The PAS-3 and Whole Leadership

A woman wearing glasses and a suit is smiling in front of a flag.

Sim Loh is a family partnership coordinator at Children’s Village, a nationally-accredited Keystone 4 STARS early learning and school-age enrichment program in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, serving about 350 children. She supports children and families, including non-English speaking families of immigrant status, by ensuring equitable access to education, health, employment, and legal information and resources on a day-to-day basis. She is a member of the Children First Racial Equity Early Childhood Education Provider Council, a community member representative of Philadelphia School District Multilingual Advisory Council, and a board member of Historic Philadelphia.

Sim explains, “I ensure families know their rights and educate them on ways to speak up for themselves and request for interpretation/translation services. I share families’ stories and experiences with legislators and decision-makers so that their needs are understood. Attending Leadership Connections will help me strengthen and grow my skills in all domains by interacting with and hearing from experienced leaders in different positions. With newly acquired skills, I seek to learn about the systems level while paying close attention to the accessibility and barriers of different systems and resources and their impacts on young children and their families.”

The 3^rd edition of the Program Administration Scale: Measuring Whole Leadership in Early Childhood Centers (PAS-3) was released this fall! The authors describe the 3^rd edition as including current information supporting the reliability and validity of the tool and a greater emphasis on administrative practices that support inclusion, equity, and cultural and linguistic diversity. The PAS-3 reflects feedback from practitioners across the country and has key revisions based on recognizing whole leadership as the guiding framework (Talan et al., 2022). This thematic emphasis on the three domains of the Whole Leadership Framework (administrative leadership, pedagogical leadership, and leadership essentials) excites me because it offers administrators much-needed support for improving their leadership practices as well as the overall quality of their programs (Abel et al., 2022; Masterson et al., 2019).

Below is a more detailed description of the Whole Leadership Framework:

McCormick Center for Early Childhood Leadership, in press.

The Whole Leadership Framework takes a comprehensive view of program leadership by emphasizing the interdependent relationships among the three domains (Abel et al., 2017; Masterson et al., 2019). I think of whole leadership as both the process and the product of the balance of and interactions between pedagogical leadership, administrative leadership, and leadership essentials. High-quality and sustainable programs have leaders and leadership practices that tap into all three domains.

Using a 7-point rating scale (inadequate to excellent), the PAS-3 assesses 25 items grouped into nine categories: human resources; personnel cost and allocation; operations; screening and assessment; fiscal management; organizational growth and development; family and community partnerships; relational leadership; and staff qualifications (Talan et al., 2022). PAS-3 items are rated and scored individually, and all item scores can then be averaged to provide an average PAS Item Score for the program. This allows administrators to identify specific areas of strength and areas for growth while also gaining a deeper understanding of best practices across a variety of areas. The PAS-3, with its seamless integration of the three domains of the Whole Leadership Framework, is the current example of the ancient axiom “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts” (attributed to Aristotle).

Here is an example of administrative leadership using Item 1: Hiring and Orientation. It is no secret that there is a staffing crisis in our field. Research has found that strong orientation practices lead to less turnover (Hirsch, 2017). However, many early childhood education and care (ECEC) administrators lack access to professional development and resources regarding hiring and orienting new staff and research has also found that the majority of ECEC programs (53%) do not have written orientation procedures in place (Talan & Kelton, 2021). But fear not, the PAS-3 is here to help! The first strand in Item 1 focuses on hiring procedures, while the second strand focuses on practices that need to be in place for new staff orientation. Both are key components of administrative leadership (Talan et al., 2022). New administrators can use the PAS-3 for guidance about hiring candidates, compiling critical information newly-hired staff should receive during orientation, and identifying how to prioritize onboarding tasks during the first days, weeks, and months on the job.

Pedagogical Leadership broadly aims to improve the art and science of teaching (Masterson et al., 2019). Item 3: Staff Development and Professional Growth, touches on pedagogical leadership in several ways, but the strand that intrigues me the most is the fourth, which focuses on “practices that demonstrate job-embedded professional development for teaching staff” (Talan et al., 2022). Here the authors share a number of ways that programs can support teaching staff in learning, reflecting, and engaging in on-the-job professional development. Some examples include case studies used by teaching staff for critical analysis, teaching staff observing one another and providing feedback, and the use of journaling in reflective supervision (Talan et al., 2022). I especially like this strand because the examples provided give administrators a variety of low-cost but highly-relevant and engaging ideas for supporting pedagogical growth.

Moving to Item 21: Internal Communication, the second strand explores the administrator’s knowledge and use of a strengths-based approach to supporting staff, while the third strand looks at reflection and professional practices related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (Talan et al., 2022). This item includes specific practices administrators can easily integrate into their programs to demonstrate culturally responsive leadership and personal and professional self-awareness, important components of leadership essentials.

The PAS-3 includes many substantive changes and updates. Program administrators directly influence the quality and sustainability of the programs they lead, but specific support and professional development focused on acquiring the knowledge and implementing the skills needed to manage and lead are often scarce (Talan & Kelton, 2021). For over two decades, the PAS and PAS-related professional development have helped to fill that void by providing administrators with a clear blueprint for best practices in leadership and management. The PAS-3 builds on that legacy.

SELF-REFLECTION:

1. In what ways do you think hiring and orientation practices can impact staff retention?

If you were to step back and reflect on your program’s hiring and orientation practices, what changes could be made to streamline the process and provide newly hired staff with a strong sense of the program and their role?

2. What are some advantages of job-embedded professional development?

What opportunities could you add for job-embedded professional development that are low-cost but highly relevant to the work of teaching staff?

3. Why is it critical for early childhood programs to foster an environment of reflection and self-awareness?

How does your program prioritize increasing self-awareness?

REFERENCES:

Abel, M., Talan, T., & Masterson, M. (updated 2022). Whole Leadership: A Framework for Early Childhood Programs. McCormick Center for Early Childhood Leadership, National Louis University.

Hirsch, A. S. (2017). Don’t Underestimate the Importance of Good Onboarding. Society for Human Resource Management.

McCormick Center for Early Childhood Leadership. (in press) Whole Leadership: A Framework for Early Childhood Programs. McCormick Center for Early Childhood Leadership, National Louis University.

Masterson, M. L., Abel, M., Talan, T., & Bella, J. (2019). Building on whole leadership: energizing and strengthening your early childhood program. Gryphon House, Inc.

Talan, T. N., Bella, J.M., and Bloom, P. J. (2022). Program Administration Scale: Measuring Whole Leadership in Early Childhood Centers. (3rd ed.). Teachers College Press.

Talan, T. & Kelton, R. (2021, Summer). A Window on Early Childhood Administrative Practices: 2010-2021. Research Notes. McCormick Center for Early Childhood Leadership, National Louis University.

Are you interested in training on the PAS-3 or the BAS? The McCormick Center has a wide selection of professional development opportunities designed to meet the needs of center-based administrators, family child care providers, and those in technical assistance roles. Click here to learn more, or contact us at PAS.BAS@nl.edu.

Robyn Kelton, M.A., is the Research and Evaluation Manager for the McCormick Center for Early Childhood Leadership at National Louis University (NLU), where she conducts training and research and serves as a national reliability anchor on the Business Administration Scale for Family Child Care (BAS) and the Program Administration Scale (PAS). Robyn holds a baccalaureate degree in psychology from the University of Kansas (KU), a graduate degree in psychology with an advanced certificate of study in organizational psychology from NLU, and is currently a doctoral student in the brain, behavior, and quantitative science psychology program at KU. Prior to joining the McCormick Center, Robyn was a lead teacher in a pre-k classroom in a child care center and a lead teacher in a kindergarten classroom for an after-school program.

< Older Post

Newer Post >

Examining the Role of Employer Benefits and Turnover in Center-based Child Care

By Robyn Kelton, M.A. • June 27, 2025

INTRODUCTION Turnover rates in child care are among the highest in education, with over 160,000 workforce openings predicted annually (Bassok et al., 2014; Doromal et al., 2022; Joughin, 2021; U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2025). While some turnover is expected and even necessary, the levels of turnover experienced in the field of early childhood education and care (ECEC) are not only alarmingly high but deeply problematic. In 2021, a national survey conducted by the National Association for the Education of Young Children found that over 80% of child care centers were experiencing a staffing shortage, with the majority of those programs reporting one-to-five open roles, but 15% reporting between six and 15 open roles (NAEYC, 2021). Staffing shortages result in lost revenue, financial uncertainty, and program instability, often forcing administrators to operate below capacity and/or under reduced hours (NAEYC, 2021; NAEYC, 2024; Zero to Three, 2024). Limited enrollment slots and classroom and program closures lead to increased waiting lists (Zero to Three, 2024; Carrazana, 2023). In turn, families are placed in a highly vulnerable position of needing to leave the workforce to stay home with their child or turn to potentially unsafe or unregulated child care. Moreover, increased turnover in classrooms interrupts continuity of care and disrupts the relationships built between children and their educators (Reidt-Parker, J., & Chainski, M. J. (2015). Research has begun to highlight some of the programmatic and personnel characteristics predictive of increased staff turnover in ECEC programs. Low wages are most commonly identified as a strong predictor of turnover (Amadon et al., 2023; Bryant et al., 2023; Fee, 2024; Guevara, 2022; Totenhagen et al., 2016). However, workforce advocates and some researchers have begun to expand conversations on compensation to explore the impact the profession’s general lack of benefits such as paid time off, access to health insurance, and retirement benefits has on retention (e.g., Amadon et al., 2023; Bryant et al., 2023; Fee, 2024; Lucas, 2023). While informative, this body of work has typically approached benefits as binary variables (i.e., have or do not have) rather than reflect the spectrum on which benefits are commonly offered (e.g., the number of days off, the percent of insurance covered by the employer, and levels of retirement matching funds). This Research Note aims to expand on previous work investigating the relationship between benefits and turnover by exploring the possibility of a more nuanced relationship between the variables to determine if the level of benefits offered impacts turnover rates. METHOD This study used data collected via formal Program Administration Scale, 3rd Edition (PAS-3) assessments conducted by Certified PAS-3 Assessors between 2023 and 2025. To become certified, PAS-3 assessors must first achieve reliability (a score of at least 86%) on a test conducted after four days of training on the tool. Next, they must conduct two PAS assessments within three months of reliability training. PAS-3 national anchors reviewed the completed assessments for consistency, accuracy, and completeness. The study analyzed data from 133 PAS-3 assessments collected during the certification process across 12 states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. Mariana Islands. Measures Data for this study were collected using the PAS-3, a valid and reliable tool used to measure and improve Whole Leadership practices in center-based programs (Talan, Bella, Jorde Bloom, 2022). The PAS-3 includes 25 items, each composed of 2-5 indicator strands and scored on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = inadequate, 3 = minimal, 5 = good, and 7 = excellent). Item scores are averaged to determine a mean PAS-3 score. Of particular interest to this study is Item 5: Benefits. Item 5 measures employee access to health insurance and considers what percentage of the cost is paid by the employer, the total number of paid time off days within the first and fifth years of employment, access to a retirement plan, and the percentage at which the employer will match the employee’s contribution. Last, Item 5 explores provisions made to cover the costs of staff’s professional development. Non-applicable is allowed as a response for indicators related to health insurance and retirement if there are no full-time staff employed by the program. Sample Program enrollment ranged in size from four children to 285, with a mean enrollment of 65 and a median of 55. Total program staff for the sample ranged from two to 44 staff, with an average of just under 14 staff (13.93) and a standard deviation of 8.80. Table 1 below provides a detailed breakdown of staff by role and full-time and part-time status.