Child Care and Early Education at CLASP

Building on the Promise: State Initiatives to Expand Access to Early Head Start for Young Children and Their Families

A new joint report by CLASP and ZERO TO THREE - Building on the Promise: State Initiatives to Expand Access to Early Head Start for Young Children and Their Families – examines actions states have taken to build on Early Head Start. Less than 3 percent of babies and toddlers who are eligible for Early Head Start (EHS) - a federal program with promising results - are reached at current federal funding levels. CLASP and ZERO TO THREE found 20 states use mostly one of four main approaches:

• Extending the day or year of existing EHS services. 
• Expanding the capacity of existing EHS and Head Start programs to increase the number of children and pregnant women served.
• Providing resources and assistance to child care providers to help them deliver services meeting EHS standards. 
• Supporting partnerships between EHS and center-based and family child care providers to improve the quality of care. 

The paper also discusses opportunities and challenges facing state policymakers and provides recommendations for state leaders interested in promoting better futures for at-risk children through building on Early Head Start. Click to read state profiles of Iowa's and Kansas' EHS initiatives. Coming soon - profiles of the other 8 states interviewed in the paper. For more information on the federal EHS program, see Supporting Families, Nurturing Young Children: Early Head Start Programs in 2006.

ZERO TO THREE Policy Center hosted a webinar on Tuesday, April 22, with a presentation on the study as well as presentations by state policymakers in Iowa and Kansas about their EHS initiatives. All three presentations are currently available online, or click here to view a recording of the webinar.

2006 CCDBG participation data are now available

On December 7, 2007, the Child Care Bureau released preliminary federal fiscal year 2006 participation data for the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG). The data include the number of children served, the ages of children served, the types of child care settings used, and the reasons families receive assistance for each state. According to the data:

• Approximately 53,200 additional children were served in CCDBG (including TANF transfers) in FY 2006.
• The average monthly number of children served increased from 1.75 million in 2005 to 1.80 million in 2006.

In FY 2006, states received an additional $200 million in federal matching funds. CCDBG expenditure data for 2006 are not yet available.  The Administration for Children and Families does not report on the number of children receiving TANF-funded child care; therefore, an updated figure on the "total" number of children receiving child care assistance through all sources is not available.

Click here to read CLASP's fact sheet on CCDBG participation in 2006.

CLASP previously reported a preliminary analysis of TANF spending on child care in FY 2006. We will provide additional analysis on national child care spending trends as in prior years, as well as updated state-by-state child care spending pages when CCDBG expenditure data are available.

State-by-state TANF spending analysis

CLASP has posted Analysis of Fiscal Year 2006 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and Maintenance-of-Effort (MOE) Spending by States, showing how states, and the nation as a whole, spent funds from the TANF block grant in the previous fiscal year. According to the analysis, child care (including both TANF funds spent directly on child care and TANF funds transferred to the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) remained the second largest use of TANF funds nationally. Nineteen percent of all federal and state funds were used for child care assistance. As in prior years, basic assistance was the only category of spending to which states directed more funds.  State-by-state worksheets show how individual states chose to direct their portion of funds. Read more about TANF funds used for child care.

Getting the facts on state child care policies

Data collection and analysis is a critical component of understanding whether early childhood systems are effectively meeting the needs of young children and their families.  For policymakers and advocates, it is important to understand the full range of child care policies in a state, including data on child care participation and expenditures, family income eligibility criteria, and provider reimbursement rates, to gain a better understanding of a state’s child care assistance program.

This week the National Women's Law Center (NWLC) released its annual report on state child care subsidy policies, State Child Care Assistance Policies 2007: Some Steps Forward, More Progress Needed. This report compiles essential data on key state child care assistance policies. NWLC finds that while states have made some progress in the last year, most states currently have policies in place that make fewer families eligible for help paying for child care than in 2001. Read more.

TANF funds used for child care continue to fall

Federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) funds used for child care declined slightly in fiscal year 2006, marking the sixth consecutive year of decline since the beginning of the decade. Nationally, states directed a total of $3.1 billion in TANF funds to child care in FY 2006, approximately $100 million less than in the previous year, according to FY 2006 TANF Financial Data posted by the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) last week. ACF does not report on the number of children receiving TANF-funded child care assistance.

States choose whether to use TANF funds to provide child care assistance to families. States may spend TANF funds directly on child care, usually in the form of vouchers given to parents; they may also choose to transfer up to 30 percent of their annual TANF block grant to the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) or to a combination of CCDBG and the Social Services Block Grant (SSBG). TANF funds may also be used to support early education programs.

According to the new data, TANF transfers to CCDBG totaled $1.9 billion and TANF funds spent directly on child care totaled $1.2 billion in 2006. This compares to $1.9 billion in TANF transfer and $1.3 billion in TANF direct in FY 2005. In FY 2006, 11 states transferred the maximum amount of 30 percent of TANF funds: Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, Oklahoma and Washington. Only Kentucky transferred all 30 percent of its funds to CCDBG alone. An additional 10 states transferred between 25 to 29 percent of TANF funds to a combination of CCDBG and SSBG.

States are required to meet a maintenance-of-effort (MOE) requirement in the TANF program. In an upward shift, states spent $2.3 billion in state MOE funds on child care. This was an increase of $386 million compared to 2005.

The Administration for Children and Families has not yet released FY 2006 expenditure data for CCDBG. When that data is available, CLASP will produce additional analysis on national child care spending trends as in prior years, as well as updated state-by-state child care spending pages.

Where can I find that number? Things to know about the Head Start PIR database

How many four-year olds does Head Start serve in a year? What percent of teachers in Migrant Head Start programs have a postsecondary degree or credential? In which states and territories do all Early Head Start programs ensure that every pregnant mother they serve has access to prenatal and postpartum care?

To answer these questions, you need a national database – the Program Information Reports (PIR) collected by the Office of Head Start. Each grantee reports data on child enrollment (and pregnant women, in the case of Early Head start), staff qualifications, and family services. These reports are then compiled into a database.

The PIR is the only national database of Head Start programs. It can track national trends over time, analyze specific program elements, and provide state policymakers key information about their state and region. Whether you want state-by-state data, a national summary of Head Start, quick facts on Early Head Start, or information on teacher qualifications, the PIR has the answers.

How accurate is the PIR?  In a 2005 study, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported conducting 29 tests of internal data consistency on the PIR – 18 failed. Head Start regional office staff told GAO they have about 6 weeks to check each electronic PIR report against the program’s records, and that time is short for verifying even basic data items. Even with these limitations, the depth of information in the PIR data allows state policymakers, researchers, grantees and other partners to gather useful information about the children and families served in local programs.

And speaking of information, in the Head Start 2005-2006 program year:

• 546,393 four-year-olds enrolled in just Head Start for some portion of the year (not including Migrant or Early Head Start),
• 84 percent of Migrant Head Start teachers have a Child Development Associate credential or higher, and
• All the Early Head Start programs in Delaware, Massachusetts, North Dakota, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Vermont, and the Virgin Islands had all pregnant women receive prenatal and postpartum care.

Child Care and Early Education State-by-State Data

This set of state-by-state data includes new analysis of 2005 child care spending from Child Care Development Block Grant and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families funds and of 2005 Head Start Program Information Report data, along with data (published in March 2006) on states’ use of community-based child care to provide pre-kindergarten.  It also links to profiles of state infant and toddler initiatives highlighted in CLASP’s Starting Off Right report

Child Care Assistance in 2005: State Cuts Continue

This policy brief provides an overview of national expenditure data for the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) funds directed towards child care. State-by-state child care subsidy data show that spending on child care assistance declined in 2005 for the second consecutive year. Twenty-two states made cuts to their child care programs, as the number of children living in low-income families that received help from these programs continued to decline. Many families turn to child care assistance programs to get help paying for the child care they need in order to work and to succeed.