Understanding Child Care Instability Among Low-Income Subsidized Parents

Background and Purpose

Child care instability may cause adverse child developmental outcomes by disrupting children’s relationships with caregivers and creating stress for children and parents. However, whether child care changes adversely impact families likely depends on the reasons for the change and whether it was planned and desired (Sandstrom & Huerta, 2013).  A move from a lower- to higher-quality arrangement may be temporarily disruptive but ultimately beneficial, whereas changes to undesirable arrangements may be problematic. Although there is previous research on provider changes, this study is unique in its focus on low-income child care subsidy recipients, its consideration of reasons for change and families’ preparedness for change, and its mixed-methods design. We address two research questions:  (1) What factors contribute to provider exits? (2) How do parents assess their preparedness for a provider change in terms of whether it is (un)planned and (un)desired?  Understanding why provider exits occur and whether they are desired and planned furthers knowledge about how and under what conditions policies can best support parental child care decisions. 

Methods

To address Question 1, we use telephone survey data on a random sample of 612 subsidy clients who participated in the Child Care Research Partnership Study (CCRP). The survey includes a rich set of covariates and historical child care data. With Cox proportional hazards models, we estimate the risk of leaving a subsidized provider within 18 months following subsidy entry. We observe whether demographic, employment, provider, and subsidy experiences heighten the risk of provider exit.

To address Question 2, we examine qualitative interviews with a purposive sample of CCRP survey respondents (N = 85) who represent a demographically diverse group with distinct subsidy and provider experiences. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded (+90% reliability) using NVivo qualitative software.

Results

Multivariate survey results show that short subsidy spells and job loss put families at heightened risk for leaving their subsidized provider. Parents who felt their child was safe and secure in care, whose provider operated during non-standard hours, and who used a center (vs. family childcare) had a lower risk of leaving their provider. 

Qualitative interviews revealed that provider exits were often precipitated by provider problems, and by job loss, subsidy loss, and residential moves. Changes in other domains—like a sudden move or job change—could force an unplanned, undesired provider change. Problems with providers contributed to sudden, but sometimes desired, exits. Provider changes due to job or subsidy loss were not typically desired and resulted in moves to lower cost providers or families went without care. Parents leaving centers, often due to subsidy loss, lamented the lost benefit to children’s school readiness.

Conclusions and Implications

Findings suggest that subsidy program changes mandated by the 2014 reauthorization of the Child Care and Development Block Grant—including a minimum 12-month eligibility period and greater access to high-quality care—should help prevent undesirable and sudden child care changes driven by job or subsidy loss, and should reduce the need for parents to change providers due to quality concerns.