Patterns of child care subsidy use and stability of subsidized care arrangements: Evidence from Illinois and New York

What Explains Short Spells on Child-Care Subsidies?

“…In their five-state comparison study, Meyers and colleagues (2002) find that subsidy recipients in states that require applicants to recertify their program eligibility after a shorter period of time had, on average, shorter subsidy spells than recipients in states that did not require as frequent recertification. More recently, using administrative data from Illinois and New York, we find that the average duration of client subsidy spells tended to cluster around the length of the eligibility period in each of the four regions under study (Pilarz et al 2016). Specifically, the median survival time on the program is 6 months in southwestern Illinois; 9 months in Cook County, Illinois; 12 months in Nassau County, New York; and 10 months in Westchester County, New York.…”

“…Swenson (2014) analyzes child-care subsidy data available from 35 states and finds that median spell duration ranges from 4 to 8 months for the majority of states. Other research on subsidy dynamics shows many families who exit return to the program shortly after exiting, and subsequent spells are again short (Meyers et al 2002;Ha and Meyer 2010;Ros, Claessens, and Henly 2012;Pilarz et al 2016).…”

“…Moreover, highquality early childhood programs contribute to positive child development (e.g., Heckman 2006;Duncan and Magnuson 2013); however, instability in program use can thwart its ability to do so. A growing awareness of these patterns of subsidy use motivates recent research on the factors that contribute to subsidy instability (e.g., Grobe et al 2016;Pilarz et al 2016. ) In this article, we add to these studies by investigating whether and how parents' experiences with the child-care subsidy program, their employment experiences, and their child-care arrangements contribute to subsidy exits.…”

“…Prior research suggests that the type of subsidized care (e.g., center, licensed family child-care home, informal care) may be related to spell lengths and subsidy exits; however, the findings are inconsistent across studies, and they suggest that this relationship may vary across state and local contexts and may depend on the provider-family relationship (Meyers et al 2002;Grobe et al 2008;Ha and Meyer 2010;Pilarz et al 2016).…”

“…Child-care subsidies are also associated with increased enrollment in center care (Weinraub et al 2005;Burstein and Layzer 2007;Ryan et al 2011;Ertas and Shields 2012), and, although findings are mixed, some studies link subsidies to the use of higher-quality arrangements (Johnson, Ryan, and Brooks-Gunn 2012;Krafft, Davis, and Tout 2017). Yet, studies also find that subsidy spells are generally brief and participants cycle off and on the program, often returning with a new provider (Meyers et al 2002;Ha and Meyer 2010;Ha, Magnuson, and Ybarra 2012;Weber, Grobe, and Davis 2014;Pilarz, Claessens, and Gelatt 2016).While some exits are precipitated by income gains suggestive of upward economic mobility, many families remain income eligible after leaving the program. Short spells and dynamic program use raise concerns about the effectiveness of the child-care subsidy program to support stable employment and children's healthy development and contribute to long-term economic stability for families with unstable use.…”