Table of Contents | Previous | Next |
CHILD CARE QUALITY: STRUCTURAL AND PROCEDURAL QUALITY
EARLY HEAD START EVALUATION AND TRACKING PRE-K
Measure: Selected “child care” items from the Parent Interview (Early Head Start sample)
Source
The birth-to-3 phase of the Early Head Start (EHS) evaluation (1996–2001) was funded by the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The contractor for the evaluation is Mathematica Policy Research (MPR) and the subcontractor is the Center for Children and Families at Columbia University, Teachers College. The Tracking Pre-K (TPK) follow-up phase (2001–2004) is also funded by the ACF, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. MPR is the contractor. In 1997, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development provided funds (through ACYF) to add a major study of the fathers of EHS children.
Population Assessed
The EHS and TPK follow-up was implemented in 17 EHS programs in all regions of the country. Programs offered center-based, home-based, and mixed-approach services. The families and children who participated in the evaluation were diverse. Many of the families were single-parent, were ethnically diverse (including Hispanic, African American, and White), did not speak English as their primary language, had relatively low educational attainment, and were receiving public assistance of some kind (e.g., Medicaid, WIC, food stamps, AFDC or TANF, and SSI benefits). A total of 3,001 families participated in the evaluation, with 1,513 in the treatment group and 1,488 in the control group. Table 1 contains specifics of the families and children participating in the EHS evaluation.
| Sample in All Sites | ||
|---|---|---|
| Characteristic | Sample Size | Percent of Families |
| Parent and Family Characteristics | ||
| Mother's Education | ||
| Less than grade 12 | 1,375 | 48 |
| Grade 12 or attained a GED | 822 | 29 |
| Greater than grade 12 | 682 | 24 |
| Missing | 122 | |
| Race and Ethnicity | ||
| White Non-Hispanic | 1,091 | 37 |
| Black Non-Hispanic | 1,014 | 35 |
| Hispanic | 693 | 24 |
| Missing | 68 | |
| Welfare Receipt | ||
| Received welfare | 842 | 35 |
| Did not receive welfare | 1,554 | 65 |
| Missing | 41 | |
| Primary Language | ||
| English | 2,265 | 79 |
| Other | 615 | 21 |
| Missing | 121 | |
| Living Arrangements | ||
| With spouse | 752 | 25 |
| With other adults | 1,157 | 39 |
| Alone | 1,080 | 36 |
| Missing | 12 | |
| Focus Child Characteristics | ||
| Age | ||
| Unborn | 761 | 25 |
| Less than 5 months | 1,063 | 35 |
| 5 months or older | 1,177 | 39 |
| Missing | 0 | |
| Gender | ||
| Male | 1,510 | 51 |
| Female | 1,448 | 49 |
| Missing | 43 | |
| Sample Size | 3,001 | |
Periodicity
The parent interview was administered when the children were 14-, 24-, and 36-months old.
Subscales/Components
The majority of questions about child care quality (structural and procedural) came from the child care section in the parent interview. The section on child care asks about how much time the parent and other people spend taking care of the child. Questions address the child’s child care arrangement of more than 10 hours per week, the number of arrangements for the child, and the age of the child when he/she began the care arrangement. Specific quality questions ask the parent the extent of his/her agreement with statements about the caregiver including whether the caregiver is a caring person, whether the caregiver has the knowledge/skills necessary to be a good caregiver, and whether the parent trusts the provider to give good, consistent care.
Procedures for Administration
The parent of the focus child completes the interview in a one-on-one setting where the interviewer asks questions and writes the respondent’s answers. In addition to the interview, the interviewer conducts a 30-minute child assessment and videotapes the parent and child playing together. The time needed for the sequence, including the interview, is 2.5 hours.
Psychometrics/Data Quality
Psychometrics and data-quality information is not readily available for the selected items. For the parent interview, primary sources of nonresponse were refusals to participate and inability to locate the families. “For the 24-month PI, 51 percent of the families who did not respond refused to participate, and 44 percent moved or could not be located (the remaining 5 percent included families for whom the interview window closed before the interview was completed). For the 36-month PI, 46 percent of the families who did not respond refused to participate, and 51 percent moved or could not be located (the remaining 3 percent included families for whom the interview window closed before the interview was completed)” (http://paper.xtria.com/opre/ehs/ehs_resrch/reports/impacts_vol2/impacts_vol2.pdf). Nonresponse was also because of the death of the child (12 children in the control group and 9 in the EHS group) and adoption (3 children were adopted after random assignment). Center-based sites were more successful in completing interviews with EHS families than with control group families.
To be included in the impact analyses, measures had to have adequate psychometric properties (e.g., adequate reliability and validity for children from low-income families and for many racial and ethnic groups). In general, measures were chosen that had an internal consistency reliability (coefficient alpha) or .70 or higher and that had consistent reliability across major race/ethnicity subgroups. Constructed variables also had to have sufficient data at the item level (e.g., not missing more than 25 percent of items), adequate distribution of scores (e.g., check mean, standard deviation, skewness, and kurtosis were checked to determine that variables had a normal distribution that was similar to those in other studies using the same measure).
Languages Available
The interview developers do not expressly state availability of the interview in languages other than English.
Items Included
The interviews can be requested by contacting the EHS and TPK Project Director (Dr. John Love, jlove@mathematica-mpr.com) or the ACF Project Officer (Dr. Rachel Cohen, rccohen@acf.hhs.gov).
Child Care Items
The next questions are about how much time you and other people spend taking care of (CHILD).
Is (CHILD) currently being cared for in any regular child care arrangement for two weeks or more while your work, go to school, or participate in some regular activity. By regular we mean arrangements for at least 10 hours per week that lasted two weeks or more. Think about child care arrangement like the ones listed on this card.
Yes (go to 3)
No
Is (CHILD) currently being cared for by anyone else on a regular basis?
Yes
No (go to next section)
Not counting yourself, how many different child care arrangements are you currently using for (CHILD)?
Please count each sitter or child care provider separately. Count only those that lasted two weeks or more and please county only those that you used at least 10 hours per week.
How much (does/did) your household pay for this (program/arrangement)? RECORD AMOUNT AND TIME PERIOD.
Household pays nothing
Child care provided in exchange for other service
Amount per hour, day, week, every two weeks, month, year, or don’t know
Next, I am going to read some statements parents have made about the people who take care of their children. For each one, please tell me if you strongly agree, mildly agree, mildly disagree, or strongly disagree with the statement about (NON-RELATIVE CURRENT PROVIDER).
Do you strongly agree, mildly agree, mildly disagree, or strongly disagree with the statement about (NON-RELATIVE CURRENT PROVIDER).
| Strongly agree | Mildly agree | Not sure | Mildly disagree | Strongly disagree | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| a. You feel that (NON-RELATIVE CURRENT PROVIDER) genuinely cares for (CHILD) | |||||
| b. (NON-RELATIVE CURRENT PROVIDER) is someone you can rely on | |||||
| c. You have a great deal of personal respect for (NON-RELATIVE CURRENT PROVIDER) | |||||
| d. Overall (NON-RELATIVE CURRENT PROVIDER) is a caring person | |||||
| e. (NON-RELATIVE CURRENT PROVIDER) has the knowledge and skills needed to be a good caregiver | |||||
| f. You and (NON-RELATIVE CURRENT PROVIDER) really seem to value your relationship with each other | |||||
| g. You know that (CHILD) really enjoys being with (NON-RELATIVE CURRENT PROVIDER) | |||||
| h. You always trust (NON-RELATIVE CURRENT PROVIDER) to give (CHILD) good, consistent care | |||||
| i. You really like (NON-RELATIVE CURRENT PROVIDER) as a person and enjoy being in (her/his) presence |
References and Source Documents
The interviews can be requested by contacting the EHS and TPK Project Director (Dr. John Love, jlove@mathematica-mpr.com) or the ACF Project Officer (Dr. Rachel Cohen, rccohen@acf.hhs.gov).
A number of reports are available on the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Web site: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/ehs/ehs_resrch/index.html
The reports include the following:
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2002, December). Pathways to quality and full implementation in Early Head Start Programs. Washington, DC: Author.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2002, June). Making a difference in the lives of infants and toddlers and their families: The impacts of Early Head Start. Executive summary. Washington, DC: Author.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2002, June). Making a difference in the lives of infants and toddlers and their families: The impacts of Early Head Start. Volume I: Final technical report. Washington, DC: Author.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2002, June). Making a difference in the lives of infants and toddlers and their families: The impacts of Early Head Start. Volume II: Final technical report appendixes. Washington, DC: Author.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2002, June). Making a difference in the lives of infants and toddlers and their families: The impacts of Early Head Start. Volume III: Local contributions to understanding programs and their impacts. Washington, DC: Author.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2001, June). Building their futures: How Early Head Start programs are enhancing the lives of infants and toddlers in low-income families. Volume I: Technical report. Washington, DC: Author.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2001, June). Building their futures: How Early Head Start Programs are enhancing the lives of infants and toddlers in low-income families. Volume II: Technical report, appendixes. Washington, DC: Author.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2001, June). Building their futures: How Early Head Start programs are enhancing the lives of infants and toddlers in low-income families. Summary report. Washington, DC: Author.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1999, December). Leading the way: Characteristics and early experience of selected Early Head Start programs. Volume I: Cross-site perspectives. Washington, DC: Author.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2000, December). Leading the way: Characteristics and early experience of selected Early Head Start programs. Volume II: Program profiles. Washington, DC: Author.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2000, December). Leading the way:
Characteristics and early experience of selected Early Head Start programs. Volume III: Program implementation. Washington, DC: Author.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2000, December). Leading the way: Characteristics and early experience of selected Early Head Start programs. Executive summary, Volumes I, II, and III. Washington, DC: Author.
For other papers, please refer to the Early Head Start Collection of Consortium-Written Research Articles and Reports at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/ehs/ehs_resrch/index.html
| Table of Contents | Previous | Next |