)
No
186
285
Ingresar su Nombre a la Rifa
Encuesta para el Proveedor de Cuidado Infantil Familiar
Nombre
Correo Electrónico
27. Si usted quisiera que su nombre ingrese en la rifa para ganar tarjetas de regalos para materiales
educacionales, por favor escriba su nombre y dirección de correo electrónico a continuación.
187
286
¿Algo más?
Encuesta para el Proveedor de Cuidado Infantil Familiar
28. ¿Tiene usted algo más que le gustaría decirnos mientras consideramos maneras para asegurar un
suministro adecuado de instalaciones para el cuidado infantil en el Condado de Contra Costa para los
próximos años?
188
287
Encuesta para el Proveedor de Cuidado Infantil Familiar
Gracias por ayudarnos en la planeación para la disponibilidad a largo plazo de instalaciones locales para el cuidado infantil.
189
288
Comprehensive Countywide Child Care Needs Assessment – 2017 to 2027
Contra Costa County
August 2018
Prepared by Brion Economics, Inc. Final Report 190
APPENDIX D:
STAKEHOLDER SURVEY
289
!
"
#
$
%!
&
'
(
)**++,
-
#
.
$ $
$
/
0
1 )
191
290
! "
#$
% &
% &
'( ) * '(+ ! "
++ *( $
( !
,
-
) *
++ ! "
. '
++
! '
/
192
291
% &
'(+ ! "
/
+ ! $
0
193
292
% &
*
$
(12
+2
2
0 3 $ (
(+ (1
4
)
$
(12
+2
2
5 3 $ (
(+ (1
+ ! (
4
)
$
(
!
$ $ (1 $
(
6 7
88 9/ ::
! (1
4
)
5
194
293
; #
$!
88 9/ ::
(1
4
)
< $
6
195
294
'(
$ &=( !
> *
88 9/ :: (
?
!
! $ (
! !
(+ (
@ *
$ !
( !
;
196
295
(
++ (( $
A
+ ! "
'
! " $
$
+
$
/ $
3
$
'
&
7
.
B "
B !
*
*
!
*
7
% +
*
C (
) # 3**.
3 .& $
$
0 3((= + $ + +(
# + ( $
$
(( (+ $
(
#
=
!
$ !
+ ( !
# (! + + !
+(
$
( (
>
197
296
5
!
4
)
?
198
297
! "
$ =
!
6
! "
(
+(
,AAD-
* + +(
,?6 @@D-
&+(
++ ++
,(
( -
@
199
298
)E
++ % &
$
# + ( $
$
(( (+ $
(
#
=
!
$ !
+ ( !
# (! + + !
( (
=(
(
; ( $
! " $
( ! $
(
!
$
$ =
)
+$
.
F .
A
200
299
( !
2
!
3
2
> ! " $
(
(
? *
$ !
( !
201
300
'
*4
%
! "
@ *
+ !!
/A $
/ '
!! $
$
/
202
301
! "
$ #
// '
!! (
(
$
4
)
/0
+ (! +
!
0
203
302
#
#
/
#
((
=(
(
/5 ( $
!! $
( ! $
( $
!
$ =
)
+$
.
F .
5
204
303
! "
$ +
!
(
=(
(
/6 7$ $ !!
! !
(
( (
)
+$
.
F .
/; *
$ !
( !
6
205
304
! "
%&)# #
) +
&+
*
/>
G
$
(
$ $H
+
$ + +
(
/? *
$ !
( !
;
206
305
&
/@ $
0A '
2 (! +
!
A /
4
)
)
0 '
! (! +
!
0 5
4
)
)
0/ '
! (! +
!
!
6 /
4
)
)
>
207
306
00 '
( ( ( (! +
!
4
)
)
$ 4& (
+
(! +
$
!
(
05 7
( !
( (
( 22(
(! +
4& $ (
(! +2
(! +
++ = $
)
(
( (
(! +
'
((
(
(
< $
06 '
( +
(
$ + !
(! +
4
)
?
208
307
* .
+2
'
(
0; 3 $
+ !
(
0> *
$ !
( !
@
209
308
0? $ 1
0@
&
++
B !+
,(
( -
# + ( $
$
(( (+ $
(
#
=
!
$ !
+ ( !
# (! + + !
( (
(
( ((
5A 3 $ " !
2 0 5 $
+ ! ++
4
)
/A
210
309
*
( ((
5 3 $ " !
'#6'2 5 $
+ ! ++
4
)
*
( ((
5/ 3 $
% (+ (1
1
!
4
)
*
( ((
50 3 $
(+ (1
1
!
4
)
7$ $
55 '
(1
+ (
)
4
$
(
( +
(
56 '
1
(
(
4
)
< $
/
211
310
$
(
( +
(
5; '
1
%
(
(
4
)
< $
$
(
( +
(
5> '
1
4
)
< $
(
$ + +
E *
5? '
1
(
(+ $
7
3
4
)
< $
5@ ( $
1
)
+$
.
F .
//
212
311
)
+$
. F < $
!
* =
(
+
E
( (
'( +(
!
++
6A ( $
1
$
$ ! +
+
6 3 $ + 1 ( ! (
++
( + +
6/ '
!!
!
1
+ !
!
/0
213
312
((
*
(
( 2
+ +
60 ' $ ( !
,
!
-
$ + ! ( 2 !
4
,(
$-
)
65 ' G
( ! !
( !
/5
214
313
66 $
(
(( G
!
E+
&
6
++
. '
E+
% &
'(
. ! &+(
*
*
! "
) *
* (
*
,(
( -
6; '
!!
!
$
$
$
G
((
+
6> ' $ (+
! " (
4
)
)
+
( !
6? ' $ (+
+
4
)
/6
215
314
6@
+
++ (
4
)
;A $ G
! !
(
+ $
4
)
) +
&+
*
; I ( + +
!
/;
216
315
# 4J
#
!
( ! ! +
$ +
+
(
K22$$$
++22I
/>
217
316
FAMILY AND HUMAN SERVICES
COMMITTEE 9.
Meeting Date:02/25/2019
Subject:2019 MEETING SCHEDULE AND WORK PLAN
Submitted For: David Twa, County Administrator
Department:County Administrator
Referral No.: N/A
Referral Name: N/A
Presenter: Julie DiMaggio Enea Contact: Julie DiMaggio Enea (925)
335-1077
Referral History:
The Board of Supervisors made the following referrals to the 2019 Family and Human Services
Committee:
Standing Referrals
Family Justice Center & Commercially Sexually Exploited Children (#111)1.
Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (#109)2.
Community Development Block Grant Recommendations (#20)3.
Innovative Community Partnerships (#110)4.
Local Planning Council Countywide Child Care Pilot Plan (#92)5.
Youth Services Report (#93)6.
Child Care Planning/Development Council Activities Update (#81)7.
SNAP/CalFresh Program Update (#103)8.
Homeless Continuum of Care (#5)9.
Adult Protective Services (#45)10.
Community Services Bureau/Head Start (#78)11.
Laura’s Law/Assisted Outpatient Treatment (#107)12.
Non-Standing Referrals
13. Employment and Human Services Department Challenges (#44)
14. Second Hand Smoke (#82)
15. Protecting Youth from Tobacco Influences (#112)
The Committee members have selected the fourth Monday of each month at 10:30 a.m. as the
standing meeting date/time for 2019.
317
Referral Update:
Attached for the Committee's review is the proposed meeting schedule and the proposed work
plan for hearing each of the 2019 referrals (Attachment A).
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
APPROVE the proposed 2019 Committee meeting schedule and work plan, or provide direction
to staff regarding any changes thereto.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
None.
Attachments
Attachment A: PROPOSED 2019 SCHEDULE AND WORK PLAN
318
ATTACHMENT “A”
2019 Family & Human Services Committee Discussion Schedule
4th Monday at 10:30 a.m.
As of February 20, 2019
Meeting
Date
Subject
Staff Contacts
February 25
*625 Court
Street, TTC
Conf. Room
B001
Advisory Council on Aging nominations
Workforce Development Board nominations
Homeless CoC nominations
#111 - Family Justice Center & Commercially Sexually
Exploited Children
#81 Child Care Needs Assessment Review
Anthony Macias, EHSD
Rochelle Soriano, EHSD
Jaime Jenett, HSD
Kathy Gallagher, Devorah Levine,
EHSD
Susan Joeng, Office of Ed
March 25 CANCEL – NO REPORTS SCHEDULED
April 22 #20 - FY 2018-19 CDBG Recommendations: Public
Services and Economic Development Categories
#109 - Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act
Gabriel Lemus
Kathy Gallagher, Donna Van Wert
May 13
Special
Meeting?
Not Room
101
#44 - Challenges for EHS (All Bureaus) Kathy Gallagher
May 27 Memorial Day - Cancel
June 24 #110 - Innovative Community Partnerships
#92 - LPC - Countywide Child Care Pilot Plan
Devorah Levine
Susan Jeong
July 22 #93 - Youth Services Report (includes ILSP Program
Report)
#81 - Local Child Care & Development Planning
Council Activities Update
Kathy Marsh, Donna Van Wert
Susan Jeong 942-3413
August 26 #103 - SNAP/CalFresh (Food Stamp) Program
#5 - Continuum of Care Plan for the
Homeless/Healthcare for the Homeless
Wendy Therrian
Rachael Birch, Lavonna Martin
September 23 #116 - Public Mental Health Care System
#45 - Adult Protective Services and Challenges for Aged
& Disabled Populations
#78 - Community Services Bureau/Head Start Oversight
(Consent Item)
Matthew White/Matthew Luu, CCBH
Victoria Tolbert
Camilla Rand
October 28 #107 - Laura's Law
#82 - Secondhand Smoke Ordinance
#112 - Policy Options to Protect Youth from Tobacco
Influences in the Retail Environment
Warren Hayes
Dan Peddycord/Jen Grand 313-6216
Dan Peddycord/Jen Grand 313-6216
November 25 Thanksgiving week
December 23 Christmas week
319