Table Of Content

CHILD CARE CHOICES OF LOW-INCOME WORKING FAMILIES AJAY CHAUDRY JUAN MANUEL PEDROZA HEATHER SANDSTROM ANNA DANZIGER MICHEL GROSZ MOLLY SCOTT SARAH TING URBAN INSTITUTE JANUARY 2011 CONTENTS Acknowledgments vi Glossary of Terms viii Chapter 1: Introduction 1 Conceptual Framework and Research Questions 2 Review of the Literature on Child Care Decisionmaking 4 Research Methods 9 Analytic Approach and Descriptive Characteristics 12 Strengths and Limitations of Research Approach 16 Organization of the Report 17 Chapter 2: Parental Preferences for Child Care and the Factors That Influence Their Choices 18 Methods 18 Parent Preferences and Decision Factors: What Parents Consider When Selecting Child Care 21 Alignment of Preferences and Decisionmaking Factors: What Are the Barriers for Families? 32 Summary and Conclusions 35 Chapter 3: Low-Income Working Families’ Employment Contexts 37 Employment Contexts for Families in the Study Sites 37 Employment Challenges and Constraints 39 The Role of Employment Constraints in Shaping Child Care Decisions 46 Summary and Conclusions 53 Chapter 4: Early Care and Education Contexts 54 Overview of Themes 54 Supply of Child Care Options in the Study Communities 55 Parental Awareness of Local Child Care Options 57 Access to Child Care 62 Summary and Conclusions 67 iii Chapter 5: Immigrant Families 68 Immigrant Families in the Study Sample 68 Types of Child Care Used by Immigrant Families 70 Immigrant Parents’ Experiences and How These Contributed to Their Child Care Preferences 74 Immigrants’ Social Networks 80 Summary and Conclusions 87 Chapter 6: English Language Learner Parents 89 The English Language Proficiency of the Study Sample 89 Children of ELL Parents and Language Exposure 91 Types of Child Care Used by ELL Families 95 Decisionmaking Factors for ELL Families 96 Information Sources: How Do ELLs Find Out about Their Child Care Options? 97 The Role of Language in Child Care Decisionmaking 98 Summary and Conclusions 102 Chapter 7: Children with Special Needs 104 The Special Needs of Children in the Study Sample 105 Services for Children with Special Needs 111 Children with Multiple, Severe Special Needs 113 Parents’ Views on Making Care Decisions for Children with Special Needs 117 Summary and Conclusions 119 Chapter 8: Policy Strategies to Improve Child Care Choices 120 Overall Summary of Study Findings 120 Linking Parents’ Child Care Decisionmaking to Program Policy 123 Policy Strategies to Address the Child Care Choices Available to Low-Income Working Families 125 Conclusion 133 Appendix A: The Two Making Connections Study Communities for the Study of Child Care Choices of Low-Income Working Families 135 Providence Study Site 136 Seattle Study Site 139 Appendix B: Early Care and Education Context in Study Sites 141 Supply of Child Care and Program Contexts in Providence 141 iv Supply of Child Care in White Center 144 Appendix C: Interview Guides Used in the Family Study Component of the Child Care Choices of Low-Income Working Families Project 151 References 190 Notes 199 v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report is based on the study of Child Care their advice and guidance during the research Choices of Low-Income Working Families, made design phase. Also, in earlier stages, Urban possible by grants from the Administration for Institute Metropolitan Housing and Communities Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health Policy Center staff Kerstin Gentsch, Diane Levy, and Human Services (grant number 90YE099), Carlos Manjarrez, and Marge Turner helped and the Annie E. Casey Foundation (through the provide context for the site selection and Urban Institute’s Low-Income Working Families preparation in the Making Connections project). communities. The authors of this study report are Urban The authors are especially grateful to the Institute researchers Ajay Chaudry, Juan Manuel leaders of the Annie E. Casey Foundation’s Pedroza, Heather Sandstrom, Anna Danziger, Making Connections program efforts, the Michel Grosz, Molly Scott, and Sarah Ting. The community leaders working in the two Making views and conclusions included herein are those Connections sites, and Cathy Haggerty and her of the authors alone, and do not necessarily reflect staff at NORC, who conducted the Making the opinions of the project’s funders, the Urban Connections survey efforts, all of whom greatly Institute, or its funders. assisted in getting the planning and recruitment The principal investigator for this study was for the site-based studies off the ground. This Ajay Chaudry. Major components of the project includes Cindy Guy, Wendy Chun-Hoon, and were managed by Juan Pedroza, including much others from the Casey Foundation; Maryclaire of the qualitative data collection with families in Knight (Making Connections Providence), Elexi the two study sites, while other project phases Campbell (Dorca’s Place), Michelle Cortes- were managed by Jennifer Macomber, Molly Harkins (Center for Hispanic Policy & Advocacy), Scott, and Ajay Chaudry. Family interviews were and Joyce Butler and Leslie Gell (Ready to Learn conducted by Juan Pedroza, Anna Danziger, Providence) from Providence; and Theresa Michel Grosz, Molly Scott, Rosa Maria Castañeda, Fujiwara, Aileen Balahadia and Sopha Danh and Megan Gallagher. Interviews with (White Center Community Development community respondents were conducted by Association), LiLi Liu (Making Connections Molly Scott, Gina Adams, and Ajay Chaudry. Seattle-King County), and Thuong Tach (Khmer Adam Kent, Katie Mathews, Joanna Parnes, Community Center of Seattle-King County) from and Alex Stanczyk provided valuable research White Center. assistance in support of the research design and Our greatest debt is to the parents from the site visits. Amelia Hawkins contributed to the Providence, Rhode Island, and Seattle-White project during the data management phase. Center, Washington, communities who Lindsay Giesen helped with editing the final draft participated in this study. Without their of the report. Lauren Eyster, Karin Martinson, willingness to share their stories, and most often Shelley Waters-Boots, and Erica Zielewski lent invite us into their homes to explore their vi experiences with us, we would not have been able Department of Elementary and Secondary to do this work. Education Child Care Resources, King County We would like to also think the many staff at Developmental Disabilities Division, "La the numerous organizations in Providence at Escuelita’" at the New Futures Burien, Seattle-White Center for their perspectives on the Neighborhood House, Puget Sound Educational research questions for the study’s community Service District Head Start, Refugee and component, some of whom also helped the Immigrant Family Center, Refugee Federation research team meet other key community contacts Service Center, Refugee Women’s Alliance, Seattle as well as parents in the study sites. Without their Human Services Department, Seattle Public assistance, the study also would not have been Schools Head Start, White Center Community possible. Development Association, White Center Early The following organizations in Rhode Island Learning Initiative, Work and Earnings Working provided such assistance: Amos House, Beautiful Group, and White Center Community Beginnings, Center for Hispanic Policy and Development Association. Advocacy, Children’s Friend and Service Head The authors thank the advisory group for the Start, Dorca’s Place, Family Child Care Homes of project—Ann Collins, Julia Henly, Ellen Scott, Rhode Island, International Institute, Making Helen Ward, Bobbie Webber, Hiro Yoshikawa, Connections Providence, Options for Working and Martha Zaslow—for their support in helping Families, Providence School Department, Rhode design the study, and for their tireless review of Island Department of Education, Rhode Island draft chapters of the report. We also benefitted Parent Information Network, and Solutions from the thoughtful discussant comments of CEDARR. Reeva Murphy also provided insight Deborah Phillips and Kathryn Tout when into Rhode Island’s early care and education preliminary findings from the study were system. presented at the 2010 Head Start Research The following organizations in Washington Conference and annual APPAM conference, also provided insights into the community respectively. Gina Adams and Margaret Simms of context for the study: Community Services the Urban Institute reviewed earlier drafts of the Organization (Department of Social and Health report chapters and provided valuable feedback Services), Department of Early Learning, as well. vii GLOSSARY OF TERMS Center-based care: Child care arrangements that local CCR&R in Providence is a nonprofit are not provided within a home setting, including organization called Options for Working Families private child care centers, Head Start centers, and (OWF); it is funded by the State Department of publicly funded prekindergarten programs. A Human Services, which also runs the child care further distinction is sometimes made in the field subsidy program. In Seattle, Child Care Resources between center-based and school-based (CCR) is the local CCR&R. programs, but given the small incidence of school- English language learner (ELL): An individual based programs in this study, all non-home-based who speaks English as a second language and programs are categorized and referred to as lacks English fluency. In this report, we define center-based programs. respondents as ELL if they were currently or Child care subsidy: Financial assistance provided recently enrolled in English as a second or other through government funds to eligible low-income language classes or if they responded that they families, whereby the cost of child care is fully or lacked basic English language skills. partially paid by the subsidy source. The dollar Family child care: A type of child care provided amount of the subsidy payment varies depending by a nonrelative within a home setting to multiple on a family’s circumstances. Research has shown children. Depending in the state, family child care that access to subsidies influences the type of homes are required to be registered or licensed child care that a family will use. The most and meet specific child care regulations. In this common source of funding is the Child Care and report, however, because the legal status of Development Fund (CCDF), but some states also providers is not always clear, we use family child use Temporary Assistance to Needy Families care to mean any care setting (licensed or (TANF) and other program dollars for eligible unlicensed) in which providers offer child care in families. their homes, serve multiple children from Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF): A different families, and provide these services as program established by the U.S. Congress in 1990 an intended ongoing business. to support parental work and family economic Family, friend, and neighbor (FFN) care: A type self-sufficiency, and to make high-quality child of child care in which children are cared for by a care available to low-income working families. family member, friend, or neighbor in an informal State-administered CCDF programs use program home setting. FFN care is also known as kith and funds to reduce the cost of child care, improve the kin care. In this report, we refer to informal quality of child care, and promote coordination relative care and informal nonrelative care among early childhood development and separately. Nonrelative care arrangements afterschool programs. provided by friends and neighbors who served Child care resource and referral agency multiple unrelated children were categorized as (CCR&R): A local organization that connects family child care, regardless of licensing parents with child care providers in their area, standards. provides training opportunities for child care Foreign-born or immigrant: A person born providers, and analyzes the supply and demand outside the 50 United States and territories, of child care services within a community. The including Puerto Rico. In this study, a number of viii Puerto Rican families spoke Spanish and were across the country. It aims to combat poverty and English language learners, but they were not create opportunities for families by promoting identified as foreign-born. economic success for parents, and ensuring school Head Start/Early Head Start: Federally readiness and healthy development among subsidized early childhood programs which aim children. The Making Connections initiative to provide comprehensive child development informed site selection for the current study services to economically disadvantaged children because the neighborhoods in which Making and families. Head Start funding supports two Connections operates are home to a high programs: Head Start, which serves children age 3 concentration of low-income households and through 5 years and their families, and Early immigrant populations. Head Start (EHS), which serves children birth Personal social networks: The familial, through age 3, pregnant women, and their neighborhood, or community-based support families. The programs promote school readiness networks on which families rely for information, by enhancing the social and cognitive assistance, and other resources. development of children through the provision of State prekindergarten: Center- or school-based early care and education, health, nutrition, parent early education programs funded by state or local involvement, and family support services to governments that provide eligible children with enrolled children and families. Head Start the early learning skills they need to succeed in program schedules and hours of child care vary school. Thirty-eight states across the nation by grantee, with some providing half-day currently provide publicly funded (morning or afternoon) care and others full-day prekindergarten programs. Some serve only 4- care. EHS offers center-based, home-based, and year-old children while others include 3- and 4- combination services. Both Head Start and EHS year-olds. Eligibility also varies by state, with grantees must adhere to federal program most programs serving only low-income or at-risk performance standards. Eligible children include children. Some programs, however, are universal; those from families with incomes below the in these programs, all resident children are poverty level, children from families receiving eligible for participation and are either public assistance (TANF or SSI) regardless of automatically accepted for enrollment or selected family income, and foster children regardless of based on a lottery system. The terms their foster family’s income. Programs may also prekindergarten, or pre-k, and preschool are often enroll up to 10 percent of their children from used interchangeably, and states use differing families that do not meet the above requirements terms to identify their programs. but who demonstrate a need for services. The public prekindergarten programs described Informal nonrelative care: A type of child care in in this report include the Ready to Learn which caregivers are friends, neighbors, or Providence pilot prekindergarten program (a babysitters who are not related to the focal lottery-based program for 4-year-olds), the children and care for them in either their own Washington State Early Childhood Education and homes or the child’s home with no other Assistance Program (ECEAP, for low-income 3- nonrelated children present. and 4-year-olds who do not qualify for Head Informal relative care: A type of child care in Start), and the Seattle Steps Ahead preschool which care is provided by a family member in the program (for 4-year-olds from families with child’s home or the relative’s home. moderately low incomes). Making Connections: A community-based Special-needs children: Children who are initiative of the Annie E. Casey Foundation identified as having a health, behavioral, or located in 10 low-income urban communities developmental need that requires care or medical ix attention. Health needs include chronic and acute needs children is often adopted in the field, in this conditions that require medical care, including report, we broadly categorize children as special asthma. Behavior needs include diagnosed issues needs if their parents report that they have any that require therapy and/or medication. disabilities, special health needs, or Developmental issues include speech and developmental delays that have challenged them language delays as well as conditions that affect or have factored significantly into their child care children’s physical or intellectual development decisions. since birth. While a narrow definition of special- x