Multiple and Interacting Sources of Child Care Subsidy Stability: Complexities of Administrative and Family-Level Factors

Background and Purpose: Child care is both a vital work support and a setting that influences child development, but its benefits are tied to its quality and continuity. Recently, a significant body of literature has addressed the issue of continuity of care for child care subsidy recipients. Despite the broad reach of the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) subsidy program in improving child care affordability and parental employment, CCDF is challenged by high levels of instability in subsidy receipt, resulting in instability of child care arrangements. Instability in subsidy receipt can result from a number of factors, including a complex maze of eligibility and recertification requirements, local variation in the implementation of practices and family- level changes in income, employment, family composition, housing, or transportation.

While research has grown exponentially in understanding which policies, administrative and family factors can potentially impact subsidy stability, there is limited evidence on which factors have the most influence on subsidy stability and exits. The challenge to answering this question is that there are limited data sets that provide information about CCDF policy requirements (e.g. how much income can change before reporting), local administrative practices (e.g. locations, hours, staff) and family-level changes linked to subsidy administrative records. Using administrative data alone, it is difficult to unpack how these factors, and the interaction of family-level changes and local administrative practices work together to influence the stability of subsidy receipt. This research gap is a major limitation for policymakers seeking levers within the subsidy system to improve the stability of subsidy receipt.

Methods: To fill this gap, this mixed methods study focuses on reassessment and local variation in practices and the impact on subsidy stability in Massachusetts. The study includes administrative data analysis and a qualitative implementation study, the focus of this presentation. Data were collected through a policy document review and in-depth interviews representing multiple vantage points of subsidy policy, service delivery and receipt. Interviews were conducted with state staff (17), all CCR&R representatives (19), randomly sampled child care provider administrators (80) and 40 randomly selected families matched to subsidy records.

Results: This presentation will provide 1) a typology of administrative practices in subsidy reassessment and variation in practices and 2) findings from semi-structured interviews with families that have gone through voucher reassessment. Interviews with CCR&Rs and contracted child care providers revealed that there is significant local variation in reassessment practices, some of which may be considered “family friendly.” However, family interviews suggest that parents have differing views on which practices they find effective. The administrative burden, family factors and the interactions of these factors can result in a family’s exit from the voucher system. Additionally, parents have varied preferences in terms of location and mode of reassessment.

Conclusions and Implications: Parents’ differing views on which practices are effective and less burdensome make it challenging for CCR&Rs and providers to offer families a range of voucher reassessment options. Recommendations about how states can reduce administrative barriers in order to increase subsidy stability will be discussed.