WE ASKED UPK PROVIDERS HOW A RATIO DECREASE WOULD AFFECT THEM.
This is what they said....
Proposed Ratio Decreases Will Financially Devastate Colorado Preschool Programs
241 Colorado Universal Preschool programs responded to a survey on the fiscal impact of proposed adult-to-child ratio decreases. The results are clear โ and alarming.
Most Programs Had No Idea This Was Coming
Of 241 programs surveyed, a majority were completely unaware of the mandated ratio change โ raising serious questions about the state's outreach and implementation process.
๐ 59% of programs were unaware of the requirement
That's 141 out of 241 programs โ the majority โ who had not been informed of a major regulatory change affecting their operations starting this summer.
n=241 respondents
More Than Half of Programs Are Affected or At Risk
When programs with conditional impact ("Yes, if I reach full enrollment") are included, 51% of respondents face direct financial harm from the ratio change.
Will the ratio decrease affect your program?
Of those affected: Can your program afford the revenue loss?
โ this will make it impossible"
โ this will make it harder"
financial distress
themselves in hardship
Staggering Financial Losses Across the State
Programs that reported financial figures project a combined loss of over $8.3 million annually โ and these are only the programs that completed the survey.
Distribution of Annual Revenue Loss
Annual Loss by Program Setting
Community-Based Programs Are Hit Hardest
Community-based centers โ the backbone of Colorado's private childcare sector โ face the highest rate of impact, while school districts are largely insulated due to structural advantages.
| Program Setting | Total Responses | Directly or Conditionally Affected | % Affected | Impact Level | Can't Afford Loss |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Community Based | 166 | 102 |
61%
|
Critical | 96% (97 of 101) |
| Home-Based | 40 | 13 |
32%
|
High | 77% (10 of 13) |
| School District | 34 | 8 |
23%
|
Moderate | 87% (7 of 8) |
| Head Start | 1 | 0 |
0%
|
Low | โ |
Lower-Rated Programs Bear a Disproportionate Burden
Ironically, programs with Colorado Shines ratings of 1โ3 โ those most in need of support โ face the highest rates of impact. Higher-rated (Level 5) programs are largely exempt due to existing ratio flexibility.
% of Programs Affected by Colorado Shines Rating
๐ Note on Rating 5 Programs
Only 22% of Level 5 programs report being affected โ many have already achieved lower ratios and are not impacted by the 1:11 threshold. The state's policy may be inadvertently punishing programs that are actively working toward higher quality without yet achieving the top rating.
What Programs Want the State to Know
These are direct quotes from Colorado UPK program directors, educators, and providers โ in their own words.
This proposed overregulation will make it significantly harder for families to continue care in the school of their choice. To maintain operations with a lower ratio, centers will be forced to increase tuition for all students to offset the financial loss. Many centers, including ours, may be forced to withdraw from UPK participation entirely. This outcome would ultimately disadvantage the very families the program aims to support.
I will be forced to pick between this or losing staff. If I lose staff I will then have to lose 4 children as well โ a loss of $64,480 a year. This is not in the best interest of all children right now, especially with a deficit in childcare seats and need for care.
Reducing these ratios means that all kids, UPK or not, will not have the opportunity to have a spot in our academy. What is the clear reasoning behind making this arbitrary decision that fewer children make a better program? The curriculum and the environment is what's important โ not just a headcount.
It is hard enough to survive. Why are they making it harder? It makes me want to give up.
The public elementary schools are taking all of the students from preschool and PreK. This makes it very difficult to get enrollments, which is seriously hurting our business. This ratio change adds yet another layer of harm.
Not fair to require different programs within the state to adhere to one rule, especially when it affects programs' incomes. The QRIS refresh isn't scheduled to wrap up until Jan 2028 โ ratio changes should be paused until that process is complete.
We can not afford financially to give up those 9 seats. We thrive with a rating of 4 through Colorado Shines and continue to positively impact families within our community. Going through with this ratio decrease can impact our community as well as us as a center.
As a home-based provider, I have limited space and staffing. This ratio change puts more pressure on me to either take on more children than is manageable or lose income. Even losing a small number of children has a big financial impact. This change feels like it's pushing smaller providers out of the UPK system entirely.
With the CCAP cut, staff salary increases, and now decreasing ratios โ it's affecting everything financially. Please stop passing or proposing initiatives that hurt our preschool and childcare centers.
Key Findings for State Policymakers
The data collected from 241 Colorado UPK programs paints a consistent and urgent picture. The proposed ratio changes lack safety justification and carry severe, documented financial consequences.
Lack of Awareness
59% of programs were unaware of this requirement โ signaling a failure in state communication and inadequate implementation planning.
Catastrophic Revenue Loss
$8.35M in projected annual losses across surveyed programs alone. 93% of affected programs say they cannot absorb the hit.
Children Lose Access
456 children across 91 programs would be turned away โ the opposite of the UPK program's mission to expand preschool access.
Programs at Risk of Closure
33 programs say they are "barely surviving" โ this change would make continued operation impossible. 62 more say it makes an already hard situation worse.
Unequal Impact
Community-based programs face a 61% impact rate vs. 23% for school districts โ deepening inequity between private providers and publicly-funded institutions.
No Safety Justification
Programs universally question the rationale. The state has not provided evidence that 1:12 is unsafe. The move appears to be regulatory, not child-safety, driven.
To See all of the comments
We always share everything that is said.ย ย See the comments in this linked google sheet.ย ย
