The Impact of Child Care Subsidies on Low-Income Single Parents: An Examination of Child Care Expenditures and Family Finances

Forry, Nicole

doi:10.1007/s10834-008-9135-6

Cited by 72 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There were four response options, including “a social service or welfare agency.” The child‐care provider and director questions used to construct our measure of subsidy receipt are listed in online supporting information Appendix S1. Following prior studies (Forry, ; Herbst, ), families who indicated that the child's primary nonparental care arrangement occurred in a center were coded as receiving a subsidy if (a) the parent reported receiving assistance paying for child care and reported that the assistance came from a social service or welfare agency, and the child did not attend Head Start or public pre‐k, according to provider report, or (b) the parent reported using center‐based care, that the care was free, and the care was not Head Start or public pre‐k, according to provider report. Parents who indicated that their child's primary nonparental care arrangement was home based were coded as receiving a subsidy if (a) the parent reported receiving assistance paying for care and reported that the assistance came from a social service or welfare agency, or (b) the parent reported that there was no charge for the care and the provider reported that he or she was licensed or part of a family child‐care network, provided care in the provider's home, and cared for four or more unrelated children.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Child‐Care Subsidies and School Readiness in Kindergarten

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The federal child care subsidy program represents one of the government’s largest investments in early care and education. Using data from the nationally representative Early Childhood Longitudinal Study – Birth Cohort (ECLS-B), this paper examines associations, among subsidy-eligible families, between child care subsidy receipt when children are 4 years old and a range of school readiness outcomes in kindergarten (sample n ≈ 1,400). Findings suggest that subsidy receipt in preschool is not directly linked to subsequent reading or social-emotional skills. However, subsidy receipt predicted lower math scores among children attending community-based centers. Supplementary analyses revealed that subsidies predicted greater use of center care, but this association did not appear to affect school readiness.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Child‐Care Subsidies and School Readiness in Kindergarten

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The program, whose explicit goal is to facilitate employment among current and former welfare recipients as well as low-income parents more broadly, is now the federal government’s largest child care program, serving nearly 2 million children per month (US DHHS, 2008). Although subsidies have been shown to reduce families’ cost of care (Forry, 2009; Gennetian, Crosby, Huston, & Lowe, 2004) and facilitate parental employment (Blau & Tekin, 2007), it is less clear whether receipt of a subsidy alters the characteristics of child care parents purchase. Of particular interest is whether parents use subsidies to purchase higher-quality care than they would otherwise, for quality of child care is positively associated with children’s cognitive and socioemotional development (National Institute for Child Health and Human Development–Early Child Care Research Network [NICHD ECCRN], 2002; NICHD ECCRN & Duncan, 2003; Vandell & Wolfe, 2000), particularly among low-income children (Currie, 2001; McCartney, Dearing, Taylor, & Bub, 2007).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of child care subsidy use on child care quality

Ryan

Johnson

Rigby

et al. 2011

Early Childhood Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2008, the federal government allotted $7 billion in child care subsidies to low-income families through the state-administered Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF), now the government's largest child care program (US DHHS, 2008). Although subsidies reduce costs for families and facilitate parental employment, it is unclear how they impact the quality of care families purchase. This study investigates the impact of government subsidization on parents' selection of child care quality using multivariate regression and propensity score matching approaches to account for differential selection into subsidy receipt and care arrangements. Data were drawn from the Child Care Supplement to the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study (CCS-FFCWS), conducted in 2002 and 2003 in 14 of the 20 FFCWS cities when focal children were 3 years old (N = 456). Our results indicate that families who used subsidies chose higher quality care than comparable mothers who did not use subsidies, but only because subsidy recipients were more likely to use center-based care. Subgroup analyses revealed that families using subsidies purchased higherquality home-based care but lower-quality center-based care than comparable non-recipients. Findings suggest that child care subsidies may serve as more than a work support for low-income families by enhancing the quality of nonmaternal care children experience but that this effect is largely attributable to recipients' using formal child care arrangements (versus kith and kin care) more often than non-recipients.

show abstract

“…Witte and Queralt (2004) found that when reimbursement rates for formal child care subsidy were substantially increased, families were more likely to choose formal licensed child care. Ryan, Johnson, Rigby, and Brooks-Gunn (in press) reported that families using subsidies chose higherquality care than eligible families who did not use subsidies, and Forry (2009) found that some parents on a wait list for subsidies chose lower-quality care because the cost of better care was prohibitive. Thus, it would appear that child care subsidies increase access to better quality care.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%