ABSTRACT
On June 1, 2020, with declines in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases and hospitalizations in Rhode Island,* child care programs in the state reopened after a nearly 3-month closure implemented as part of mitigation efforts. To reopen safely, the Rhode Island Department of Human Services (RIDHS) required licensed center- and home-based child care programs to reduce enrollment, initially to a maximum of 12 persons, including staff members, in stable groups (i.e., staff members and students not switching between groups) in physically separated spaces, increasing to a maximum of 20 persons on June 29. Additional requirements included universal use of masks for adults, daily symptom screening of adults and children, and enhanced cleaning and disinfection according to CDC guidelines. As of July 31, 666 of 891 (75%) programs were approved to reopen, with capacity for 18,945 children, representing 74% of the state's January 2020 child care program population (25,749 children).
Subject(s)
Child Care , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Adult , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Child , Child Care/organization & administration , Child, Preschool , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Contact Tracing , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Female , Guideline Adherence/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infant , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Rhode Island/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Young AdultABSTRACT
Despite widespread belief in the early childhood field of the benefits of reflective supervision, there has been limited empirical evidence to support the effectiveness of reflective supervision for home visitors and the children and families they serve. The present study examined the psychometric properties of four adapted self-report measures assessing supervisors' reflective supervision capacities; the study also investigated whether these measures captured change in reflective capacity over time as supervisors participated in professional development activities focused on reflective supervision. Results from 33 participants (home visiting supervisors and program managers) suggested that three of the four measures demonstrated acceptable internal consistency, and these three measures were correlated with each other. Two of these measures also captured significant change over time. Finally, there was some evidence that those with less education demonstrated more substantial improvement in their reflective supervision capacities than did those with an advanced degree. Findings provide initial evidence for reliable, efficient, and cost-effective supervisor self-report measures that could be used in research and program evaluation to assess change in supervisor reflective capacity over time.
