Legally-Exempt Child Care What Does it Mean in New York State?
A b o u t E a r l y C a r e & Lea r n i n g C o u n c i l
The Early Care & Learning Council is a statewide nonprofit organization that works to increase the quality, affordability, and capacity of the early care and learning field. Established in 1975, the council provides training and technical assistance, data management, and advocacy services. Services and programs of the Council are provided to, and in partnership with, the network of local Child Care Resource & Referral programs across New York State. About the Authors
Asil Özdogru, Rebekah Widrick, and Jessica Klos Shapiro work in the Communication, Research, and Development Department of the Early Care & Learning Council. Dr. Özdogru is the evaluation specialist of the Council with a doctorate in educational psychology from the State University of New York (SUNY) Albany. Ms. Widrick works as a research and evaluation associate and holds a Master’s in psychology from SUNY New Paltz. Ms. Klos Shapiro serves as a policy associate and obtained her Bachelor’s degree in political science and philosophy from Syracuse University. Acknowledgments
This report was prepared with financial support from the Rauch Foundation. We, the authors, thank Marsha Basloe for her supervision and leadership in this project. The project team consisted of the three authors, Ms. Basloe, and Mary Stalker, Director of Communications, Research, and Development at the Early Care & Learning Council. We appreciate the participation of the individuals in the state survey and the informant interviews. In addition, the Evaluation Advisory Committee of the council provided valuable guidance and consultation. Staff members of the council transcribed the interviews and reviewed the paper. The following individuals also reviewed many drafts of our paper. E a r l y C a r e & Lea r n i n g C o u n c i l E v a l u a t i o n A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t ee Me m b e r s
Dr. Cindy Esposito Lamy, Robin Hood Foundation Dr. Lisa McCabe, Cornell University Dr. Joan Newman, University at Albany Dr. Toni Porter, Bankstreet College of Education Dr. Sheila Smith, National Center for Children in Poverty Dr. Sam Stephens, Center for Assessment & Policy Development O t h e r Re v i e w e r s
Sharon Lynn Kagan, Columbia University Susan Antos, Empire Justice Center Jenn O’Conner, Schuyler Center for Analysis and Advocacy Suzanne Sennett Those who reviewed the paper did not necessarily provide any endorsement of its contents.
Legally-Exempt Child Care What Does it Mean in New York State?
Asil Ali Özdoğru, Rebekah M. Widrick, and Jessica Klos Shapiro
Early Care & Learning Council
230 Washington Avenue Extension Albany, NY 12203 ph: 518.690.4217 fx: 518.690.2887
earlycareandlearning.org
Early experiences lay the foundation for future outcomes in human life. The child care and early education that children experience play an important role in their development. Quality child care and education contributes to children’s physical, psychological, and social development (aap, 2005). Children who experience high quality early care and education demonstrate positive outcomes in their school and work life. Many of these outcomes last well into adulthood and help the society at large (reynolds et al., 2011). While it is widely accepted that high-quality care is important to future outcomes, a significant number of New York’s young children are receiving care in a setting known as legally-exempt child care which is subject to minimal regulation and oversight. There is little information about the quality of this form of child care and many questions about the impact on children. New York uses more of its federal child care funding on legallyexempt care in comparison to other states. In 2011, New York State had a capacity for 680 thousand children in its licensed and registered child care system. In the same year, 246 thousand children received subsidized child care. Over 95 thousand of the children in subsidized care received legally-exempt care.
In other words, 39% of all children receiving subsidized care in New York received legallyexempt care. It was 40% in 2010, twice the national average. This paper provides a look at the legallyexempt child care in New York by reviewing research on unlicensed child care, examining how other states support legally-exempt care, and identifying key issues for further research and discussion. The paper lays out the known and unknown conditions and outcomes of legally-exempt child care with the goal of drawing attention to legally-exempt care and initiating a discussion on the accessibility and affordability of quality child care for all citizens of New York. Policy recommendations are included for further discussion.
Legally-Exempt Child Care What does it mean in New York State?
Asil Ali Özdoğru, Rebekah M. Widrick, and Jessica Klos Shapiro
Background
In order to ensure basic quality in child care settings, states establish licensing and regulation standards for different types of child care arrangements. New York State has three types of child care: 1) Licensed child care centers and group family child care homes, 2) Registered family child care homes and school-age child care programs, and 3) Legally-exempt child care providers. Legallyexempt child care is not licensed or registered and receives a minimum amount of regulation. Quality of this type of care is largely unknown. Families who are eligible for child care subsidies in New York State (primarily parents on public assistance, low-income working parents and families involved with the child welfare system) are able to use the subsidy to pay for legally-exempt care. The federal government uses the term license-exempt child care for this type of care. Other terms are also used to refer to similar types of care such as kith and kin care and family, friend and neighbor care. New York State Social Services Law defines child day care and makes licensing and registration requirements available for providers to operate a child care program in New York. The law also provides clear definitions of different types of legally-exempt providers. There are three types of legally-exempt child care providers; family, in-home, and group. The first type of legally-exempt child care is legally-exempt family care, which takes place outside of the child’s home. No more than two unrelated children can be cared for at one time and the number of related and unrelated children together cannot exceed eight. If all children are related to the provider or care is provided for three hours or less per day, there is no limit to the number of children in care. This type of care can also be provided by a relative within the third degree of consanguinity of the parent or stepparent such as a grandparent, aunt, uncle, in-law, sibling or cousin. The second type of legally-exempt child care is legallyexempt in-home care, which takes place in the child’s own home. In this circumstance, there is no limit to the number of unrelated
4 Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
children in care as long as the children in care live in the same home. The child’s parent must also provide the provider with all employment benefits required by law, including minimum wage. The third type of legally-exempt child care in New York State is group care. Pre-K and nursery school programs for children three years of age or older, programs for school-aged children conducted during non-school hours, and programs for pre-school-aged children that provide services for three or less hours per day are all part of legally-exempt group care. Day care centers, family day care homes, and other child care programs located on Federal or tribal property are also in this group. Here we will focus on the first two types of legally-exempt care. Legally-exempt family care is the most common type of legally-exempt care. In 2011, close to 96 thousand children were cared for by over 51 thousand legally-exempt providers. As shown in the table below, the majority of New York children in the legally-exempt system are cared for by non-relatives outside of their homes. Since legally-exempt family care is partially funded through child care subsidies, it is important to understand who is eligible for a child care subsidy and how the provider payment rates are
established. While the eligibility requirements for a child care subsidy in New York vary by county, in general the children in the subsidized system are from families who are on public assistance and working families with an income below 200 percent of the poverty level.1 This means that the children in this form of care are primarily poor children. Providers are reimbursed based on the market rate, which is the ceiling reimbursement rate given to providers as payment for child care services. The reimbursement rate for legally-exempt child care services is determined by calculating 65% of the market rate for the registered family day care services. The enhanced rate for legally-exempt care is set at 70% of the registered family day care rate. The enhanced subsidy rate is the rate given to providers who choose to complete 10 or more hours of training a year. In light of the fact that quality child care makes significant contributions to children’s life-long developmental outcomes and there are many children and families utilizing legally-exempt care, the quality of legally-exempt care stands out as an important issue to investigate. Existing studies on legally-exempt child care and other similar type of care provides a closer look into the conditions and outcomes of legally-exempt child care.
Children Relative
Non-Relative
Total
Providers Relative
Non-Relative
Total
Family
22,284
25,903
48,187
12,862
17,450
30,312
In-Home
20,148
14,372
34,520
11,839
8,517
20,356
Group
N/A
N/A
13,180
N/A
N/A
435
Total
95,887
51,103
Table 1. Number of providers and children in the legally-exempt child care system in New York State in 2011 Source: New York State Office of Children and Family Services (OCFS, 2012)
1.
This percentage can range depending on different factors.
Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
5
Review of Existing Studies
Studies in New York
National studies
There are not many studies on New York’s legally-exempt child care. Findings from these studies in conjunction with other studies on similar types of care offer some insight on the conditions and outcomes of legally-exempt care. An audit by New York State Office of State Comptroller in 2002 and 2003 found that many legally-exempt providers failed to meet basic safety standards and had cases of potential fraud (NYS OSC, 2004). Twenty-six of the 28 providers (93%) could not meet one or more of the seven health and safety criteria that were inspected. In 13 of the 41 random visits (32%), inspectors could not confirm that care was being provided, which suggested fraudulent subsidy payments. The audit recommended an increased oversight of the providers and assurance of safe and accountable care arrangements. A study on subsidized legally-exempt child care in Albany County (CHSR, 2006) showed that most of the providers of this kind of care are related to the children, live close to children and parents, care for two or fewer children, provide full-time care, and provide care mostly for school-aged children. Focus groups and telephone interviews with parents and providers in the county showed that parents preferred this type of care because of providers’ trustworthiness and reliability as well as flexibility with the care schedules (CHSR, 2007a). A quality improvement project was implemented with a small group of legally-exempt providers and children (CHSR, 2007b). The Enhanced Play & Learn Project was found to lead to increased provider knowledge about child care and more opportunities for children and providers to play, learn, and socialize together. There are at least two initiatives that support quality in legally-exempt child care in New York State. The first initiative is the Informal Family Child Care Training Project governed by the New York City Early Childhood Professional Development Institute. The second is the Home-Based Child Care Microenterprise Network administered by the Women’s Housing and Economic Development Corporation. Both of these initiatives are in New York City and offer enrollment, training, curriculum development, and technical assistance services for legally-exempt providers (Porter et al., 2010).
Even though there are not many studies on legally-exempt care in New York, the literature is quite rich for research on other similar types of child care in other states, such as family, friend, and neighbor (FFN) care. The quality of FFN care provides useful information on the general conditions and outcomes of New York’s legally-exempt child care as both types of care are unlicensed and subject to minimal regulation. FFN care is also referred to as informal care, kith and kin care, relative care, legally unlicensed care, and license-exempt care. It can take place in the caregiver’s home or the child’s home and is provided by relatives, friends, or neighbors (Susman-Stillman & Banghart, 2008). Child care provided by family, friends, and neighbors is the most common type of non-parental child care arrangement. Nationally, between 33% and 53% of children under five receive FFN care (Susman-Stillman & Banghart, 2008). The percentage is even higher among infants and toddlers. Child care by FFN takes place in the continuum of child care options with varying degrees of structure, support, and regulation (Figure 1, opposite). FFN care is on the informal side of child care options with less structure and support and little or no regulation or licensing requirements similar to legally-exempt care. Quality assessments of FFN settings show different results based on the tools used. For example, studies with Family Day Care Rating Scales2 showed inadequate to minimum levels of quality (e.g., Li-Grining & Coley, 2006). On the other hand, studies using QUEST, a home-based rating scale3, found adequate physical environments and positive child-caregiver relationships (e.g., Tout & Zaslow, 2006). Like in any other child care settings and arrangement, FFN care has strengths and weaknesses. FFN care settings are more likely to have lower adult to child ratios than center-based programs. One caregiver to two children is a common configuration in FFN care arrangements. Lower adult to child ratios and small group sizes often allow for more positive child and caregiver relationships. Warm, supportive, and nurturing caregiving was found in many FFN studies (e.g., Tout & Zaslow, 2006). Family members, friends, and neighbors are individuals known and trusted by parents. Parents feel
6 Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
Family (Nuclear, Extended)
Grandparents
46%
26%
29%
0-3 year olds
0-3 year olds
0-3 year olds
FFN Caregiver
Paid FFN Caregiver
FCC Providers
Group FCC
Center Care
Family
School
Informal
Formal
Support
Regulation
Figure 1. Family, friend, and neighbor caregivers in the continuum of child care (Porter & Rice, 2000) FFN=FAMILY/FRiend/neighbor
FCC=Family Child Care
FFN providers are stable and flexible in their care arrangements. Since most of the FFN providers share similar backgrounds with children’s families, cultural continuity in caregiving is also listed among the strengths (Early Head Start National Resource Center, 2006). Motivations of FFN caregivers are also found to be mostly positive in nature such as helping parents and supporting children’s development. Although there is a mixed set of studies on the parental satisfaction of FFN caregivers, parents are reported to have positive communication and relationships with providers (e.g., Layzer & Goodson, 2006). FFN care is known to have issues around child care quality and lack of resources (Early Head Start National Resource Center, 2006). FFN providers tend to have lower levels of formal training and socioeconomic status than licensed providers. For example, in a study of over 300 child care settings in three states, FFN providers had lower levels of education than the employees of center-based programs (Fuller, Kagan, Loeb, & Chang, 2004). In some cases, the lack of formal education is balanced by
extensive informal experience, as reported by FFN caregivers such as grandparents. Some studies reported other areas of concern in FFN care, including structured learning opportunities, support for socioemotional development, and screen time (e.g., Layzer & Goodson, 2006). Child care settings with providers who had lower levels of education were found to have children spending more hours watching TV (Christakis & Garrison, 2009). In terms of children’s developmental outcomes in FFN, a small set of studies reported mixed results. Some studies found positive linguistic and socioemotional outcomes for children receiving FFN care in comparison to center-based care. However, center-based programs tended to have better child outcomes in cognitive skills and school readiness in comparison to FFN care. The overarching conclusion from these studies is that the quality of caregiving, rather than the setting of care, is a better predictor of children’s developmental outcomes (Votruba-Drzal, Coley, & Chase-Lansdale, 2004).
2) The Family Day Care Rating Scale (FDCRS) assesses the quality of center-based child care for children up to 30 months of age. FDCRS consists of 32 items in six categories: 1) Space and Furnishings for Care and Learning, 2) Basic Care, 3) Language and Reasoning, 4) Learning Activities, 5) Social Development, and 6) Adult Needs. 3) Quality of Early Childhood Care Settings: Caregiver Rating Scale (QUEST) measures quality in formal and informal care of children 0 to 5 years of age. QUEST consists of an environmental checklist and a caregiver rating scale.
Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
7
New York Compared to Other States
State survey In order to learn more about legally-exempt child care, a form of license-exempt care in New York, a custom online survey was developed by the Early Care & Learning Council to examine license-exempt child care in eight other states. The selected eight comparison states were California (CA), Illinois (IL), Michigan (MI), North Carolina (NC), Oklahoma (OK), Oregon (OR), Pennsylvania (PA), and Washington (WA). These states were selected to participate because in their totality, they represented a range of percentages of children in license-exempt subsidized care, with some having higher percentages (IL 46%, MI 63%, OR 55%) and others having lower percentages (CA 27%, NC 1%, OK %0, PA 28%, WA 20%) than New York’s 44%. Including states with this variation in the survey enables understanding of different funding, oversight, and support strategies that exist and therein help to situate New York more aptly.
Funding In New York State federal child care subsidy funds from the Child Care Development Block Grant are administered by the Local Departments of Social Services at the county level. Eligible parents may use subsidies to pay for licensed, registered or legally-exempt
child care.4 In 2010-2011, federal, state, and local funding sources were available to support legally-exempt child care in New York. A total of $953 million was provided to fund licensed, registered, and/or legally-exempt child care. Nearly 78% of these funds (approximately $743 million) came from the federal level through the CCDF, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), and the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Approximately 15% ($142 million) of total child care funds came from state funding and about 7% ($68 million) came from local funding. The survey respondents were asked to list all funding sources that supported license-exempt child care in 2010. Funding at the federal level was the most frequently reported source of child care funding used to support license-exempt child care (Table 2). Most states, including New York, reported receiving funding from the CCDF and TANF to support license-exempt care. Only one state, Oklahoma, reported that they did not make funding available for license-exempt child care. Washington reported utilizing all funding sources in Table 2 to support this type of care. Data shows that most states are utilizing funds from federal and state sources. New York, North Carolina, and Washington utilize federal and state sources and also utilize additional sources. New York, for example, utilizes local sources while Washington has a long history of private sector funding and receives support from parent fees and unions.
NY CA IL MI NC OK OR PA WA
4 4 Local Other 4 Federal
State
4 4 4
4 4
4 4
4
Table 2. 2010 funding sources for license-exempt child care by state
4) New York State has three types of regulated child care: 1) Licensed child care centers and group family child care homes, 2) Registered family child care homes and school-age child care programs, and 3) Enrolled legally-exempt child care providers.
8 Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
4 4
4 4
4 4 4 4
Inspecting provider homes In all areas of New York, except New York City,5 Child Care Resource & Referral agencies (CCR&Rs) are responsible for enrolling and monitoring legally-exempt providers. In New York, on-site inspections are conducted annually in 20% of legallyexempt family child care (out of child’s home) homes that do not participate in the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP). These visits are unannounced and are conducted by agencies that enroll legally-exempt providers. For those who participate in CACFP, inspections of the provider’s food programs are conducted by CACFP representatives three times a year and at least two visits are unannounced. Although there are statewide inspection standards for legally-exempt child care providers caring for children outside of their home, a statewide standard for legally-exempt child care taking place in the child’s home does not exist in New York. New York requires minimum standards to be met for the 20% of legally-exempt homes that are inspected. Providers must report all providers, volunteers, employees, and household members in the home where child care is taking place. They must also provide information (e.g., relationship to provider, drop off/ pick up time, age, etc.) on all children being cared for in the home (present and not present at time of visit). The inspector must complete a home safety checklist that includes information such as emergency escapes, evacuation drills, unsafe areas, water supplies, ventilation, meals/snacks, use of corporal punishment, use of alcohol/drugs, supervision, and the administration of medication. If a program is non-compliant, a corrective action plan is developed and a follow-up visit is scheduled.
Some counties have chosen to require additional monitoring visits for legally-exempt providers. Schenectady County, for example, requires a fraud investigator to conduct a home visit on each legally-exempt provider (temporarily or fully enrolled) at initial application and a minimum of one annual home visit by a fraud investigator. The visit is conducted in the provider’s home. In Tompkins County, a quality home visit is required at least once a year, after one month of care, and again during recertification (Child Care Council of Westchester, Inc., 2011). The visit is conducted in all child care settings, both in and out of the child’s home. Visits are funded by Tompkins County Local Department of Social Services. Requirements for inspections vary from state to state. None of the states in the sample including New York, reported having inspections for license-exempt in-home providers, and New York was the only state that reported having formal inspections for license-exempt family providers.6 Those inspection reports are not made public nor are parents and caregivers informed of the results, providing little transparency for the parents utilizing such care. New York does, however, provide assistance to move providers towards compliance if they are non-compliant during an inspection.
5) In New York City, the Women’s Housing and Economic Development (WHEDCO) registers legally-exempt providers. 6) However, data from 2010-2011 CCDF Plans compiled by the National Child Care Information and Technical Assistance Center (NCCIC, 2012) indicated that fire, building, and/or health inspections were not required for license-exempt family providers in New York in order to participate in the CCDF.
Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
9
Additional provider requirements7 There is variation in the requirements for license-exempt providers. Provider requirements in the enrollment process, for example, vary among all 58 social services districts in New York. Although the Office of Children and Family Services (OCFS) establishes minimum state requirements, additional standards are set by the county. During the enrollment process, providers must provide information on their age, previous enrollment history, type of care they wish to provide, and families/households they will provide care for. They must also provide the state with information on all children in care, such as name, date of birth, child care schedule, and total hours of care provided. Information is also collected on food stamps, meals/snacks, CACFP, and additional hours of training. State law also requires all legally-exempt providers to complete a basic health and safety checklist by attesting to safety requirements within their home. This list is nearly identical to the home safety checklist used when inspections are completed.
Lastly, providers must attest to: 1) history of a criminal record (this requirement is necessary for all employees and anyone 18 and older living in the home when care is outside of child’s home); 2) removal of a child; 3) termination of parental rights; 4) suspension, revocation, or denial of licensure or registration to operate a child care program; and 5) any reports of child abuse or maltreatment (this requirement is necessary for all employees and anyone 18 and older) (OCFS, 2011). Verification of attestations depends on the county, however, and there is no statewide standard. In 2012, plans on file with OFCS indicated that 10 counties required criminal conviction checks. While some counties do not require verification, others require state criminal background checks with the New York State Department of Corrections, local criminal background checks with the Office of New York Court Administration and/ or County Sheriff ’s Department, and/or local child welfare database checks. Cortland County, for example, requires monthly child welfare database checks for the legally-exempt provider and all household members over 18 years of age.
NY CA IL MI NC OK OR PA WA
Unions Other * CCR&Rs QRIs
4 4
4 4 4
4 4
4
4
4
4
Table 3. Support for license-exempt family and in-home providers by state Note. *California had a training and support program funded through the Child Care and Development Block Grant Quality Set-Aside but it was eliminated. California also reported providing training materials designed specifically for license-exempt providers.
7) This information was not gathered from the license-exempt survey, but it is important in understanding license-exempt care across states.
10 Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
In the sample of the eight states, only California, Oregon, and Pennsylvania require background checks for both licenseexempt family and in-home child care providers (NCCIC, 2012). Conversely, New York, Illinois, and Oklahoma do not institute this requirement for either modality as a statewide standard. Some states also require that license-exempt providers receive training in the form of orientation, pre-service, and/or ongoing training. California, New York, Oregon, and Pennsylvania require this training for both family and in-home providers participating in the CCDF but they do not require CPR/first aid staff training for either license-exempt family or in-home providers. North Carolina is the only state to require CPR/first aid staff training for its license-exempt in-home providers. In summary, many county, state, and funding agencies determine what requirements will be set and enforced. This provides for wide variation in license-exempt child care.
Support for providers Across the nation, states support license-exempt providers in different ways. Some states focus on investing resources in building and strengthening these systems while others focus more on their regulated systems. Eight states were asked to report whether or not they receive support for license-exempt child care providers in the form of CCR&Rs, Quality Rating and Improvement Systems (QRIS), unions, or “other” supports. Data shows that CCR&Rs are the most common source of support, followed by unions
(Table 3, opposite). New York implements both forms of support. Washington and North Carolina reported that they did not provide support in any of the forms listed below. Although not reported in the survey, a CCR&R in King County, Washington supports an initiative known as the Play and Learn Network which supports Family, Friend, and Neighbor (FFN) caregivers. Similar to New York, CCR&Rs and unions support licenseexempt care in Illinois. However, in contrast to New York, Illinois also supports license-exempt providers in their QRIS. All eight states were asked if they provided incentives for their license-exempt family and in-home child care system or passed laws that dictated funding and other priorities. Among the states surveyed, six, including New York, reported that they did not provide incentives or laws dictating this support. Michigan, Oregon, and Washington reported providing this support. Washington, for example, reported providing “state funding to the CCR&R Network for FFN work and through connecting Home Visiting outreach and services to FFN caregivers when meeting with the families of the children they serve.”
Benefits and Challenges
Based on the literature review, surveys of other states, and interviews with stakeholders8, it is clear that there are benefits to using legally-exempt care. Responses from key informants are presented below.
Flexibility and convenience. Cultural competence. Affordability. “I’d have to say that the advantage is when parents work hours that do not accommodate… you know if you work the night shift in a box factory or you work at a convenience store and your hours change every week...that’s often difficult to find a regulated provider that will accommodate your schedule.” “I think it tends to be more flexible and particularly for low-income working families that’s really, really critical.” “Well I know it benefits my daughter because she’s a wonderful mother and if she’s trying to work and go to school and study I mean she’s one of those people that is not going to be able to do it worrying about what’s wrong with the kids.” -legally-exempt provider
12 Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
While there are benefits to using legally-exempt care, there are also challenges. Responses from key informants are presented below.
Lack of oversight and monitoring. Wide disparities in quality. Lack of support for providers. “…folks don’t necessarily reach out for training that is available to them to improve the quality of their care…they may not have the peer supports that others for example in family child care associations might have…” “…I can’t afford to pay anyone to do it because I am a home owner. So balancing that and balancing my schedule to do doctor appointments…it’s hard for me to find work around the constant changes of my daughter’s schedule and her needs for me to care for the kids because I do need another income but other than that for me I’m happy.” -legally-exempt provider “I guess the biggest thing… we don’t qualify for a lot of the trainings. We have to pay for the full cost to do those trainings because it’s not required… at least from what I looked up I know there isn’t a lot of opportunities when you’re legally-exempt; more of the cost falls on our shoulders.” -legally-exempt provider
Remaining Questions
There are a significant number of children receiving legallyexempt care in New York and more of New York’s federal funding supports legally-exempt care than in most other states. Some studies on legally-exempt child care do not indicate the existence of a high quality care, while other studies on FFN care show a mixed set of findings in terms of quality. Even though these studies offer some insight on legally-exempt child care, quality of care among legally-exempt providers is mostly unmeasured and unknown. There is a need for more research on the process and outcomes of legally-exempt care. An area of focus might involve exploring the effectiveness of current health and safety oversight and funding allocation. Nearly ten years ago, an audit of legallyexempt providers was conducted by the New York Office of State Comptroller (2004). Since that time, CCR&Rs have taken charge of the enrollment process yet these agencies still face challenges which should be identified and addressed. Hence, an audit or research study should be implemented to re-examine the efficacy in light of recent fraud cases within the state and across the nation.
Other studies could be implemented to collect basic demographic information as well as outcome information on legally-exempt providers and children and parents utilizing this type of care. It would be beneficial to replicate and expand on the 2006 Albany County study in other New York State counties. Data to be collected might include parent’s education level, employment status, and income; provider’s age, ethnicity, education level, income, and relationship to child; and child’s age, ethnicity, and special needs. Another study could investigate the structural and procedural quality, quality improvement strategies, and developmental outcomes in legally-exempt settings. These will increase the understanding of the legally-exempt system as well as help to target where the most support is needed.
Other questions may include: Why is New York State’s usage of legally-exempt care twice the national average? What historical issues and/or system-design led to this structure and how do those issues affect future changes to legally-exempt care? According to the surveys conducted for this paper, New York State had the highest monthly ceiling reimbursement rates for license-exempt child care. What is the explanation behind this? Have any states instituted increased regulation, requirements and/or monitoring on legally-exempt care, and what has been the result?
Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
13
The Future of Legally-Exempt Child Care
Findings from the survey and the interviews have showcased the many complexities of license-exempt care around the country and those that are exclusive to legally-exempt care in New York State. Legally-exempt child care, as with all forms of child care, varies in quality. With an ultimate goal of increasing the quality of child care for all children in New York State, there are several areas of legally-exempt to focus on. Below are three policy areas recommended for exploration in New York State. In no way should these policy areas harm the children we serve, but increase the quality of care that all children receive. The policy areas are as follows:
1. Strengthen requirements for legally-exempt providers receiving public funding 2. Support for existing legally-exempt providers 3. Development of a stronger regulated system that is focused on quality Figure 2. (below) outlines the policy areas discussed above.
Figure 2. Policy areas and strategies for New York State’s legally-exempt system
Strengthen requirements for legally-exempt providers receiving public funding
Support for existing legally-exempt providers
Development of a stronger regulated system that is focused on quality
Enhance background check requirements
Early learning education and support
Support an infrastructure for quality in child care
Strengthened training
Incentivized care during non-traditional hours
Reallocate subsidies for children in legally exempt care
Expand on site visits by regulatory agencies
Explore alternative funding sources
Clarify information to parents about access to quality care
14 Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
Strengthen requirements for legally-exempt providers receiving public funding Public assistance programs often come with a very specific prescriptive of how funds can be used. Although the federal government dictates what can be bought with Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly known as food stamps) funds and Women, Infants and Children (WIC), it does not dictate the same minimum standards for a child care environments paid for with public funds. While legally-exempt providers must meet some requirements for background checks, training, and inspections in order to receive public funding, standardization of those requirements to ensure a more thorough background check and quality training may lead to better quality child care. The following is recommended:
A. Enhance background check requirements At this time, upon enrollment, legally-exempt providers must attest to: 1) history of a criminal record; 2) removal of a child; 3) termination of parental rights; 4) suspension, revocation, or denial of licensure or registration to operate a child care program; and 5) reports of child abuse or maltreatment (OCFS, 2011). All legallyexempt providers are required by the state to be checked against the Child Welfare Database for a history of removal of a child or termination of parental rights. There is no statewide standard that requires the remaining information that legally-exempt providers attest to be verified. For example, legally-exempt providers are not required to be checked against the Statewide Central Registry of Child Abuse and Maltreatment or have criminal background checks that include fingerprints. Providers in licensed child care settings are required to do both. Key individuals at the state and national level support an expansion of required background checks. When non-providers in New York State were interviewed for this paper, they were asked how to improve the quality in legally-exempt settings, some suggested an increase in the requirements for legally-exempt providers in the form of background checks that included fingerprints and child abuse checks. Furthermore, Child Care Aware of America, formally NACCRRA (2012), recommends that all paid child care providers who regularly care for unrelated children (as a business) have a comprehensive background check, including federal and state criminal record checks using fingerprints.
Recommendation:
Ensure that legally-exempt providers are held to the same standard as providers in licensed care, including comprehensive background checks.
Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
15
B. Strengthen training
C. Expand on-site visits by regulatory agencies
In their 2011 Child Care Development Fund Plan Testimony, the Empire Justice Center recommended that New York “provide more training, support and oversight of legally-exempt providers” (Antos, 2011). At this time, 10 hours of training must be completed annually by providers for them to receive an enhanced rate of pay for providing child care services. The Empire Justice Center recommended that the state require 10 hours of training within three months of enrollment, as a condition of enrollment. Key informants in the state interviewed for this paper also reported that provider training was important to increasing the quality of care in legally-exempt settings. OCFS requires nine training topic areas for child care providers employed in regulated child care. These nine training topic areas can also be used for legally-exempt child care providers.
At this time, annual on-site inspections are conducted in 20% of legally-exempt family child care (out of child’s home) homes that do not participate in CACFP. Inspections are not conducted for legally-exempt child care taking place in the child’s home, however some counties in New York State (Schenectady and Tompkins) have chosen to require additional monitoring visits for legally-exempt providers. Key informants in New York State interviewed for this paper have shown an interest in increased oversight as well. When asked how the quality of care can be improved in legally-exempt settings, increasing the frequency of inspections was suggested.
Recommendation:
Explore the implications associated with requiring all legally-exempt providers, not just those seeking to obtain the enhanced rate, to pursue at least 10 hours of training while granting the enhanced rate of reimbursement to those who engage in additional training.
Recommendation:
Explore implementing statewide standards that require monitoring visits to legally-exempt providers taking care of children in the child’s home and conduct inspections in more than 20% of legally-exempt providers taking care of children outside of the child’s home.
For legally-exempt providers who participate in CACFP, inspections of the provider’s food programs are conducted by CACFP representatives three times a year and at least two visits are unannounced. In an interview conducted for this paper, one non-provider in New York State suggested mandating participation in the food program as a means to increase the quality in legally-exempt child care. New York State CCR&Rs often encourage exempt caregivers to apply for the program as a way to provide more home visits and more opportunities to educate providers regarding health, safety, and child development. Some CCR&Rs take the initiative to invite exempt providers to their training workshops. However, cost can be prohibitive. The Child Care Council of Suffolk in New York State has successfully done such outreach in the past. Research shows that approximately one-third to onehalf of exempt providers participate in the program as a result of recruitment (Collins & Carlson, 1998). Although what CACFP monitors is not what a licensor or registrar would inspect, these visits may be the only observation and training opportunities that the legally-exempt provider receives (Shulman & Blank, 2007)
Recommendation:
Implement a demonstration project in legallyexempt homes that participate in CACFP in order to investigate whether promoting this program will increase quality.
Support for existing legally-exempt providers Providing support in the form of peer to peer education, financial assistance, professional development, program partnerships and resources to legally-exempt providers currently in the system may help to increase the quality of care for legally-exempt children.
A. Early learning education and support Key informants interviewed for this study share a desire for legally-exempt provider support. The providers interviewed reported a concern with the lack of financial support and resources. One provider highlighted her ineligibility for New York State’s Educational Incentive Program, a scholarship program to help providers pay for quality training and education needed to enhance the provision of quality care. Non-provider informants also suggested improving quality in legally-exempt child care by increasing training, professional development, workshops, support groups, and material support for providers. Although New York’s legally exempt providers receive CCR&R and union support, the implementation of additional supports should be explored. California reported implementing a training and support program funded through the Child Care and Development Block Grant Quality Set-Aside, a portion of the grant’s funding allocated for quality improvement. They also reported providing training materials designed specifically for license-exempt providers. A CCR&R in King County, Washington supports an initiative known as the Play and Learn Network which supports children and their informal caregivers, often relatives or friends.
Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
17
States have also linked FFN care with pre-kindergarten (Pre-K) education in order to share information with parents regarding the availability of Pre-K programs. A Chicago pilot program used vans to transport children between FFN care and Pre-K programs (Shulman & Blank, 2007). Some states, including New York, do not currently fund transportation for Pre-K. Early Head Start has examined ways to work with the FFN caregiver community through the Enhanced Home Visiting Pilot Project. Here, supports are offered to caregivers, including many older family members. Many recipients of the support described the information provided by Early Head Start as “new ways of doing things now� (Early Head Start National Resource Center, 2006). The home visiting program, Parents as Teachers, has also targeted the FFN community, recognizing that many providers would benefit from home visits in the same way as parents (Shulman & Blank, 2007).
Recommendation:
Offer and implement programs in New York State that ensure legally-exempt caregivers learn about child development and what they can do to support the healthy growth and learning of the children in their care.
B. Incentivize care during non-traditional hours As reported by members of the New York State child care community, quality child care slots in licensed and regulated centers remain unfilled, forcing the closure of centers and dismissal of trained staff. Responses to a widely distributed child care provider survey indicated that as of May 2011 in Westchester County, only 35% of respondents reported full enrollment and 65% indicated that they were below capacity (Child Care Council of Westchester, 2011). Under-enrollment was most pronounced for family child care providers at 85%, yet 95,000 children remain in legallyexempt care (OCFS, 2012). It can be very challenging to find child care during nontraditional hours, such as evenings, overnights or weekends. The child care system, however, could be incentivized to meet these needs. An enhanced rate of pay for legally-exempt providers providing care during non-traditional hours rather than during the day would build a needed supply and help support the existing system. Allocating funds to support this need would allow parents the flexibility to work the hours that best fit their family’s needs. As legally-exempt providers take advantage of this incentive, fewer would be available during the day time hours, allowing more children to be engaged in subsidized care during their waking active hours, moving into the regulated system. Additional factors such as location, transportation and cultural values will always factor into access to child care, but the increasing the supply of care during non-traditional hours builds a system that can accommodate more children and families with quality child care.
Recommendation:
Incentivize legally-exempt providers to provide care during non-traditional hours.
18 Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
C. Explore alternative funding sources Funds to support the child care system continue to be stretched thin. As child care funding is carefully allocated to support families who need assistance as well as quality improvement activities, every dollar must be accounted for. While legally-exempt care is the preferred choice for some families, whether or not its support should come from the Child Care Development Block Grant is a consideration. Other funding streams must be explored. New York State currently receives Supporting Healthy Families and Adolescent Development funding (formerly the Promoting Safe and Stable Families) from the federal government. This is a significant source of federal funding to help states keep children safe from maltreatment, allow children to remain safely with their families, and ensure safe and timely permanency for children in foster care. Discretionary competitive grants from this funding, which require a match, are awarded to regional partners. Past award recipients have used funds to provide support services for parents and families such as funding child care (Casey Family Programs, 2011).
New York State, a network of Family Resource Centers is funded through the Children and Family Trust Fund. These centers assist families in their caregiving roles, strengthen informal support among families, and offer needed resources either directly or through community referrals (NYS Family Resource Network, 2008). Informal caregiving, and its circumstances, may be more directly matched with the mission of family resource centers than with the child care system. Administrators and community officials in some states have worried about their liability due to the amount of public funding spent on this type of care (Galinsky, Howes, & Kontos, 1994). The issue continues to be a topic of debate as child care funds are stretched.
Recommendation:
Explore funding sources for legally-exempt child care that supports its familial nature and does not draw on the already limited Child Care and Development Block Grant funds.
Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
19
Development of a stronger regulated system that is focused on quality Following an interview conducted on this topic, one non-provider in New York State stated that legally-exempt care in general has “mediocre to not very good quality� primarily due to the lack of licensing and registration requirements. Another key informant recommended that all non-relative legally-exempt providers become registered family child care providers. Whether or not encouraging legally-exempt providers to enter the registered and licensed system could set the foundation for an increase in quality for all children. This area should be explored further.
A. Support an infrastructure for quality in child care Two of the eight states surveyed in this study support licenseexempt child care through their quality rating and improvement system; six do not. New York State continues to develop a quality rating and improvement system, QUALITYstarsNY, which will evaluate and improve registered and licensed care. The system is designed to acknowledge programs that demonstrate quality above and beyond meeting New York State’s strong regulatory standards and develop a quality improvement plan for all participating programs. The comprehensive initiative will ensure that the 1.5 million New Yorkers under age six have the chance to experience high-quality early care and learning (QUALITYstarsNY, 2012). Legally-exempt care is not included in QUALITYstarsNY. As incentives, training and technical assistance available to regulated providers increase the quality of programs, the gap
20 Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
between programs that choose to participate and attain a high star rating and those programs with a low rating or none at all with become more and more evident. Implementing QUALITYstarsNY statewide may serve as an incentive for legally-exempt providers to become regulated in order to utilize the supports of the program. Furthermore, some states assist license-exempt providers to transition into licensed and registered system. In the Pennsylvania BUILD Initiative, caregivers receive information on how to become a registered family child care provider at meetings hosted by the state certification staff and Child Care Information Systems (Pennsylvania BUILD, 2008). Efforts have been made in New York to help legally-exempt providers become licensed and registered providers. For example, on February 9th, 2012 the Child Care Council of Rochester New York gave testimony before the Human Services Committee of the New York State legislature, stating that 25% of the currently registered providers in the county were previously legally-exempt providers. Many initiatives have successfully supported the transition of license-exempt providers to the regulated system (Porter et al., 2010).
Recommendation:
Support full implementation of QUALITYstarsNY as the mechanism to build quality.
B. Reallocate subsidies for children in legally-exempt care
C. Clarify information to parents about access to quality care
Parents need choices regarding their child care options. In 2011 over 3 million children had mothers working non-traditional hours (NACCRRA, 2011; U.S. Census Bureau, 2011). During nontraditional hours, such as 2nd and 3rd shift, options may be limited, but child safety and well-being remain a priority. The Department of Social Services should explore only offering legally-exempt care during non-traditional hours. Counties could set a dollar amount target or percentage for the number of legally-exempt care arrangements not to be exceeded. This will help increase the use of regulated care and minimize the use of legally-exempt care only when absolutely necessary. A parent should not be limited to choosing care that has questionable quality and child care paid for with public funds should have more stringent parameters.
The original version of Social Services Law §335 (4) approved on July 10, 1990, stipulated that participants in a work program could gain access to child day care, if needed. If the participant needed this care, the district had to offer the participant at least two choices of regulated, accessible, and available child day care providers who were willing to accept the amount and type of payment offered. In this instance, regulated child day care was defined as “a licensed, certified or registered child day care provider” (1990 NY ALS 453). Under this law, parents receiving social services were given choices of regulated care. If the district was unable to provide referrals to two regulated providers because of an insufficient number of regulated providers available, the local district would need to submit a report to state government, together with its local plan, regarding its efforts to increase the supply and availability of regulated child care consistent with the needs of the population. Under the current version of the law the parent or caretaker is solely responsible for finding child care. Only when the parent “demonstrates an inability to obtain needed care” is the district responsible for making a referral to two child care options, only one of which has to be regulated. If the previous version of the law is reenacted, districts would document any unmet needs, such as the lack of availability of regulated care during non-traditional hours. Documentation of these needs would provide additional state-wide data about care child. Parents who are eligible for subsidies should have choices and know the level of regulation and monitoring of those choices so they can make an informed decision about their child’s care
Recommendation:
Focus subsidies for legally-exempt care in areas only where the supply of regulated care is not sufficient and where use of non-traditional child care hours are absolutely necessary.
Recommendation:
Reinstate the original version of Social Services Law §335 (4) to allow parents at least two choices of regulated care.
Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
21
Conclusion
The quality of child care impacts children’s physical and psychological development, school readiness, and other long-term life outcomes. There is an increasing awareness on the necessity and value of quality early childhood programs. The federal government and national organizations also point out the importance of quality child care. Child Care Aware of America (formerly NACCRRA) recommends that all child care paid with public funds should meet a level of quality that ensures children are safe, healthy, and learning. In its 2011 cost of child care report, Child Care Aware of America (2012) raised concerns about the quality of unlicensed child care.
“the quality of unlicensed care is unknown because unlicensed care is not required to meet licensing standards (e.g., basic health and safety standards, minimum training requirements for providers or background checks). Some states have minimum requirements for providers who receive taxpayer dollars to care for children, but those requirements are usually below licensing standards. Also, unlicensed care is not subject to regular inspections.” (page 8) There are a significant number of children receiving legallyexempt care in New York State. Legally-exempt care is specific to New York State and refers to child care that is unlicensed, subsidized and legal. New York State is using more of its federal funding to subsidize children in legally-exempt care than most other states. Some studies on legally-exempt child care do not indicate the existence of a high quality care. Other studies on Family, Friend, and Neighbor (FFN) care, another form of unli-
22 Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
censed care, show a mixed set of findings in terms of quality. Even though these studies offer some insight on legally-exempt child care, quality of care among legally-exempt providers is mostly unmeasured and unknown. State comparisons were conducted for this paper to help to situate New York State more aptly and better understand funding, oversight, and support strategies related to the legally-exempt child care system. Key state comparison findings are below:
Funding for license-exempt care vary but most states utilize funds from federal and state sources to fund license-exempt child care. Some states, such as New York, North Carolina, and Washington also utilize additional sources. New York is the only state to have inspection requirements for license-exempt family child care homes (care provided outside of the child’s home). None of the states in the sample have statewide requirements for the inspection of license-exempt provider homes (care provided in the child’s home).
Many county, state, and funding agencies determine what license-exempt requirements will be enforced. California, Oregon, and Pennsylvania, for example, require background checks for both license-exempt family and in-home child care providers while New York, Illinois, and Oklahoma do not institute this requirement for either type of care. Supports for the license-exempt system are in place for all but two states surveyed. Some states have additional supports for their license-exempt providers, but implementation of more formal supports, such as funding laws, are non-existent. Benefits and challenges associated with legally-exempt care are also presented with supporting evidence from key informants in New York State. Highlighted benefits include the flexibility and convenience, cultural competence, and affordability of care. Challenges with this type of care include lack of oversight and monitoring, wide disparities in quality, and lack of support for providers. These findings direct the attention of stakeholders in the child care system on legally-exempt care and help to initiate public discussion on the accessibility and affordability of quality child care for all citizens of New York State.
Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
23
Conclusion
Lastly, remaining questions are explored and a set of recommendations for the future of legally-exempt care in New York State are presented. With an ultimate goal of increasing the quality of child care for all children in New York State, three policy areas are recommended for exploration. The three areas include 1) strengthening requirements for legally-exempt providers receiving public funding, 2) supporting existing legally-exempt providers, and 3) developing a stronger regulated system that is focused on quality. A summary of specific recommendations associated with these policy areas are listed below:
24 Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
1. Ensure that legally-exempt providers are held to the same standard as providers in licensed care, including comprehensive background checks. 2. Explore the implications associated with requiring all legally-exempt providers, not just those seeking to obtain the enhanced rate, to pursue at least 10 hours of training while granting the enhanced rate of reimbursement to those who engage in additional training.
3. Explore implementing statewide standards that require monitoring visits to legally-exempt providers taking care of children in the child’s home and conduct inspections in more than 20% of legally-exempt providers taking care of children outside of the child’s home. 4. Implement a demonstration project in legallyexempt homes that participate in CACFP in order to investigate whether promoting this program will increase quality. 5. Offer and implement programs in New York State that ensure legally-exempt caregivers learn about child development and what they can do to support the healthy growth and learning of the children in their care.
6. Incentivize legally-exempt providers to provide care during non-traditional hours. 7. Explore funding sources for legally-exempt child care that supports its familial nature and does not draw on the already limited Child Care and Development Block Grant funds. 8. Support full implementation of QUALITY starsNY as the mechanism to build quality. 9. Focus subsidies for legally-exempt care in areas only where the supply of regulated care is not sufficient and where use of non-traditional child care hours are absolutely necessary. 10. Reinstate the original version of Social Services Law §335 (4) to allow parents at least two choices of regulated care Given the importance of early care and learning experiences, legally-exempt care, which constitutes a significant portion of the child care system, remains a noteworthy topic of investigation. As the federal government strategizes about both early learning and quality, we need to align vision with practice. The more we know about the conditions and circumstances of legally-exempt care the better solutions and policies we can offer.
Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
25
References
on October 13, 2011 from http://www.albany.edu/chsr/ Publications/FOCUS%20GROUP%20AND%20TELEPHONE%20 SURVEY%20REPORTS.pdf American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) (2005). Policy statement quality early education and child care from birth to kindergarten committee on early childhood, adoption, and dependent care. Pediatrics, 115(1), 187-191. Antos, S. (2011). Empire Justice Testimony on New York State’s draft Child Care Development Fund Plan for FFY 2012-2013. Retrieved online on November 16, 2011 from www. empirejustice.org/policy-advocacy/testimony/child-caredevelopment-fund-testimony.html Casey Family Programs. (2011, May). The Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program: Background and Context. Child Care Council of Westchester (2011, October). Legally-Exempt Providers County by County Standards. Data provided to Early Care & Learning Council by the Child Care Council of Westchester. Christakis, D. A., & Garrison, M. M. (2009). Preschool-aged children’s television viewing in child care settings. Pediatrics, 124(6), 1627–1632. CHSR (2006). Data analysis report: Subsidized legally exempt child care in Albany County. Center for Human Services Research, University at Albany. Retrieved online on October 13, 2011 from www.albany.edu/chsr/Publications/Data%20Analysis%20Report_Albany%20County.pdf CHSR (2007a). Focus group and telephone survey reports: Legally Exempt Child Care Providers and Families Utilizing Subsidized Care in Albany County. Center for Human Services Research, University at Albany. Retrieved online
26 Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
CHSR (2007b). Improving the Quality of Legally Exempt Child Care: Report on the Implementation Phase. Center for Human Services Research, University at Albany. Retrieved online on October 13, 2011 from www.albany. edu/chsr/Publications/Legally%20Exempt%20Child%20 Care%20Report%20on%20Implementation.pdf Collins, A., & Carlson, B. (1998). Child Care by Kith and Kin–Supporting Family, Friends, and Neighbors Caring for Children (Child and Welfare Reform Issue Brief 5). National Center for Children in Poverty. Early Head Start National Resource Center, ZERO TO THREE (2006). Family, friend and neighbor care in Early Head Start: Strengthening relationships and enhancing quality. Technical Assistance Paper No. 11. Fuller, B., Kagan, S. L., Loeb, S., & Chang, Y.-W. (2004). Child care quality: Centers and home settings that serve poor families. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19(4), 505-527. Galinsky, E., Howes, C., & Kontos, S. (1994) The study of children in family child care and relative care: Highlights of Findings. Families and Work Institute. Layzer, J. I., & Goodson, B. D. (2006). National Study of Child Care for Low-Income Families – Care in the Home: A Description of Family Child Care and the Experience of Families and Children That Use It. Wave 1 Report. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates. Retrieved online on March 21, 2012 from www.acf.hhs.gov/ programs/opre/cc/nsc_low_income/reports/care_in_home/care_ in_home.pdf
Li-Grining, C., & Coley, R. L. (2006). Child care experiences in low-income communities: Developmental quality and maternal views. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 21(2), 125-141.
Porter, T., & Rice, R. (2000). Lessons learned: Strategies for working with kith & kin providers. New York, NY: Bank Street College of Education.
National Association of Child Care Resource & Referral Agencies (NACCRRA) (2012). Leaving Children to Chance: NACCRRA’s Ranking of State Standards and Oversight for Small Family Child Care Homes. Retrieved online on March 2, 2012 from www. naccrra.org/sites/default/files/default_site_pages/2012/lcc_ report_march_1.pdf
Porter, T., Paulsell, D., Nichols, T., Begnoche, C., & Del Grosso, P. (2010). Supporting Quality in Home-Based Child Care: A Compendium of 23 Initiatives. Mathematica Policy Research.
National Child Care Information and Technical Assistance Center (2012). Child Care and Development Fund Report of State and Territory Plans FY 2010-2011, 48-55. Retrieved online on February 23, 2012 from www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/occ/ccdf/ plans/sp2010-2011.pdf New York State Office of Children and Family Services (2011). Child Care Services. Retrieved online on August 31, 2011 from www.ocfs.state.ny.us/main/childcare/regs/415%20Child%20 Care%20ServicesA.pdf New York State Office of Children and Family Services (2012, February). NACCRRA Policy Symposium PowerPoint Presentation: A Look at Legally-Exempt Child Care in New York State. Data provided to Early Care & Learning Council by OCFS. New York State Office of State Comptroller (2004). Life safety and fiscal issues related to legally exempt child care. A report by the New York State Office of the State Comptroller. 2002-S-38. Retrieved online on March 19, 2012 from www.osc.state.ny.us/ audits/allaudits/093004/02s38.pdf Pennsylvania BUILD Initiative. (2008, May). Report of the BUILD Taskforce on Quality in Regulation Exempt Care Settings: Recommendations to Promote Quality in Pennsylvania Regulation Exempt Child Care Settings.
QUALITYstarsNY (2012). Introduction to QUALITYstarsNY. Retrieved online on May 18, 2012 from qualitystarsny.org/ introduction.php Reynolds, A. J., Temple, J. A., Ou, S-H., Arteaga, I. A., & White, B. A. B. (2011). School-based early childhood education and age-28 well-being: Effects by timing, dosage, and subgroups. Science, 333(6040), 360-364. Schulman, K., & Blank, H. (2007). Close to Home: State Strategies to Strengthen and Support Family, Friend, and Neighbor Care. National Women’s Law Center. Susman-Stillman, A., & Banghart, P. (2008). Demographics of Family, Friend, and Neighbor Child Care in the United States. Research Connections Research Brief. Retrieved online on January 28, 2013 from www.nccp.org/publications/pub_835.html Tout, K. & Zaslow, M. (2006). Observations of child care provided by family, friends, and neighbor in Minnesota. Report of the Minnesota Child Care Policy Research Partnership. Retrieved online on March 23, 2012 from www.childtrends.org/Files/ Child_Trends-2006_02_01_FR_MinnesotaCare.pdf United States Census Bureau (2011). Who’s minding the kids? Child care arrangements: Spring 2010, detailed tables. Retrieved February 10, 2012, from www.census.gov/hhes/childcare/data/ sipp/2010/tables.html Votruba-Drzal, E., Coley, R. L., & Chase-Lansdale, P. L. (2004). Child care and low-income children’s development: Direct and moderated effects. Child Development, 75, 1-17.
Legally-Exempt Child Care. What Does it Mean in New York State?
27
230 Washington Avenue Extension Albany, NY 12203 ph: 518.690.4217 fx: 518.690.2887
earlycareandlearning.org