Parent Experiences with State Child Care Subsidy Systems and Their Perceptions of Choice and Quality in Care Selected

Abstract

Research Findings: This study investigated parents’ experiences using Child Care and Development Fund and other state-dispersed child care subsidies, reasons for choosing their current child care program, and perceptions of the quality of child care received from their current program. A telephone survey of 659 parents receiving child care subsidies in 4 states showed that parents gave generally positive ratings to accessibility and reliability of subsidies, reported that child care subsidies were a substantial benefit to them, and gave low ratings to limitations of child care subsidies. However, 40% of parents reported that they had experienced a disruption in eligibility for subsidy. Parent experiences with child care subsidies varied by state. Parents in the sample identified 4 criteria used to choose their child care program: (a) characteristics of the provider, (b) convenience, (c) whether the provider was licensed or accredited, and (d) whether a personal relationship existed with the provider. Selection criteria varied by type of care parents were using. The majority of the participants rated the overall quality of their child care as perfect or excellent (73.6%), but ratings of quality also varied by the type of child care parents were using. Practice or Policy: Implications for child care subsidy program administration and for improving the quality of child care purchased by public subsidies in the context of parental choice are discussed.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This research was supported by Grant 90-YE0011/01 from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration on Children, Youth, and Families, Child Care Bureau; and the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, Kansas City, Missouri. The contents are solely our own responsibility and do not represent the official views of the funding agencies, nor does publication in any way constitute endorsement by the funding agencies. Research reported here was conducted in collaboration with the Midwest Child Care Research Consortium. Principal investigators include Susan Hegland and Carla Peterson, Iowa State University; Jane Atwater and Jean Ann Summers, University of Kansas; Kathy Thornburg, University of Missouri; Carolyn Edwards and Julia Torquati, University of Nebraska. Helen Raikes and Brian Wilcox, University of Nebraska, were project directors.

Notes

Note. Principal axis factoring with varimax rotation was used. Factors with eigenvalues greater than 1 were extracted, and items with loadings equal to or greater than .30 were retained.

^a Although most of the items that loaded on the factors likely seem intuitively consistent with the titles we gave the factors, this one—referring to whether a parent thinks the child care provider likes the child—may not seem to be a limitation of the subsidy. We retained the title Limitations of the Subsidy (rather than calling the factor the Negative Factor). Moreover, we think some parents could feel that they needed to select a provider who would take subsidies and that provider could be someone who was not in sync with their child. We remind the readers that this study was conducted in states with large rural populations, and in some areas child care was sparse.

^b Item not included because of low loading.

^c Item deleted because of double loading.

^d Although most items on this factor likely seem to conceptually link to the factor title, Positive Perception of the Child Care Provider and Setting, one item may not. This item (“If I had it to do over, I would choose this child care provider”) was retained because of its high correlation with observed quality in a large, representative study of family child care (Kontos et al., 1995). In addition, it was included in the Emlen et al. (2000) items pertaining to parent perceptions of quality.

¹The items selected were drawn from Emlen Scales: A Packet of Scales for Measuring the Quality of Child Care From a Parent's Point of View (Emlen et al., 2000). The constructs of the original scale and Cronbach's alpha coefficients were as follows: warmth and interest in my child (10 items; α = .93), rich activities and environment (5 items; α = .87), skilled caregiver (8 items; α = .88), talk and share information (3 items; α = .72), caregiver accepting and supportive (4 items; α = .70), child feels safe and secure (8 items; α = .86), child getting along well socially (2 items; α = .80), and high-risk care (11 items; α = .73). With Emlen's guidance, we selected 20 items across the first groups of positive items and 8 items across the second group.

Note. F ratios are Wilks's approximation of Fs. MANCOVA = multivariate analysis of covariance; ANCOVA = univariate analysis of covariance; type = child care type.

*p < .05. **p < .01..

Note. F ratios are Wilks's approximation of Fs. MANCOVA = multivariate analysis of covariance; ANCOVA = univariate analysis of covariance; type = child care type.

***p < .001.

Note. F ratios are Wilks's approximation of Fs. MANCOVA = multivariate analysis of covariance; ANCOVA = univariate analysis of covariance; type = child care type.

*p < .05. **p < .01.