Chapter 3: Caring for Children

SOCIETAL CHANGES AND WORKING MOTHERS
WHO CARES FOR CHILDREN IN THE UNITED STATES?
FACTORS THAT AFFECT CHILD CARE
FORMAL CHILD CARE FACILITIES
THE COST OF CHILD CARE

SOCIETAL CHANGES AND WORKING MOTHERS

In the early twenty-first century, women with young children were much more likely to work outside the home than they had been three decades previously. Jane Lawler Dye of the U.S. Census Bureau reports in Fertility of American Women: June 2004 (December 2005, http://www.census.gov/prod/2005pubs/p20-555.pdf) that in 1976, 31% of women aged 15 to 44 with a child under 12 months old worked. By 1998, this number had risen to 59% of allwomen with a child under 12months old; from 2000 through 2004 the number stabilized at 55% of allwomenwho had given birth in the past year. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) indicates in the press release “Employment Characteristics of Families in 2007” (May 30, 2008, http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/famee.pdf) that in 2007 this percentage had increased slightly to 55.1%. In 2007, 63.3% of mothers with children under the age of six and 77.2% of mothers with school-age children were in the labor force. (See Table 3.1.)

Many factors contributed to the greater proportion of mothers in the workforce. Legislation passed in the late 1970s made it more possible for women to return to work after the birth of a child. In 1976 tax code changes allowed families a tax credit on child care costs, making it more financially feasible for women to return to work. In 1978 the Pregnancy Discrimination Act was passed, making it illegal for employers to discriminate in hiring, firing, promoting, or determining pay levels based on pregnancy or childbirth. In 1993 the Family and Medical Leave Act was passed, requiring employers to give eligible employees up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave for childbearing or family care each year.

Societal changes also contributed to the greater number of women with young children participating in the labor force. In Maternity Leave and Employment Patterns, 1961–1995 (November 2001, http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/p70-79.pdf), Kirsten Smith, Barbara Downs, and Martin O'Connell of the Census Bureau review the changing demographic profile of first-time mothers between the 1960s and 1990s to explain, in part, this increase. The researchers emphasize that during this period the incidence of first-time motherhood at age 30 and older tripled and that first-time mothers in the 1990s tended to be better educated than their 1960 counterparts. These older, well-educated mothers often viewed their jobs as long-term careers and believed time lost could adversely affect their ability to hold a position and earn promotions and could decrease contributions to retirement funds. This trend continued into the twenty-first century. Joyce A. Martin et al. of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) note in “Births: Final Data for 2005” (National Vital Statistics Reports, vol. 56, no. 6, December 5, 2007) that the mean age of first-time mothers reached 25.2 years in 2003, up from 22.7 years in 1980 and an all-time high for American women; this age remained unchanged in 2005. However, by the end of 2006, Martin et al. indicate in “Births: Final Data for 2006” (National Vital Statistics Reports, vol. 57, no. 7, January 7, 2009) that the age had dropped to 25—the first decline in some 40 years.

Furthermore, the increasing number of single mothers meant that more women had to work to support their families. In 1970, 3.4 million women maintained single-parent households; by 2007 this number had tripled to 9.9 million. (See Table 1.7 in Chapter 1.) Changes in government programs that provided assistance to poor families also resulted in increasing numbers of single mothers entering the workforce. In 1996 the federal government placed a two-year time limit on receiving public assistance benefits while not working, requiring poor parents to work even if they had to place young children in day care. In 2007, 72.8% of mothers in single-parent households worked. (See Table 3.2.) Nearly two-thirds (64.1%) of single mothers with children under three years old were in the labor force, with a 13.4% unemployment rate. (See Table 3.3.)

Married women have also entered the workforce in larger numbers. A decline in men's real wages plus a

rising cost of living has led some two-parent families to decide to maintain two incomes to meet financial obligations and pay for their children's future college expenses. According to the Census Bureau, in The 2009 Statistical Abstract (2008, http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/tables/09s0678.pdf), the median income in 2006 for married couples with one or more children under the age of 18 in which both the husband and wife worked was $86,338, which was significantly higher than the $57,452 median income for married-couple families in which the wife was

not in the paid labor force. Table 3.1 shows that 68.8% of married women with children under the age of 18 were in the labor force in 2007, and Table 3.3 shows that 57.4% of married women with children under the age of three were in the labor force in that year. According to Table 3.2, in 62.2% of married-couple families with children under 18 years old, both parents were employed. Many families have come to depend on women's economic contributions to the household.

WHO CARES FOR CHILDREN IN THE UNITED STATES?

School-Age Children

Married parents who both work and single parents who work need reliable child care. The Federal Inter-agency Forum on Child and Family Statistics reports in America's Children in Brief: Key National Indicators of Well-Being, 2008 (2008, http://www.childstats.gov/pdf/ac2008/ac_08.pdf) that about half of children in kindergarten through eighth grade were cared for by someone other than their parents in 2005. (See Figure 3.1.) Of those who were cared for by someone other than parents, younger children were more likely to receive home- or center-based care for before- or after-school hours; children in grades four and up were less likely to receive these types of care and more likely to care for themselves. Only 2.6% of children in kindergarten through third grade cared for themselves regularly, whereas 22.2% of older children did. (See Table 3.4.)

SELF-CARE—LATCHKEY KIDS . The term latchkey kids is used to describe children left alone or unsupervised either during the day or before or after school. These are children five to 14 years of age whose parents report “child cares for self” as either the primary or secondary child care arrangement. In 2005 approximately 5.6 million school-age children cared for themselves regularly without adult supervision. (See Table 3.5.) Self-care was higher among children who lived with their fathers without their mother present than it was among children who lived with their mothers, with or without their fathers present, in all age groups. Most of these children were 12 and older, but 1.5 million children 11 years of age and younger regularly took care of themselves. In Who's Minding the Kids? Child Care Arrangements: Winter 2002 (October 2005, http://www.census.gov/prod/2005pubs/p70-101.pdf), Julia Overturf Johnson of the Census Bureau finds that the percentage of children in self-care held steady between 1997 and 2002 in both families with married parents and in families living with an unemployed single parent; however, the percentage of children of a single, employed parent in self-care actually declined from 24% in 1997 to 18% in 2002.

TWENTY-FIRST-CENTURY COMMUNITY LEARNING CENTERS . More than half of all families use after-school programs, and in many families, parents rely on after-school care to provide a safe and nurturing place for their children while they are working. In response to concerns about the availability of quality after-school programs, the U.S. Department of Education initiated Twenty-First-Century Community Learning Centers (21st CCLC), which was authorized under Title X, Part I, of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and reauthorized under Title IV, Part B, of the No Child Left Behind Act. This initiative gives grants to low-performance elementary and middle schools in rural and urban areas to provide after-school opportunities for their students, both educational and recreational. In 1997 the 21st CCLC had a budget of only $1 million; by fiscal year 2008 the program's budget had increased tenfold, to $1.1 billion. According to the Department of Education, in “21st CCLC Profile and Performance Information Collection System” (2008, http://ppics.learningpt.org/ppics/publicGrantSearch.asp), by 2008 the 21st CCLC supported 4,183 after-school programs across the country.

Deborah Lowe Vandell, Elizabeth R. Reisner, and Kim M. Pierce note in Outcomes Linked to High-Quality Afterschool Programs: Longitudinal Findings from the Study of Promising Afterschool Programs (October 2007, http://www.policystudies.com/studies/youth/Promising%20Programs%20Final%20Report%20FINAL%2010-23-07.pdf) that participation in high-quality afterschool programs in 2007 was associated with improved outcomes among disadvantaged students. The study included a group of 3,000 low-income, ethnically diverse elementary and middle school students. These students improved their

standardized test scores and work habits and reduced problem behaviors. They also posted gains in teacher-reported social skills.

Children Younger Than Five (Preschoolers)

In 2005, 50.7% of children under the age of two and 73.7% of children aged three to six were in nonparental care at least some of the time. (See Table 3.6.) Among the youngest children, home-based care by a relative was most common (22%), followed by care in a center-based program (19.6%) and home-based care by a nonrelative (15.6%). Among older preschoolers, center-based programs were by far the most common; 57.1% of three- to six-year-olds were enrolled in these programs, whereas 22.7% were cared for in a home by a relative, and only 11.7% were cared for in a home by a nonrelative. These numbers reflect the fact that as their children grow from infancy to school age, working mothers often change child care arrangements to meet the needs of their children, their families, and their employers. Making child care arrangements for infants and toddlers is often more difficult than for older children, because fewer organized child care facilities admit infants and very young children, primarily due to the cost involved in hiring enough workers and adapting facilities to care adequately for babies. In addition, many parents prefer, if possible, to keep their infants in a home environment as long as possible. Also,

many mothers view center-based programs, which often have an educational focus, as most appropriate for older preschoolers.

FACTORS THAT AFFECT CHILD CARE

Preschool Child Care

RACIAL AND ETHNIC DIFFERENCES . In 2005 African-American mothers of preschoolers relied more heavily on relatives to provide child care than did other mothers. More than one out of four (27.7%) African-American preschoolers were cared for by relatives in that year, compared to 21% of non-Hispanic white preschoolers, 21.2% of Hispanic preschoolers, and 21.3% of Asian-American preschoolers. (See Table 3.6.) Non-Hispanic white preschoolers (54.8%), African-American preschoolers (54.1%), and Asian-American preschoolers (46%) were all more likely to be cared for by nonrelatives or in center-based programs than were Hispanic preschoolers (35.6%).

POVERTY MAKES A DIFFERENCE . In 2005, 85.3% of preschoolers whose mothers worked full time (35 hours or more each week) and 69.7% of preschoolers whose mothers worked part time were regularly in nonparental care. (See Table 3.6.) However, the type of care varied by the income levels of these families. A substantial number of children from low-income families are cared-for in unregulated home-based settings. Gina Adams, Kathryn Tout, and Martha Zaslow note in Early Care and Education for Children in Low-Income Families (January 12, 2006, http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/411482_early_care.pdf) that “several observational studies have found unregulated home-based care of lower quality than regulated home-based settings in which low-income children participate. Studies question specific aspects of quality, such as prolonged exposure to television, missed opportunities for learning, and health and safety issues.” In “Snapshots of America's Families III: Children in Low-Income Families Are Less Likely to Be in Center-Based Child Care” (January 27, 2004, http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/310923_snapshots3_no16.pdf),

Jeffrey Capizzano and Gina Adams find that preschoolers from lower-income families (families with an income less than 200% of the poverty line) were less likely to be in center-based care (24.9%) than children from higher-income families (31.2%). The Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics indicates in America's Children in Brief that data support this conclusion. In 2005, 42.2% of preschoolers from families whose incomes were above 200% of the poverty line were in center-based care, compared to 29.4% of children from families with incomes 100% to 199% of the poverty line and 28.3% of children from families with incomes below the poverty line. (See Table 3.6.)

Capizzano and Adams suggest the lower percentage of low-income children in center care reflects the lower cost of home-based care. At the same time, they argue there is evidence that quality, center-based care plays a big role in helping preschoolers make a successful transition to school and that low-income children are in large part missing this opportunity. In Key Facts: Essential Information about Child Care, Early Education, and School-Age Care (2003), Karen Blank, Karen Schulman, and Danielle Ewan also stress the

importance of providing low-income families with child care assistance to help their children succeed.

FORMAL CHILD CARE FACILITIES

Even though no comprehensive data exist on the types or quality of child care facilities in the United States, the National Association for Regulatory Administration estimates in The 2005 Child Care Licensing Study Executive Summary (2006, http://www.nara.affiniscape.com/associations/4734/files/Executive%20Summary.pdf) that in 2005 there were 335,520 licensed child care facilities in the United States, including 105,444 licensed child care centers and 213,966 licensed family child care homes. More than nine million children are taken care of in these licensed facilities, and over 70% of these children are in center-based programs. Many more unlicensed child care facilities exist, but because they are not regulated, no reliable statistics are collected.

In 2005, 50.7% of all children aged two and under and 73.7% of all children aged three to six spent time in non-parental care each week. (See Table 3.6.) Their care providers are major influences in their lives. Many working parents discover that quality and affordable care is very difficult to find. In some communities, child care is hard to find at any cost. Shortages of child care for infants, sick children, children with special needs, and for school children before and after school pose problems for many parents.

Regulations and Quality of Care

Federal assistance to low-income families to pay for child care eroded in the late twentieth century at the same time that the government imposed requirements that more low-income parents work. The 1996 welfare reform law, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, eliminated the guarantee that families on welfare would receive subsidized child care and replaced it with the Child Care and Development Block Grant to states. Even though the legislation gave states wide discretion in the use of these funds, it also imposed penalties if states failed to meet criteria for getting low-income parents into the workforce.

This legislation pushed the issue of regulation of child care facilities to the forefront. In 1989 the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) initiated the Study of Early Child Care. This comprehensive ongoing longitudinal study was designed to answer many questions about the relationship between child care experiences and children's developmental outcomes. The 1999 phase of the study examined whether the amount of time children spent in child care affected their interactions with their mothers. The results showed that the number of hours infants and toddlers spent in child care was modestly linked to the sensitivity of the mother to her child, as well as to the engagement of the child with the mother in play activities. Children in consistent quality day care showed less problem behavior, whereas those who switched day care arrangements showed more problem behaviors. Children in quality care centers had higher cognitive and language development than those in lower-quality centers.

The second phase of the study, The NICHD Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development: Findings for Children up to Age 4 1/2 Years (January 2006, http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/pubs/upload/seccyd_051206.pdf), found that the quality of child care had an impact on children's social and intellectual development. The study defined a better quality of care as care that met ideal adult-to-child ratios, maintained ideal group sizes, and had well-trained child care providers. It also focused on the quality of children's actual day-to-day experiences in child care, observing children's social interactions and their activities with toys.

The study found that children who were in higher-quality child care had better cognitive function and language development in the first three years of life, as well as greater school readiness by age four and a half. Children in higher-quality care were also more sensitive to other children, more cooperative, and less aggressive and disobedient than were children in lower-quality care. Lastly, the study found that children who were cared for in child care centers rather than in home-based care had better cognitive and language development, but also showed somewhat more behavior problems both in the child care setting and once they began kindergarten.

Child Care during Nonstandard Hours

Many parents choose to have one parent work non-standard hours to allow both parents to provide child care at different times of the day. According to the BLS, in the press release “Workers on Flexiblke and Shift Schedules in May 2004” (July 1, 2005, http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/flex.pdf), in 2004, the most recent year for which statistics are available, 27 million workers, or 27.5% of all fulltime wage and salary workers, worked flexible hours and were able to vary their work hours to fit their schedules. That number was more than twice as many workers as in May 1985, but down from a high of 28.6% in May 2001. Flexible schedules were most common among management (44.7%) and professionals (31.5%), and were more common among non-Hispanic white (28.7%) and Asian-American (27.4%) workers than among African-American (19.7%) and Hispanic workers (18.4%). By contrast, the percentage of those who worked an evening or overnight shift had fallen from 18% in 1991 to 14.8% in 2004. When asked why they worked a non-daytime schedule, 8.2% of shift workers answered they did so for better family or child care arrangements.

THE COST OF CHILD CARE

In 2008 the National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies (NACCRRA) published Parents and the High Price of Child Care: Update 2008 (http://issuu.com/naccrra/docs/price_report_2008), which surveyed child care costs across the country. The survey shows that the average yearly cost for child care in a child care center for a four-year-old ranged from $4,475 in Arkansas to $10,787 in Massachusetts. For an infant, annual costs jumped to $5,231 in Alabama and $14,591 in Massachusetts. Child care in urban care centers was so expensive that it could cost more than public college tuition.

Low-Income Families

NACCRRA notes in Parents and the High Price of Child Care that in 2008 a low-income family with two parents working full time, 52 weeks per year, at $5.85 per hour (the minimum wage after July 2007), earned $24,336 per year before taxes. These families spent an exorbitant proportion of their income on child care. For example, in New York, where the average annual cost of infant care was $13,437, the median income for single-parent families was $23,487. This family would spend 57.2% of its annual income on preschool care. Even in Nevada, where the cost of infant care averaged a relatively low $8,391, a single-parent family earning the median income of $26,170 would spend 32.1% of its annual income on child care.

In Who's Minding the Kids? Child Care Arrangements: Spring 2005 Detailed Tables (February 28, 2008, http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/child/ppl-2005.html), the Census Bureau estimates that in 2005 the average married-couple family with a working mother with a preschool child spent 7.8% of its income on child care, whereas single mothers spent 13.5% of their family income on child care. Families in poverty in which the mother was employed paid an average of $82 per week in child care costs, 26.6% of the family income, compared to families not in poverty, who paid, on average, $132 per week, or 8.3% of the family income. Many poor and low-income families were forced to enroll their children in low-cost, and often poor-quality, child care centers. As a result, these children spent much of their day in unstimulating and possibly unsafe environments.

Government Assistance with Child Care

BLOCK GRANTS . In some cases, low-income and poor parents can receive government assistance in paying for child care. Recognizing that child care assistance helps contribute to a productive workforce, every state has a child care assistance program that subsidizes some child care using federal block grant money and state funds for those on welfare and for low-income working families. In some cases, parents receive a voucher that they can use to pay for a portion of child care costs; in other states, payments are made directly to the child care provider of the parents' choice. However, according to NACCRRA, in Breaking the Piggy Bank: Parents and the High Price of Child Care (February 2006, http://www.naccrra.org/docs/policy/Breaking%20the%20Piggy%20Bank_FINAL(printer).pdf), in 2005 17 states had waiting lists for child care assistance and Tennessee was no longer accepting applications even for its waiting list. Also, the income cut-off to even be eligible for assistance was extremely low. In other words, child care assistance is available to only a small percentage of those families who need it.

HEAD START . Perhaps the best-known and most successful government-funded child care program is Head Start, a federal program begun in 1965 under the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The free program provides early education, health care, social services, and free meals to preschool children in families whose incomes are below the poverty line or who receive public assistance. In “Head Start Program Fact Sheet” (February 2008, http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ohs/about/fy2008.html), the ACF states that Head Start operates in every state, and in fiscal year 2007 it served 908,412 children. The Children's Defense Fund reports in “Head Start Basics: 2005” (April 2005, http://www.childrensdefense.org/site/DocServer/headstartbasics2005.pdf?docID=616) that the program has been shown to provide many benefits, including a greater likelihood that children will do well in school and graduate from high school.

TAX CREDITS . The Federal Dependent Care Tax Credit helps families by allowing them to claim an income tax credit for part of their child care expenses for children under the age of 13 that enabled parents to work outside the home. The credit is on a sliding scale, ranging from 20% to 35% of qualified expenses; therefore, lower-income families receive slightly larger credits. According to the Internal Revenue Service, in “Child and Dependent Care Credit” (2008, http://www.irs.gov/publications/p17/ch32.html#d0e71607), in 2008 parents could claim up to $3,000 in qualified expenses for one child or $6,000 for two or more children.

FAMILY LEAVE. In 1993 Congress enacted the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), requiring employers with 50 or more employees to give unpaid time off—12 weeks in any 12-month period—to employees to care for newborn or newly adopted children, sick family members, or for personal illness. The employee must be returned to the same position—or one equivalent in pay, benefits, and other terms of employment—and must receive uninterrupted health benefits. The U.S. Department of Labor reports that before this legislation, fewer than a quarter of all workers received family leave benefits and that most of those who did worked in establishments of more than 100 employees.

Jane Waldfogel states in “Family and Medical Leave: Evidence from the 2000 Surveys” (Monthly Labor Review,

September 2001) that in 2000, 17.9% of FMLA leave takers took their leave to care for a newborn, newly adopted, or newly placed foster child; 9.8% used it to care for a sick child; and 7.8% used it as maternity or disability time. Of all employees covered by the FMLA with children 18 months and younger, 45.1% of men and 75.8% of women had taken an FMLA leave in the previous 18 months.

Chapter 3
Caring for Children

SOCIETAL CHANGES AND WORKING MOTHERS

In the early twenty-first century, women with young children were much more likely to work outside the home than they had been three decades previously. Jane Lawler Dye reports in Fertility of American Women: June 2004 (December 2005, http://www.census.gov/prod/2005pubs/ p20-555.pdf) that in 1976, 31% of women aged fifteen to forty-four with a child under twelve months old worked. By 2004 that percentage had increased to 55%, down from a high of 59% in 1998. Table 3.1 shows that in 2005, 62.8% of mothers with children under age six and 76.5% of mothers with school-age children were in the labor force.

Legislation passed in the late 1970s that made it more possible for women to return to work after the birth of a child. In 1976 tax code changes allowed families a tax credit on child care costs, making it more financially feasible for women to return to work. In 1978 the Pregnancy Discrimination Act was passed, making it illegal for employers to discriminate in hiring, firing, promoting, or establishing pay levels based on pregnancy or childbirth. And in 1993 the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) was passed, requiring employers to give eligible employees up to twelve weeks of unpaid leave for child-bearing or family care each year.

Societal changes also contributed to the greater number of women with young children participating in the labor force. In Maternity Leave and Employment Patterns, 1961–1995 (November 2001, http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/p70-79.pdf), Kristin Smith, Barbara Downs, and Martin O'Connell review the changing demographic profile of first-time mothers between the 1960s and 1990s to explain, in part, this increase. The researchers emphasize that during this period the incidence of first-time motherhood at age thirty or older tripled and that first-time mothers in the 1990s tended to be better educated than their 1960 counterparts. These older, well-educated mothers often viewed their jobs as long-term careers and believed time lost could adversely affect their ability to hold a position and earn promotions and could decrease contributions to retirement funds. This trend continued into the twenty-first century. Laura B. Shres-tha, in The Changing Demographic Profile of the United States (May 5, 2006, http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32701.pdf), notes that the mean age of first-time mothers reached 25.2 years in 2003, up from 21.4 years in 1970 and an all-time high for American women.

Furthermore, the increasing number of single mothers meant that more women had to work to support their families. In 1970, 3.4 million women maintained single-parent households; by 2005 that number had tripled, to 10.4 million. (See Table 1.3 in Chapter 1.) Changes in government programs that provided assistance to poor families also resulted in increasing numbers of single mothers entering the workforce. In 1996 the federal government placed a two-year time limit on receiving public assistance benefits while not working, requiring poor parents to work even if they had to place young children in day care. In 2005, 63.4% of single mothers with children under three years old were in the labor force, with a 15% unemployment rate. (See Table 3.2.)

Married women have also entered the workforce in larger numbers. A decline in men's real wages plus a rising cost of living has led some two-parent families to decide to maintain two incomes to meet financial obligations and pay for their children's future college expenses. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, in The 2007 Statistical Abstract (December 22, 2006, http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/income_expenditures_wealth/), the median income in 2003 for married couples in which both husbands and wives worked was $77,899, which was significantly higher than the $51,303 median income for married-couple families in which the wife was not in the paid labor force. Table 3.1 shows that 68.2% of married women with children under the age of eighteen were in the labor force in 2005, and Table 3.2 shows that 56.7% of married women with children under age three were in the labor force in that year. Many families have come to depend on women's economic contributions to the household.

WHO CARES FOR AMERICA'S CHILDREN?

School-Age Children

Married parents who both work and single parents who work need reliable child care. The Federal Inter-agency Forum on Child and Family Statistics reports in America's Children in Brief: Key National Indicators of Well-Being, 2006 (http://childstats.gov/americaschildren/pop.asp) that about half of children in kindergarten through eighth grade were cared for by someone other than their parents in 2005. (See Figure 3.1.) Of those who were cared for by someone other than parents, younger children were more likely to receive home- or center-based care for before- or after-school hours; children in grades four and up were less likely to receive these types of care and more likely to care for themselves. Only 2.6% of children in kindergarten through third grade cared for themselves regularly, whereas 22.2% of older children did. (See Table 3.3.)

SELF-CARE—LATCHKEY KIDS

The term latchkey kids is used to describe children left alone or unsupervised either during the day or before or after school. These are children five to fourteen years of age whose parents report "child cares for self" as either the primary or secondary child care arrangement. In 2002 approximately 6.1 million grade school-aged children cared for themselves regularly without adult supervision. (See Table 3.4.) Self-care was higher among children who lived with their father without their mother present (18.3%) than it was among children who lived with their mother, with or without their father present (14.8%). Most of these children were age twelve or older, but 1.9 million children eleven years of age and younger regularly took care of themselves. In Who's Minding the Kids? Child Care Arrangements: Winter 2002 (October 2005, http://www.census.gov/prod/2005pubs/p70-101.pdf), Julia Overturf Johnson finds that the percentage of children

in self-care held steady between 1997 and 2002 in both families with married parents and in families living with an unemployed single parent; however, the percentage of children of a single, employed parent in self-care actually declined from 24% in 1997 to 18% in 2002.

TWENTY-FIRST-CENTURY COMMUNITY LEARNING CENTERS

More than half of all families use after-school programs, and in many families parents rely on after-school care to provide a safe and nurturing place for their children while they are working. In response to concerns about the availability of quality after-school programs, the U.S. Department of Education initiated the Twenty-First-Century Community Learning Centers (21stCCLC), authorized under Title X, Part I, of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and reauthorized under Title IV, Part B, of the No Child Left Behind Act. This initiative gives grants to low-performance middle and elementary schools in rural and urban areas to provide after-school opportunities for their students, both educational and recreational. In 1997 the 21st CCLC had a budget of only $1 million; by fiscal year 2006 the program's budget was $981 million. According to the Department of Education, in "21st CCLC Profile and Performance Information Collection System" (2007, http://ppics.learningpt.org/ppics/publicGrantSearch.asp), by 2007 the 21st CCLC supported after-school programs in 3,425 communities across the country.

However, Duncan Chaplin and Michael J. Puma, in What "Extras" Do We Get with Extracurriculars? Technical Research Consideration (September 30, 2003, http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/410862_what_extras.pdf), offer a cautionary note about claims that these programs may give disadvantaged students an academic boost. The researchers find that extracurricular activities included in after-school programs that do not specifically target academic outcomes (e.g., arts, music, drama, and language classes) had no affect on academic achievement. Chaplin and Puma suggest more rigorous evaluation of after-school programs that target disadvantaged youth be conducted before further money is spent on these programs, as that money might be spent on potentially more effective educational programs for disadvantaged youth. The MDRC states in "Evaluation of Academic Instruction in After-School Programs" (2007, http://www.mdrc.org/project_30_66.html) that the Department of Education is currently funding a study to evaluate whether children who receive academic instruction in these programs actually enjoy a better academic outcome than do other students.

Children Younger Than Five (Preschoolers)

In 2004 mothers with children under twelve months old were much less likely to be employed full time (thirty-five hours or more each week) than were mothers with children older than twelve months. Roughly a third of mothers whose youngest child was an infant (35%) were employed full time, compared with 39% of mothers whose youngest child was a one- to two-year-old, 47% of mothers whose youngest child was a three- to five-year-old, and 55% of mothers with only school-aged children. (See Figure 3.2.) Almost half the mothers with an infant were not in the labor force at all (45%), whereas only a quarter of mothers whose youngest child was aged six to eleven (25%) were not in the labor force. Unemployment and part-time employment were relatively equal across all groups of mothers.

In 2005, 50.7% of children under age two and 73.7% of children aged three to six were in nonparental care at least some of the time. (See Table 3.5.) Among the youngest children, home-based care by a relative was most common (22%), followed by care in a center-based program (19.6%), and home-based care by a nonrelative (15.6%). Among older preschoolers, center-based programs were by far the most common; 57.1% of three-to six-year-olds were enrolled in these programs, whereas 22.7% were cared for in a home by a relative and only 11.7% were cared for in a home by a nonrelative. These numbers reflect the fact that as their children grow from infancy to school age, working mothers often change child care arrangements to meet the needs of their children, their families, and their employers. Making child care arrangements for infants and toddlers is often more difficult than for older children, because fewer organized child care facilities admit infants and young children, primarily because of the cost involved in hiring enough workers and adapting facilities to care adequately for babies. In addition, many parents prefer, if possible, to keep their infants in a home environment as long as possible. And many mothers view center-based programs, which often have an educational focus, as most appropriate for older preschoolers.

FACTORS THAT AFFECT CHILD CARE

Preschool Child Care

RACIAL AND ETHNIC DIFFERENCES

In 2005 African-American mothers of preschoolers relied more heavily on relatives to provide child care than did other mothers. More than one out of four (27.7%) African-American preschoolers were cared for by relatives in that year, compared with 21% of white, non-Hispanic preschoolers, 21.2% of Hispanic preschoolers, and 21.3% of Asian preschoolers. (See Table 3.5.) Non-Hispanic white preschoolers (54.8%), African-American preschoolers (54.1%), and Asian preschoolers (46%) were all more likely to be cared for by nonrelatives or in center-based programs than were Hispanic preschoolers (35.6%).

POVERTY MAKES A DIFFERENCE

In 2005, 85.3% of preschoolers whose mothers worked full time and 69.7% of preschoolers whose mothers worked part time were regularly in nonparental care. (See Table 3.5.) However, the type of care varied by the income levels of those families. Jeffrey Capizzano and Gina Adams find in "Snapshots of America's Families III: Children in Low-Income Families Are Less Likely to Be in Center-Based Child Care" (November 2003, http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/310923_snapshots3_no16.pdf) that preschoolers from lower-income families (families with an income less than 200% of the poverty line) were less likely to be in center-based care (24.9%) than children from higher-income families (31.2%). Data from America's Children in Brief supports this conclusion. In 2005, 42.2% of preschoolers from families whose incomes were above 200% of the poverty line were in center-based care, compared with 29.4% of children from families with incomes 100% to 199% of the poverty line and 28.3% of children from families with incomes below the poverty line. (See Table 3.5.)

Capizzano and Adams suggest the lower percentage of low-income children in center care reflects the lower cost of home-based care. At the same time, they argue that there is evidence that quality, center-based care plays a big role in helping preschoolers make a successful transition to school and that low-income children are in large part missing this opportunity. In Key Facts: Essential Information about Child Care, Early Education and School-Age Care (2003), the Children's Defense Fund also stresses the importance of providing low-income families with child care assistance to help their children succeed.

FORMAL CHILD CARE FACILITIES

Even though no comprehensive data exist on the types or quality of child care facilities in the United States, the National Association for Regulatory Administration, in The 2005 Child Care Licensing Study Executive Summary (2006, http://www.nara.affiniscape.com/associations/4734/files/Executive%20Summary.pdf), estimates that in 2005 there were 335,520 licensed child care facilities in the United States, including 105,444 licensed child care centers and 213,966 licensed family child care homes. More than nine million children are taken care of in these licensed facilities, and over 70% of these children are in center-based programs. Many more unlicensed child care facilities exist, but because they are not regulated, no reliable statistics are collected.

In 2005 half of all children aged two and under and almost three-quarters of all children aged three to six spent time in nonparental care each week. (See Table 3.5.) Their care providers are major influences in their lives. Many working parents discover that quality and affordable care is difficult to find. In some communities child care is hard to find at any cost. Shortages of child care for infants, sick children, children with special needs, and for school children before and after school pose problems for many parents.

Regulations and Quality of Care

Federal assistance to low-income families to pay for child care eroded in the late twentieth century at the same time that the government imposed requirements that more low-income parents work. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 eliminated the guarantee that families on welfare would receive subsidized child care and replaced it with the Child Care and Development Block Grant to states. Even though the legislation gave states wide discretion in the use of these funds, it also imposed penalties if states failed to meet criteria for getting low-income parents into the workforce.

This legislation pushed the issue of regulation of child care facilities to the forefront. In 1989 the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development initiated the Study of Early Child Care. This comprehensive ongoing longitudinal study was designed to answer many questions about the relationship between child care experiences and children's developmental outcomes. The 1999 phase of the study examined whether the amount of time children spent in child care affected their interactions with their mothers. Results showed that the number of hours infants and toddlers spent in child care was modestly linked to the sensitivity of the mother to her child, as well as to the engagement of the child with the mother in play activities. Children in consistent quality day care showed less problem behavior, whereas those who switched day care arrangements showed more problem behaviors. Children in quality care centers had higher cognitive and language development than those in lower-quality centers.

The second phase of the study, The NICHD Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development: Findings for Children up to Age 4 1/2 Years (January 2006, http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/pubs/upload/seccyd_051206.pdf), found that the quality of child care had an impact on children's social and intellectual development. The study defined a better quality of care as care that met ideal adult-to-child ratios, maintained ideal group sizes, and had well-trained child care providers. It also focused on the quality of children's actual day-to-day experiences in child care, observing children's social interactions and their activities with toys.

The study found that children who were in higher-quality child care had better cognitive function and language development in the first three years of life, as well as greater school readiness by age four and a half. Children in higher-quality care were also more sensitive to other children, more cooperative, and less aggressive and disobedient than were children in lower-quality care. Lastly, the study found that children who were cared for in child care centers rather than in home-based care had better cognitive and language development but also showed somewhat more behavior problems both in the child care setting and once they began kindergarten.

Child Care during Nonstandard Hours

Many parents choose to have one parent work non-standard hours to allow both parents to provide child care at different times of the day. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, in the press release "Workers on Flexible and Shift Schedules in May 2004" (July 1, 2005, http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/flex.pdf), in 2004 twenty-seven million workers, or 27.5% of all full-time wage and salary workers, worked flexible hours and were able to vary their work hours to fit their schedules. That number was more than twice as many workers as in May 1985, but down from a high of 28.6% in May 2001. Flexible schedules were most common among management (44.7%) and professionals (31.5%), and were more common among non-Hispanic white (28.7%) and Asian (27.4%) workers than among African-American (19.7%) or Hispanic workers (18.4%).

By contrast, the percentage of those who worked an evening or overnight shift had fallen from 18% in 1991 to 14.8% in 2004. When asked why they worked a non-daytime schedule, 8.2% of shift workers answered they did so for better family or child care arrangements. (See Table 3.6.)

COST OF CHILD CARE

In February 2006 the National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies (NACCRRA) published Breaking the Piggy Bank: Parents and the High Price of Child Care (http://www.naccrra.org/docs/policy/breaking_the_piggy_bank.pdf), which surveyed child care costs across the country. The survey shows that the average yearly cost for child care for a four-year-old ranged from $3,016 in Alabama to $9,628 in Massachusetts. For an infant, annual costs jumped to $3,803 in Alabama and $13,480 in Massachusetts. And child care in urban care centers was so expensive that it could cost more than public college tuition.

Low-Income Families

According to the NACCRRA, in 2007 a low-income family with two parents working full time, fifty-two weeks per year at the federal minimum wage earned $21,424 per year before taxes. These families spent an exorbitant proportion of their income on child care. For example, in New York, where the average annual cost of preschool care was $8,530, the median income for single-parent families was $21,128. This family would spend 40.4% of its annual income on preschool care. Even in Nevada, where the cost of child care averaged a relatively low $3,200, a single-parent family earning the median income of $22,429 would spend 14.3% of its annual income on child care.

Julia Overturf Johnson estimates that in 2002 the average family with a working mother with a preschool child spent 10% of its income on child care. Families in poverty in which the mother was employed paid an average of $67 per week in child care costs, compared with families not in poverty, who paid, on average, $98 per week. Although families below the poverty level paid less per week than higher income families, they spent more than three times the percentage of their income on child care as other families (25% compared with 7%). Many poor and low-income families were forced to enroll their children in low-cost, and often poor-quality, child care centers. As a result, these children spent much of their day in unstimulating and possibly unsafe environments.

Government Assistance with Child Care

BLOCK GRANTS

In some cases low-income and poor parents can receive government assistance in paying for child care. Recognizing that child care assistance helps contribute to a productive workforce, every state has a child care assistance program that subsidizes some child care using federal block grant money and state funds for those on welfare and for low-income working families. In some instances parents receive a voucher that they can use to pay for a portion of child care costs; in other states payments are made directly to the child care provider of the parents' choice. However, the NACCRRA notes that in early 2005 seventeen states had waiting lists for child care assistance, and Tennessee was no longer accepting applications even for their waiting list. Furthermore, the income cut-off to even be eligible for assistance was extremely low. In other words, child care assistance is available to only a small percentage of those families who need it.

HEAD START

Perhaps the best-known and most successful government-funded child care program is Head Start, a federal program begun in 1965 under the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The free program provides early education, health care, social services, and free meals to preschool children in families whose incomes are below the poverty line or who receive public assistance. In the "Head Start Program Fact Sheet" (March 2006, http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/hsb/research/2006.htm), the ACF states that Head Start operates in every state, and in fiscal year 2005 it served 906,993 children. The Children's Defense Fund reports in Head Start Basics: 2005 (April 2005, http://www.childrensdefense.org/site/DocServer/headstartbasics2005. pdf?docID=616) that the program provides many benefits, including a greater likelihood that children will do well in school and graduate from high school.

TAX CREDITS

The Federal Dependent Care Tax Credit helps families by allowing them to claim an income tax credit for part of their child care expenses for children under the age of thirteen that enabled parents to work outside the home. The credit is on a sliding scale, ranging from 20% to 35% of qualified expenses; therefore, lower-income families receive slightly larger credits. According to the U.S. Department of the Treasury, in "Child and Dependent Care Credit" (2007, http://www.irs.gov/publications/p17/ch32.html#d0e71607), in 2006 parents could claim up to $3,000 in qualified expenses for one child or $6,000 for two or more children.

FAMILY LEAVE

In 1993 Congress enacted the FMLA, requiring employers with fifty or more employees to give unpaid time off—twelve weeks in any twelve-month period—to employees to care for newborn or newly adopted children, sick family members, or for personal illness. The employee must be returned to the same position—or one equivalent in pay, benefits, and other terms of employment—and must receive uninterrupted health benefits. The U.S. Department of Labor reports that before this legislation fewer than a quarter of all U.S. workers received family leave benefits and that most of those who did worked in establishments of more than one hundred employees.

Jane Waldfogel notes in "Family and Medical Leave: Evidence from the 2000 Surveys" (Monthly Labor Review, September 2001) that in 2000, 17.9% percent of FMLA leave takers took their leave to care for a newborn, newly adopted, or newly placed foster child; 9.8% used it to care for a sick child; and 7.8% used it as maternity or disability time. Of all employees covered by the FMLA with children eighteen months or younger, 45.1% of men and 75.8% of women had taken an FMLA leave in the previous eighteen months.

Employer Involvement

Employers are increasingly providing family leave beyond the requirements of the FMLA as well as providing assistance to employees in finding child care. Employers find that providing such benefits can pay off in increased productivity, worker recruitment and retention, and community goodwill. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in Pilot Survey on the Incidence of Child Care Resource and Referral Services in June 2000 (November 2000, http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ocs/sp/ncrp0002.pdf), 13.8% of workers in private industry, as well as in state and local government, had access to child care resource and referral services. Most often these services were provided to employees by outside resources rather than directly by their employers. People working for large establishments (employing five thousand or more workers) fare best in access to child care resources.

chapter 3
CARING FOR CHILDREN

SOCIETAL CHANGES AND WORKING MOTHERS

In the second half of the twentieth century the "stayat-home mom" became less common. In the early twenty-first century women with young children were much more likely to work outside the home than they had been three decades previously. In 1976 31% of women ages fifteen to forty-four with a child under twelve months old worked; by 2003 that percentage had increased to 53.7%, down from a high of 58.7% in 1998 (Fertility of American Women: June 2002, U.S. Census Bureau, 2003, and "Labor Force Participation of Mothers with Infants in 2003," Monthly Labor Review, April 22, 2004). In 2003 62.8% of mothers with children under age six and 77.8% of mothers with school-age children worked outside the home. (See Table 3.1.)

Legislation passed in the late 1970s made it more possible for women to return to work after the birth of a child. In 1976 tax code changes allowed families a tax credit on child care costs, making it more financially feasible for women to return to work. In 1978 the Pregnancy Discrimination Act was passed, making it illegal for employers to discriminate in hiring, firing, promotions, or pay levels based on pregnancy or childbirth. And in 1993 the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) was passed, requiring employers to give eligible employees up to twelve weeks of unpaid leave for childbearing or family care each year.

Societal changes also contributed to the greater number of women with young children participating in the labor force. In Maternity Leave and Employment Patterns, 1961–1995 (U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Reports, P70-79, November 2001), Kirsten Smith and her colleagues reviewed the changing demographic profile of first-time mothers between the 1960s and 1990s to explain in part the increase. The report emphasized that during that period the incidence of first-time motherhood at age thirty or older tripled, and that first-time mothers in the 1990s tended to be better educated than their 1960 counterparts. These older, well-educated mothers often viewed their jobs as long-term careers and believed time lost could adversely affect their ability to hold a position and earn promotions and could decrease contributions to retirement funds.

Furthermore, the increasing number of single mothers meant that more women must work to support their families. In 1970 3,410,000 women maintained single-parent households; by 2002 that number had almost tripled, to 9,969,000. Changes in government programs providing assistance to poor families also resulted in increasing numbers of single mothers entering the workforce. In 1996 the federal government abolished Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) and replaced it with a new program, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF). TANF placed a two-year time limit on benefits, requiring poor parents to work even if they had to place young children in day care. In 2003 two-thirds (65.4%) of single mothers with children under three years old were in the labor force, with a 16.7% unemployment rate. (See Table 3.2.)

Married women have also entered the workforce in larger numbers. A decline in men's real wages plus a rising cost of living has led some two-parent families to decide to maintain two incomes in order to meet financial obligations and pay for their children's future college expenses. According to the U.S. Census Bureau's Current Population Survey, 2003 Annual Social and Economic Supplement, the median income in 2002 for married couples with the wife in the paid labor force was $87,496, significantly higher than the $58,379 median income for married-couple families in which the wife was not in the paid labor force. Table 3.1 shows that 68.6% of married women with children under eighteen were in the labor force in 2003, and Table 3.2 shows that 56.8% of married women with children under age three were in the labor force in that year. Many families have come to depend upon women's economic contributions to the household.

TABLE 3.1

WHO CARES FOR AMERICA'S CHILDREN?

School-Age Children

The Forum on Child and Family Statistics reported in America's Children: Key National Indicators of Well-Being, 2003 that about half of children in kindergarten through eighth grade were cared for by someone other than their parents in 2001. Younger children were more likely to receive home-based care or center-based care for before or after-school hours; children in grades four and up were less likely to receive these types of care and more likely to care for themselves. (See Figure 3.1.) Only 2.8% of children in kindergarten through third grade cared for

themselves regularly, while 25% of older children did. (See Table 3.3.)

self-care—"latchkey kids." The phrase "latchkey kids" is used to describe children left alone or unsupervised either during the day or before or after school. These are children five to fourteen years of age whose parents report "child cares for self" as either the primary or secondary child care arrangement. In 1999 6.4 million grade-school-age children cared for themselves on a regular basis without adult supervision. (See Table 3.4.) Most of these children are twelve or older, but 443,000 children eight years of age and younger regularly took care of themselves. And the number of children in self-care may be rising; in 2002 the Annie E. Casey Foundation estimated in Kids Count Data Book: State Profiles of Child Wellbeing that eight million children between ages five and fourteen spend some time alone at home each week.

twenty-first-century community learning centers. More than half of all families use after-school programs, and in many families parents rely on after-school care to provide a safe and nurturing place for their children while they are working. In response to concerns about the availability of quality after-school programs, the U.S. Department of Education initiated Twenty-First-Century Community Learning Centers (CCLC), authorized under Title X, Part I, of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and reauthorized under Title IV, Part B, of the No Child Left Behind Act. This initiative gives grants to low-performance middle and elementary schools in rural and urban areas to provide after-school opportunities for their students, both educational and

TABLE 3.2

recreational. The budget for the CCLC program was raised from $1 million in 1997 to $40 million in 1998, $453 million in 2000, and $846 million in 2001. In fiscal year 2004 Congress appropriated $999 million in funding for CCLC. According to the U.S. Department of Education's Web site, by 2003 CCLC supported after-school programs in about 6,800 rural and inner-city public schools in 1,420 communities.

However, Duncan Chaplin and Michael J. Puma, in "What 'Extras' Do We Get with Extracurriculars? Technical Research Consideration" (Urban Institute, September 30, 2003), offered a cautionary note about claims that these programs may give disadvantaged students an academic boost. The researchers found that extracurricular activities included in after-school programs that do not specifically target academic outcomes (for example, arts, music, drama, and language classes) had no affect on academic achievement. The authors suggested more rigorous evaluation of after-school programs that target disadvantaged youth be conducted before further money is spent on these programs, as that money might be spent on potentially more effective educational programs for disadvantaged youth.

Children Younger Than Five (Preschoolers)

In 2002 mothers with children under twelve months old were much less likely to be employed full-time than were mothers with children older than twelve months. Roughly a third of mothers with an infant (34%) were employed full-time, compared to more than half of mothers with older children (51%). (See Figure 3.2.) Almost

FIGURE 3.1

half the mothers with an infant were not in the labor force at all (45%), while only a little more than a quarter of mothers with older children (28%) were not in the labor force. Unemployment and part-time employment were relatively equal in the two groups of mothers.

In 2001 52% of children under age two and 74% of children ages three to six were in nonparental care at least some of the time. (See Table 3.5.) These preschoolers were more likely to be cared for in a center-based program (33%) than any other child-care arrangement. Relatives provided care for 23% of preschoolers and nonrelatives for 16% of preschoolers in 2001.

But care arrangements for preschoolers varied greatly according to the age of the child. As their children grow from infancy to school age, working mothers often change child-care arrangements to meet the needs of their children, their families, and their employers. Making child-care arrangements for infants and toddlers is often more difficult than for older children, because fewer organized child-care facilities admit infants and very young children, primarily due to the cost involved in hiring a sufficient number of workers and adapting facilities to care adequately for babies. In addition, many parents prefer, if possible, to keep their infants in a home environment as long as possible. In 2001 only 17% of children under age two were in center-based programs, compared with 56% of older preschoolers. (See Table 3.5.)

FACTORS THAT AFFECT CHILD CARE

Preschool Child Care

racial and ethnic differences. In 2001 African-American and Hispanic mothers of preschoolers relied more heavily on relatives to provide child care than did white mothers. Of those children in nonparental care, 34% of African-American preschoolers and 23% of Hispanic preschoolers were cared for by relatives, compared with 20% of white preschoolers. (See Table 3.5.) Both white (54%) and African-American preschoolers (55%) were more likely to be cared for by nonrelatives or in center-based programs than were Hispanic preschoolers (32%).

poverty makes a difference. In 2002 72.8% of preschoolers with employed mothers were regularly in nonparental care, but the type of care varied according to the income levels of those families. Jeffrey Capizzano and Gina Adams found in "Snapshots of America's Families III: Children in Low-Income Families Are Less Likely to Be in Center-Based Child Care" (Urban Institute, No. 16, November 2003) that preschoolers from lower-income families (families with an income less than 200% of the poverty line) were less likely to be in center-based care (24.9%) than children from higher-income families (31.2%). (See Table 3.6.) The authors suggest the lower percentage of lower-income children in center care reflects the lower cost of home-based care. At the same

TABLE 3.3

time, they argue that there is evidence that quality, center-based care plays a big role in helping preschoolers make a successful transition to school, and that low-income children are in large part missing this opportunity. The Children's Defense Fund also stressed the importance of providing low-income families with child care assistance to help their children succeed ("Good Child Care Assistance Policies Help Low-Income Working Families Afford Quality Care and Help Children Succeed," in Key Facts: Essential Information about Child Care, Early Education and School-Age Care, Children's Defense Fund, 2003).

regional differences. Using data from the 1997 National Survey of America's Families (NSAF), the Urban Institute calculated the number of hours that preschool children spend in institutional care by state (The Hours That Children under Five Spend in Child Care: Variation across States, Jeffery Capizzano and Gina Adams, http://newfederalism.urban.org/html/series_b/b8/b8.html [accessed July 9, 2004]). Nationwide, 41% of preschool children with employed mothers were in institutional care for thirty-five or more hours per week and another 25% were in care fifteen to thirty-four hours per week. The percentages vary widely by state. Alabama and Mississippi had the highest percentages of children in full-time care (59% and 56%, respectively). Texas also ranked high, at 46%. On the other hand, California, Massachusetts, and Washington had the lowest percentages of children in full-time care, with fewer than one in three children in care for thirty-five hours or more per week (29%, 29%, and 33%, respectively). California and Washington had the highest proportions of children who spent no time in child care (30% and 26%, respectively).

TABLE 3.4

FORMAL CHILD CARE FACILITIES

While no comprehensive data exist on the types or quality of child-care facilities in the United States, the Children's Foundation, a Washington, D.C.-based private national educational nonprofit organization, estimated that in 2004 there were 117,284 regulated child-care centers in the fifty states, District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and Virgin Islands, a 26% percent increase since 1991. These facilities, which most often provide a school-like environment, serve five to six million children. Many more unlicensed child care facilities exist, but because they are not regulated, no reliable statistics are collected.

In 2001 almost two out of three preschool children spent time in nonparental care each week. (See Table 3.5.) Their care providers are major influences in their lives. Many

FIGURE 3.2

working parents discover that quality and affordable care is very difficult to find. In some communities child care is hard to find at any cost. Shortages of child care for infants, sick children, children with special needs, and for school children before and after school pose problems for many parents.

Child Care during Nonstandard Hours

Many parents choose to have one parent work non-standard hours to allow both parents to provide child care at different times of the day. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics ("Workers on Flexible and Shift Schedules in 2001," Press Release, April 18, 2002, http://www.bls.gov/news.release/flex.nr0.htm [accessed July 10, 2004]), in 2001 twenty-nine million workers, or 28.8%, worked flexible hours and were able to vary their work hours to fit their schedules. That number was nearly twice as many workers as ten years earlier. Flexible schedules were most common among professionals, and were more common among white workers (30.0%) than African-American (21.2%) or Hispanic workers (19.8%).

On the other hand, the percentage of those who worked an evening or overnight shift had fallen from 18% in 1991 to 14.5% in 2001. When asked why they worked a non-daytime schedule, 8.9% of shift or flexible schedule workers answered they did so for better family or child-care arrangements. (See Table 3.7.)

Regulations and Quality of Care

In 1988 Congress passed the Family Support Act (FSA) (PL 100-485), which included several provisions affecting Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) and the regulation of child-care services. The legislation specified that by 1990 all states had to establish child-care programs for AFDC recipients, including the guarantee of child care for families participating in the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training programs (JOBS). The FSA also made grants available to states to improve their child-care licensing and registration requirements.

Federal assistance to low-income families to pay for child care eroded in the late twentieth century, however, at the same time that the government imposed requirements that more low-income parents work. The 1996 welfare reform law, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PL 104-193), eliminated the guarantee that families on welfare would receive subsidized child care and replaced it with the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) to states. While the legislation gave states wide discretion in the use of these funds, it also imposed penalties if states failed to meet criteria for getting low-income parents into the workforce.

This legislation pushed the issue of regulation of child-care facilities to the forefront. In 1989 the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) initiated the Study of Early Child Care (SECC). This comprehensive ongoing longitudinal study was designed to answer many questions about the relationship between child-care experiences and children's developmental outcomes. The 1999 phase of the study examined whether the amount of time children spent in child care affected their interactions with their mothers. Results showed that the number of hours infants and toddlers spent in child care was modestly linked to the sensitivity of the mother to her child, as well as to the engagement of the child with the mother in play activities. Children in consistent quality day care showed less problem behavior, while those who switched day-care

TABLE 3.5

arrangements showed more problem behaviors. Children in quality care centers had higher cognitive and language development than those in lower-quality centers.

As more children receive nonparental care at younger ages, research into the importance of quality care has shown that poor care at young ages can lead to poor adjustment and performance in school (Sheri Azer et al., National Center for Early Development and Learning, "Regulation of Child Care," Briefs, vol. 2, no. 1, Winter 2002). But regulation of child-care facilities varies considerably from state to state. (See Table 3.8.) No system for monitoring unlicensed care exists, and in thirty-four states child-care homes with fewer than three children are not regulated at all. In 2001 only 14% of child-care centers and 13% of family child-care homes nationwide were rated as good quality, and a large proportion were rated as being of poor quality and probably harmful to children. While there had been some improvements in the quality of child care available since 1986, especially in child/staff ratios and training requirements, the authors made several recommendations, including:

• All child-care facilities should be licensed by states, and states should employ enough staff to adequately enforce licensing standards in child-care facilities.
• Staff of child-care facilities should have training specific to the age group they supervise.
• Directors of child-care facilities should have management and child development training.
• All child-care workers should be required to complete annual training.

THE COST OF CHILD CARE

In 2000 the Children's Defense Fund (CDF) published The High Cost of Child Care Puts Quality Care out of Reach for Many Families (Washington, DC), which surveyed child-care costs across the country. The survey showed that child care could easily cost a family $4,000 to $6,000 per year, and in some areas more than $10,000 per year. Child-care costs for a four-year-old ranged from $3,380 annually in Mississippi to a high of $8,121 in Massachusetts.

TABLE 3.6

TABLE 3.7

For a twelve-month-old child, annual costs jumped to $3,692 in Mississippi and $12,978 in Massachusetts. And child care in urban care centers was so expensive that it could cost more than public college tuition.

Low-Income Families

At the beginning of the twenty-first century, a low-income family with two parents working full time, fifty-two weeks a year, at the federal minimum wage earned $21,424 per year before taxes. The Children's Defense Fund estimated that such families could afford to pay no more than 10% of their income ($2,142 annually) on child care. The Census Bureau estimated that in 1999 the average family with a preschool child spent 8.6% of its income on child-care (Who's Minding the Kids? Child Care Arrangements: Spring 1999, January 23, 2003). Even if able to save 10% of their income for child care, many low-income families were forced to enroll their children in low-cost, and often poor-quality, child-care centers. As a result, these children spent much of their day in unstimulating and possibly unsafe environments.

GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT

Recognizing that child-care assistance helps contribute to a productive workforce, federal and state governments subsidize some child care for those on welfare and for low-income working families. However, the Children's Defense Fund noted in State Developments in Child Care, Early Education, and School-Age Care, 2001 that only one in seven children eligible for child-care assistance received it.

Block Grants

In 1990 the 101st Congress passed what many consider the nation's first comprehensive child-care legislation—The Child Care and Development Block Grant, or CCDBG (PL 101-508). Federal funding for the CCDBG for fiscal year 2004 was almost $2.1 billion. Money is allocated to

TABLE 3.8

states based on a state's per capita income, the number of children under age five, and the number of children receiving free or reduced-price lunches through the National School Lunch Program. Highlights of the law include:

• States must use 70% of grant funds to assist families in paying for care.
• At least 4% of funds must be used to improve availability and quality of child care.

• Working parents qualify for assistance if they have children under the age of thirteen and family income is no more than 85% of the state's median income.

Head Start

Perhaps the best-known and most successful government-funded child-care program is Head Start, a federal program begun in 1965 under the Administration for Children and Families of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The free program provides early education, health care, social services, and free meals to preschool children in families whose incomes are below the poverty line or who receive public assistance. Head Start operates in every state, and in fiscal year 2002 it served 912,345 children. The Children's Defense Fund reported in Key Facts: Essential Information about Child Care, Early Education and School-Age Care (2003) that the program has been shown to provide many benefits, including a greater likelihood that children would do well in school and graduate from high school.

Tax Credits

The Federal Dependent Care Tax Credit helps families by allowing them to claim an income tax credit for part of their child-care expenses for children under the age of thirteen that enabled parents to work outside the home. The credit is on a sliding scale, ranging from 20% to 35% of qualified expenses; therefore, lower-income families receive slightly larger credits. In 2003 parents could claim up to $3,000 in qualified expenses for one child or $6,000 for two or more children.

Family Leave

In 1993 Congress enacted the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA; PL 103-3), requiring employers with fifty or more employees to give unpaid time off—twelve weeks in any twelve-month period—to employees to care for newborn or newly adopted children, sick family members, or for personal illness. The employee must be returned to the same position—or one equivalent in pay, benefits, and other terms of employment—and must receive uninterrupted health benefits. The U.S. Department of Labor reported that prior to this legislation fewer than 25% of all workers received family leave benefits and most of those who did worked in establishments of more than one hundred employees.

Jane Waldfogel reported in "Family and Medical Leave: Evidence from the 2000 Surveys" (Monthly Labor Review, September 2001) that in 2000 17.9% percent of FMLA leave takers took their leave to care for a newborn, newly adopted, or newly placed foster child; 9.8% used it to care for a sick child; and 7.8% used it as maternity or disability time. Of all employees covered by the FMLA with children eighteen months or younger, 45.1% of men and 75.8% of women had taken an FMLA leave in the previous eighteen months.

EMPLOYER INVOLVEMENT

Employers are increasingly providing family leave beyond the requirements of the FMLA as well as providing

FIGURE 3.3

assistance to employees in finding child care. Employers have found that providing such benefits can pay off in increased productivity, worker recruitment and retention, and community goodwill. According to Pilot Survey on the Incidence of Child Care Resource and Referral Services in June 2000 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, November 2000), 13.8% of workers in private industry, as well as in state and local government, had access to child-care resource and referral services. Most often these services were provided to employees by outside resources rather than directly by their employers. People working for large establishments (employing five thousand or more workers) fare best in access to child-care resources. (See Figure 3.3.)