Child Care and Early Education at CLASP

Learning from state experiences with building comprehensive prenatal-to-five early childhood systems

From the first day of life through entry into school, young children are developing foundations – built into the architecture of the brain - which will have an impact on their development and success later in life.  Although children develop holistically from the pre-natal period to age five, the federal, state and local government agencies and programs that exist to help them and their families along the way are often spread across multiple state agencies, with different funding streams, and rules.

A new report coauthored by ZERO TO THREE and Pre[k]Now examines five states’ efforts to build cohesive, comprehensive early childhood systems, suggests a set of cross-cutting components necessary for success, profiles the five states’ experiences (California, Illinois, North Carolina, Oklahoma, and Pennsylvania), and makes recommendations for state policymakers. The two groups, whose work focuses on different age groups of the prenatal-to-five spectrum, together call for a time when this nation “supports the healthy development of all children within their states and communities by providing comprehensive, coordinated, well-funded systems of high-quality, prenatal-to-five services that foster success in school and life.”  Model state early childhood systems should address physical and mental health, family support, and early care and education needs of young children and their families.

Now is an important time to take heed of the call for a birth to five approach. The newly signed Improving Head Start for School Readiness Act of 2007 requires states to have State Advisory Councils on Early Education and Care in order to determine needs across programs serving children birth to age of school entry and to develop recommendations for coordination and collaboration between early childhood programs at the state and local level, and other tasks. If funding becomes available, the bill authorizes new federal incentive grants to promote the development and expansion of state early education systems. This provision may act as a catalyst for new and existing efforts of state policymakers to improve their early childhood systems. The new report joins other resources that can be helpful to move this important work forward.

Head Start children more likely to receive recommended immunizations

Child Trends Data Bank has released new 2006 estimates on child immunizations, noting that, "The proportion of children ages 19 to 35 months receiving the combined series (4:3:1:3) vaccines increased from 69 percent to 83 percent between 1994 and 2004. Since this time, however, progress towards full immunization of all children ages 19 to 35 months has stalled, standing at 82 percent in 2006." 

The 2006 data did not show significant differences by race and ethnicity, but did show significant differences by poverty status, with 78 percent of children living below the poverty level having their recommended vaccinations, compared to 84 percent for children not living in poverty.

Yet not all poor children are falling behind: in 2006, 93 percent of young children enrolled in Early Head Start had received all immunizations appropriate or possible by the end of the program year.  Working with families to ensure access to medical services, including immunizations, is a legal requirement of all Head Start programs. This comprehensive focus on all aspects of child development makes a difference, yet only about 3 percent of eligible infants and toddlers, and about half of eligible preschool age children, get access to Head Start. 

Children living in poverty face many risk factors to healthy development.  Staying on schedule for immunizations helps to prevent illness and potential delays to development.  Head Start and Early Head Start help these children stay on schedule, and provide other needed supports, such as identifying disabilities, linking families with a medical home, and finding dental services.  Yet current funding levels limit the reach of these important programs; without substantial increases in funding for Head Start and Early Head Start, the data will continue to show that poor children are falling behind.

Minnesota funds community-based supports for family, friend and neighbor caregivers

The Minnesota Legislature has appropriated $750,000 to be used for grants to organizations to provide community-based supports to family, friend, and neighbor caregivers and the children in their care. This funding will allow community-based organizations, nonprofit organizations, libraries and Indian tribes to work with caregivers to promote children’s early literacy, healthy development and school readiness, and to foster community partnerships to promote school readiness. The Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS) expects to award the first grants by the middle of November.

The state will conduct an evaluation of the effort, as required by the legislation, in conjunction with early childhood experts from the University of  Minnesota.   

In Starting Off Right: Promoting Child Development from Birth in State Child Care and Early Education Initiatives, CLASP recommended that states adopt efforts like Minnesota's.  Many families choose care with family members, friends or neighbors, either as their primary care setting or as a second or third caregiver for their children, especially low-income parents and parents of children under age three.  Including family, friend, and neighbor caregivers in state strategies to improve the quality of child care and to ensure children are ready for school is a critical component of state birth to five strategies.

The state strategy to involve family, friend, and neighbor caregivers in promoting school readiness has included:

• supporting research on the state population of non-licensed family, friend, and neighbor caregivers;
• integrating supports for FFN providers into contracts the department has child care resource and referral programs to develop and implement plans to reach out to family, friend, and neighbor caregivers and offer health and safety training, Play and Learn groups, fun events for caregivers and children with an informational focus, library story-time, clinics for screening or immunization, consultation and home-visiting; and
• addressing the cultural and language diversity of children and family, friend, and neighbor caregivers by partnering with immigrant-serving community resources, translating materials into multiple languages, creating informal social networks for FFN providers in specific cultural communities.

Who should be licensed? Ohio examines rules for family child care

A new bill in the Ohio state legislature would require any provider caring for 3 or more children to be licensed by the state.  Currently in Ohio, providers caring for 7 children or more, up to a maximum of 12, must be licensed by the state. (Although family child care providers caring for fewer than 7 children are not state-licensed, they must be certified by the county in which they live before receiving public subsidy funds. Each county designs its own certification process, which may include health and safety requirements, background checks, and/or child development training.)

Which family child care providers should be licensed? States vary in their licensing requirements. Ten states license family child care providers caring for 1 or more child.  The National Association of Child Care Resource & Referral Agencies (NACCRRA) benchmark is: "Both child centers and all family child care homes caring for even one unrelated child on a regular basis for a fee are required to be licensed."  The National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) recommends that: “Any program providing care and education to children from two or more unrelated families should be regulated.” The Center for the Study of Social Policy recommends that adults (except parents or guardians) caring for three or more children should register with the state as a child care provider. Licensing is one vehicle that states use to impact key indicators of quality in child care, such as group sizes, child to staff ratios, and health and safety measures.

Families choose family child care settings for a variety of reasons—including cultural and linguistic preferences, work schedules, and preferences for mixed age groupings or keeping siblings together.   Current Census data show that approximately 10 percent of children under 5 with employed mothers are in family child care. Among families who receive some help paying for child care, federal data show that approximately one-third (32%) of families receiving child care assistance use family child care for their children ages birth to 13. Parents rely on family child care every day.  Yet in too many states, family child care providers caring for large numbers of children remain unlicensed and without oversight.  As Ohio re-evaluates its licensing rules, the state has an opportunity to give more families the peace of mind they need, knowing their children are safe.

Guaranteeing child care for all low-income families

The Future of Children’s latest publication, The Next Generation of Antipoverty Policies, focuses on eight policy proposals for reducing poverty in the U.S., including a proposal to restructure federal child care subsidy programs and federal tax policy related to child care.  This proposal is detailed in an article titled "Next Steps for Federal Child Care Policy" by Mark Greenberg and is based on the premise that current U.S. child care strategies fail to meet four policy goals: that every parent who needs quality child care should be able to afford it; all families should be able to place their children in settings that foster education and healthy development; all families should be able to choose among child care providers; and a set of good child care choices should be available to families.  After demonstrating that these goals are not being met by current child care policies the article asserts that they can be achieved by making the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit refundable and expanding it to cover 50 percent of child care cost for low-income families and replacing the federal child care block grant with a guarantee for child care assistance to families earning below 200 percent of poverty.  This guarantee would be administered by the states through a federal-state funding formula in which families pay a co-payment that increases with their income, and states pay the remaining cost of care.  States would also be responsible for improving the quality of child care through the use of a federally funded Early Care and Education Strategy Fund.   It is estimated that the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit changes would cost nearly $25 billion over five years and the child care guarantee and Early Care and Education Strategy Fund is estimated to cost $18 billion annually.    

Pennsylvania demonstrates comprehensive approach benefits school readiness

A special report from the Pennsylvania Partnerships for Children (PPC) documents the benefits of investments in young children. According to the report, "Pennsylvania children are reaping the rewards of great gains achieved this past year in the expansion of health coverage and early learning programs such as pre-K. These public policy accomplishments help assure that more children than ever before are entering school ready to learn and prepared to succeed.”

Using analysis of annual data on a number of indicators, PPC found that young children in the state are better off. Yet there are also critical gaps, particularly in access to child care assistance: while the report notes that the number of child care subsidy slots for infants, toddlers, and preschool children increased by nearly 5,500 from the previous year, there are currently more than 8,000 children birth to 12 on the waiting list. The report also highlights the limited availability of high quality care, defined as the number of centers or family child providers who are accredited by a national body.

PPC’s use of data to encourage investments in comprehensive supports for young children as part of a school readiness agenda is part of a national movement to identify indicators of success and help states develop the policies needed to better support children and families. Earlier this year, the National Center for Children in Poverty released 50 state data on a number of policies that support children’s healthy development from birth to five.

Every state should be undertaking an effort like that in Pennsylvania to collect and analyze data in order to better understand the impact the full range of state policies have on young children.  To start, we recommend that states look at their expenditures and participation within their state child care subsidy program and data on Head Start programs in their state. Without powerful advocacy tools like this new report, states will fail to make the investments necessary to ensure that every child has the supports they need to enter school ready to learn.

The progress, problems, and promise of early childhood comprehensive systems

In an analysis of state Maternal and Child Health Early Childhood Comprehensive Systems (ECCS), the National Center for Children in Poverty (NCCP) found that much progress has been made in creating comprehensive systems of early childhood services but challenges remain.  NCCP examined state strategies to promote systems integration as well as governance and structural mechanisms or governing bodies to support and sustain systems integration.  The investigation, State of the States' ECCS Initiatives, revealed that all 48 states that received ECCS grants had a birth to five focus and 45 states formally established cross-sector stakeholder groups that included health, mental health, early care and education, parent education, and family support services.  Nearly half (24) of these states included private sector partners in their stakeholder groups.  Professional Associations, advocacy groups and parent organizations were among the most common private partners while national initiatives and philanthropy groups were among the least.  Despite the development of cross-sector stakeholder groups by the vast majority of states only 22 had strong approaches to integrating separate programs, systems, and funding streams, and only 33 engaged parent leaders.  Challenges to creating more effective ECCS initiatives highlighted by the study include:

• States must give more equal emphasis to all components of the system
• New interagency agreements, staff configurations, and fiscal arrangements must be developed.

In maintaining their focus on state ECCS initiatives, NCCP also published Reducing Disparities Beginning in Early Childhood to highlight how ECCS initiatives could be used to reduce many of the risk factors experienced in early childhood that disparately affect low-income and minority children.   These risk factors include mental health and developmental problems, exposure to family violence, unequal treatment and access to services and low levels of school readiness.  The paper cites that these and other risk factors can negatively impact the overall health, education, and economic status of young children and lead to long-term negative life outcomes.  The authors assert that ECCS initiatives can be used to help address many of these issues by employing strategies that promote an understanding of the issues, use data and monitoring to guide planning, improve child and family services, and improve community supports.  Specific recommendations include:

• Link early childhood systems development efforts to programs aimed at undoing racism and eliminating poverty.
• Integrate cross-cultural and cultural/linguistic competency training into early childhood education and health workforce training.

A visual tool for state early childhood system building developed jointly by national organizations

To improve the lives of all children vulnerable to the effects of poverty and other risk factors, state early childhood systems can’t just focus on any one aspect of development, but need to address the full range of child development needs. But to do this, states need help identifying the pieces that should be put into place.  An ad-hoc group of national organizations and individuals who provide technical assistance to state leaders, including CLASP, has worked together to develop a tool that can help state leaders in this work. 

The tool defines the four major systems that need to be coordinated: health; mental health, and nutrition; early intervention; family support; and early learning.

It also describes the structures these systems need to have in place to be effective: governance, standards, research and development, finance, communications, monitoring, and provider and practitioner support.

For each area, numerous technical assistance materials for state and local policymakers are being developed by the partner organizations.

Click here for a presentation on Early Childhood Development Systems.

Adding pieces of the puzzle: Comprehensive services for young children

Comprehensive services are essential components of high quality early care and education, especially for at-risk children. Young children’s ability to grow and learn is hampered if they are hungry or sick, if they have an undiagnosed developmental delay or special need, or if their parents and families lack the resources, supports, and skills to care for them. Investing in early education without also funding comprehensive services is like trying to put together the puzzle of what children need without all the pieces.

What are states doing to provide comprehensive services? Forty-eight states plus the District of Columbia have been awarded State Early Childhood Comprehensive Systems (ECCS) grants from the Maternal and Child Health Bureau. By integrating children’s education into a larger system of supports, states can move towards serving children in a way that addresses families’ needs, which interlock and overlap traditional public service “silos." The National Center for Children in Poverty (NCCP) helps states share ideas and policies through Project THRIVE, focusing on how to improve early childhood systems for at-risk children. Also, the Early Childhood Systems Working Group has developed a policy tool to illustrate how states can integrate service systems that impact child development.

When exploring how to build and foster these systems, remember the tips on puzzle building your mother taught you: assemble the frame first, every piece on the table has a place, and don’t forget to look at the big picture on the box so you remember where you’re going.