Early Education
and Care
A. ISSUE SUMMARY
Vision Statement: "Travis County will be a community where all
children and families have access to a comprehensive system of high-quality
early education and child care and family support in order to assure that
all children have opportunities for successful and productive lives."
Strategies for Building
a Stronger Community: A Community Guide
The community's goals of universal access, high-quality care, and family
support expressed in this vision are far from the reality of current conditions.
The key findings regarding the gap between need and capacity are:
- Accredited child care. In terms of accredited child care,
defined as full child development programs, there is only one available
slot for every four children that need child care at the level implied
in the vision statement.
- Child care capacity. There has been a continuous increase in estimates
for the number of needed child care slots in Travis County. There appears
to be an unmet need for specific types of care, including infant care and
care for children with special needs.
Public policies and resource allocations for closing the above gaps revolve
around key outcomes identified in this assessment. The key findings regarding
early education and care outcomes from the CAN
Community Guide are:
- Wages are dangerously low and place service providers in the difficult
position of competing with other low-wage industries such as fast food restaurants
-- this is a particularly severe problem during worker shortage periods
such as those experienced in Travis County in the late 1990s.
- Retention for child care staff is low, and annual attrition/turnover
has become more severe in recent years (35% in 1997) -- this is a major
impediment to attaining and sustaining higher quality child care.
- Affordability is a serious problem -- the cost of child care
has increased 50% in the last four years. The burden for low-wage earner
parents has not only increased but is disproportionately greater than for
middle- and upper-income families (37% for low- income families, 6% for
high-income families).
- Staff-to-child ratios are mandated at certain levels for each age
group of children by the Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services.
However, those ratios are considerably larger than the recommended ratios
set by the National Association for the Education of Young Children. There
is no data detailing the actual staff-to-child ratios in Travis County.
Return to Top of Page
B. BACKGROUND AND INFLUENCING FACTORS
Giving meaningful, high-quality experiences to children in the context of
caring for them in their early life is believed to have a significant impact
on their lives. This belief is present in the conventional wisdom of parents
in all social classes, in the arguments of issue advocates, and in many conclusions
from social researchers.
As depicted in Figure 4.1.1, the association between
participation in enriching preschool care and subsequent life outcomes
and experiences has been well documented. While preschool itself does
not insure positive outcomes and prevent negative ones, the absence
of preschool certainly seems to increase negative outcomes and decrease
positive ones. Children who experience quality early childhood care
were found to have more positive achievements and fewer negative outcomes.
The cause-and-effect relationship cannot be demonstrated from that research,
but the correlation between quality early childhood care and the achievement
of young adults is clearly shown.
The disparity between low-income and middle- and upper-income families in
terms of the types of care that each can afford is a cause for concern. The
notion that all children and families should have access to high quality care
reflects both important assumptions and very difficult challenges. Achieving
equity in the provision of care and the quality of care provided is difficult
to achieve and even more difficult to measure.
Figure 4.1.1
Relationship of Preschool Programs on Children in Later Life
Age-19 Findings
Source: Changed Lives: The Effect of the Perry PreSchool Program on Youths
Through Age 19, 1984.
The Early Education and Care issue area includes a complex array of sub-issues
and concerns that are viewed in very different and sometimes conflicting ways
by different sectors of the community. Adding to this complexity is that child
care has different purposes for different groups. These purposes are a variable
mix of:
- custodial services that allow parents to work or to pursue education and
other activities; and
- child development and socialization that prepare children intellectually
and emotionally for subsequent schooling.
Early education and care services are available in a complex marketplace
with many service types and entities differing by quality, affordability,
and professionalism. Service types range from informal care provided by extended
family and neighborhood helpers in unregulated settings, to quasi-public providers
that deliver subsidized services, and large child care corporations with many
facilities. Child care is at some time a major need for virtually all families
and they have many choices in this marketplace.
By design, the Community Assessment has focused on that portion of the child
care and early childhood education industry that most affects the population
with limited or no resources to pay for the service. The differential availability
of quality child care is at the core of this issue area.
Importance to the Community
Researchers have identified specific characteristics of center-based settings
associated with high-quality early care and education and better results for
children:
- A sufficient number of adults for each child, or high staff-to-child ratios
- Smaller group sizes
- Higher levels of staff education and specialized training
- Low staff turnover and administrative stability
- Higher levels of compensation
Shortages of child care, as well as problems of reliability, affordability,
and proximity create considerable immediate problems not only for parents
but also for their employers. Employee tardiness and absenteeism related to
child care problems hurts the local economy. Employers, especially those with
low-wage workers, incur costs from turnover and low productivity from workers/parents
dealing with child care difficulties. Thus, not only the parents, but the
entire community suffers from an inadequate child care system.
At a more long-term level, the community and the local economy also incur
costs associated with remedial services and interventions required by youth
and young adults with poor life prospects attributable in part to their not
having had access to enriching early life experiences. Quality child care
is not just one of the components of such experiences; it is also related
to a well-functioning community that supports the household or family unit.
Return to Top of Page
C. OUTCOMES AND KEY INDICATORS
The first question is whether there are sufficient spaces that provide child
care for meeting the demand, as measured by the total number of children who
need care. This is hard to measure because state guidelines for capacity are
determined by square footage in a facility, not actual numbers of child care
slots.
According to the Austin/Travis County Health and Human Services Department's 1998 Community Overview, estimated part-time and full-time child
care slots needed in 1996 were 22,310 and 22,336, respectively. According
to state licensing standards, day care facilities have the capacity to care
for some 38,000 children in Austin/Travis County. It has been emphasized by
those knowledgable in the field that no facility operates at licensed capacity.
This means that despite the official "capacity," other indicators
dictate how many children are actually in care.
What types of providers constitute capacity? According to the Texas Department
of Protective and Regulatory Services, in Travis County during 1997 approximately
34,300 day care slots were found in child care centers, another 2,700 in registered
family care homes, and fewer than 1,000 in other types of registered facilities.
It is likely that at any given time, there are over 3,000 children being cared
for in informal, unregistered settings, either as a parent's preferred
option or as a last recourse due to affordability, convenience, or personal
circumstances. Day care centers provide a growing and overwhelmingly
dominant share of the capacity. In 1997, they accounted for just over 90%
of documented capacity.
Many child care providers within the county maintain waiting lists. The pilot
study of the Texas Child Care Portfolio Project revealed many providers with
waiting lists based on age groups. For example:
- Infants/toddlers (0-36 months)* 12% of providers
- Preschool (3-5 years) 76% of providers
- Schoolage (6 years+) 34% of providers
*Not all providers have infant programs.
While 93% of providers in Travis County offer full-time child care, only
47% offer part-time care. Population estimates show a growing need (up 18.8%
from 1992 to 1996).
Return to Top of Page
OUTCOME: Increased number and percentage of child
care programs and child care spaces in accredited programs as compared to
the total number of programs and spaces in Travis County
The single most important variable in the examination of capacity is quality
of care. If we impose the standard of accreditation for available child care
slots and adopt the ideal of universal access to quality care, the capacity
gap is much more severe than if we impose the standard of licensure for available
child care slots.
Figure 4.1.2
Licensed Day Care Facilities in Travis County
Estimated Capacity by Classification
1990-1994
|
1990 |
1991 |
1992 |
1993 |
1994 |
Total capacity of facilities |
29,022 |
28,902 |
27,185 |
28,744 |
29,948 |
Accredited centers |
642 |
1,095 |
1,266 |
1,798 |
2,095 |
Designated vendors |
195 |
202 |
934 |
1,178 |
1,354 |
State licensures |
28,185 |
27,605 |
24,985 |
25,768 |
26,499 |
Source: Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services; Centex
Child Care Management System.
Figure 4.1.3
Licensed Day Care Facilities in Travis County
Estimated Capacity by Classification
|
1995 |
1996 |
1997 |
| Total number of facilities |
906 |
869 |
910 |
| Drop-In Centers |
2 |
3 |
2 |
| Day Care Centers |
381 |
393 |
408 |
| Schools: Kindergarten and Above |
2 |
2 |
5 |
| Kindergarten and Nursery Schools |
4 |
4 |
3 |
| Group Day Homes |
38 |
35 |
40 |
| Registered Family Homes |
479 |
432 |
452 |
Source: Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services.
|
1995 |
1996 |
1997 |
| Total capacity of facilities |
35,331 |
36,389 |
38,081 |
| Drop-In Centers |
69 |
69 |
69 |
| Day Care Centers |
31,424 |
32,782 |
34,305 |
| Schools: Kindergarten and Above |
247 |
247 |
347 |
| Kindergarten and Nursery Schools |
272 |
272 |
192 |
| Group Day Homes |
445 |
427 |
456 |
| Registered Family Homes |
2,874 |
2,592 |
2,712 |
Source: Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services.
The patterns of change in child care services have been primarily determined
by demographic and economic demand. Since the industry is largely driven by
demand and by the economics of that demand, we have seen substantial increases
in the numbers of available slots in the years after 1992, after about four
or five years of small declines or level conditions.
The distribution of child care spaces in the quality continuum out of an
estimated 450 child care centers is only 65 accredited and 45 designated vendors.
The most dramatic measure is that only about one in four child care slots
are in accredited facilities or with state-designated vendors that offer the
equivalent of accredited facility care; the overwhelming majority are in non-accredited,
state-licensed centers. These provide child care that meets the more relaxed
standards of custodial care in the state licensing criteria. Under this
stricter scenario of accredited early education experiences, the gap between
the available capacity and the community objective is much greater. Thus,
a critical policy question is whether providing fully accredited care to all
children is feasible when only about 25% of children are currently in such
accredited centers.
The other outcomes adopted for this assessment reflect the more detailed
questions that must be asked in order to adopt solutions and interventions
to fulfill the CAN vision statement's goals. The themes of these outcomes
are affordability, wage levels of child care staff, child/teacher ratios,
training and retention of staff, parental involvement and parental skills,
and others. Six such outcomes from the 1997
Community Guide met the criteria of issue area experts' input and
relationship to measurable indicators. These outcomes are discussed below.
Return to Top of Page
OUTCOME: Decreased turnover rates of teachers and
directors in child care programs
There have been periodic studies of child care centers that have focused
on issues of staffing and related factors. Although the statistics from these
studies have not been published in a comparable manner, there appeared to
be a slight increase in annual staff turnover between 1993 and 1997. Average
turnover is currently at just over 30%. Turnover for the more typical non-accredited
center is even higher -- 35% in 1997. As shown in the following figure,
the long-term retention of child care staff is extremely low. The consequences
of this for quality of service are considerable, given children's need
for continuity and stability. Skill learning and experience make a facility's
staff more valuable and beneficial to children; the turnover makes this more
difficult to achieve and more costly.
Figure 4.1.4
Child Care Teacher Turnover in Travis County
1993

Source: City of Austin Child Care Supply and Demand Survey
What causes high turnover of staff in child care facilities? There are multiple
factors that explain the situation -- some are a function of the child
care industry; others are related to labor market conditions in Travis County.
Low-wage conditions are the most significant factor affecting high turnover.
In the overwhelming majority of state-licensed centers without accreditation
(they provide over 80% of the capacity), the basic entry-level requirements
are being 18 years of age and a high school graduate. As has been noted by
various observers, child care centers compete with employers in the fast-food
industry for workers. Thus, it is not surprising that turnover is so substantial.
Return to Top of Page
OUTCOME: Increased child care teachers' and
directors' wages
Child care workers have traditionally earned low wages. In the Austin/Travis
County Child Care Salary, Benefit and Tuition Survey (1997), the average starting
hourly wage for assistant teachers and lead teachers in full-day programs
was $5.89 and $7.01 per hour, respectively. Average ending salaries for assistant
teachers and lead teachers in full-day programs were $7.11 and $9.29 per hour,
respectively. In part-day programs, teachers' wages were slightly higher.
The average starting wage for assistant teachers and lead teachers was $6.29
and $9.48, respectively.
Even directors, who are typically college educated, garnered full-time annual
salaries that are barely competitive with other jobs. Starting salaries ranged
from a low of $12,000 to a high of $30,000 annually. The average annual starting
salary for a child care center director in a full- day program in Travis County
was $21,488 (1997).
Teaching position salaries tended to be higher in part-time programs, but
full-time programs tended to provide more benefits. Benefits for entry-level
staff were relatively low, with such basics as health insurance available
to barely half of the workers in this sector.
According to the survey, only 60% offered medical insurance to the staff.
Much smaller percentages offered additional coverage (life, retirement, dental,
or disability). Only 31% of part-time programs offered medical insurance plans
and even fewer offered additional benefits. Benefits tended to be slightly
higher for National Association
for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) accredited centers versus
non-accredited centers.
Return to Top of Page
OUTCOME: Improved child-to-teacher ratios in child
care programs
According to the Texas
Department of Protective and Regulatory Services, the number of children
per staff member and the group size in a day care center must not exceed the limits shown in Figure 4.1.5.
The child/staff ratio is based on the age of more than half of the children
in the group. The larger number indicating the child/staff ratio for ages
2 through 5 years are the ratios for groups where more than half of the children
are a year or more older than the specified age group.
The maximum group size described in Figure 4.1.5 is also the child/staff
ratio when two staff are present. Figure 4.1.6 shows the recommended staff
to child ratios that have been set by NAEYC.
According to NAEYC, smaller group sizes and lower staff-child ratios have
been found to be strong predictors of indicators of quality such as positive
interactions among staff and children and developmentally appropriate curriculum.
While it is possible to present what the guidelines for staff/child ratios
are, and what the ideal staff/child ratios are, there is no data on what currently
exists in Travis County. This is a huge gap in the data, as it hinders the
planning necessary to reach the ideal.
Figure 4.1.5
Child-to-Staff Ratios
Specified Age Group |
Number of Children Supervised by One Staff |
Maximum Group Size |
| 0-11 months |
4 |
10 |
| 12-17 months * |
6 |
14 |
| 12-17 months ** |
5 |
13 |
| 18-23 months |
9 |
18 |
| 2 years |
11-13 |
22-26 |
| 3 years |
15-17 |
30-34 |
| 4 years |
18-20 |
35 |
| 5 years |
22-24 |
35 |
| 6-8 years |
26 |
35 |
| 9-12 years |
26 |
35 |
*Effective until September 1, 1999. ** Effective after September 1, 1999.
Figure 4.1.6
Recommended Child-to-Staff Ratios
Specified Age Group |
Number of Children Supervised by One Staff |
Maximum Group Size |
| 0-12 months |
3
4 |
6
8 |
| 12-24 months |
3
4
5
4 |
6
8
10
12 |
| 2 years |
4
5
6 |
8
10
12 |
| 2 1/2 years |
5
6
7 |
10
12
14 |
| 3 years |
7
8
9
10 |
14
16
18
20 |
| 4 years |
8
9
10 |
16
18
20 |
| 5 years |
8
9
10 |
16
18
20 |
| 6-8 years |
10
11
12 |
20
22
24 |
| 9-12 years |
12
14 |
24
28 |
Return to Top of Page
OUTCOME: Increased numbers of affordable child care
slots
The current average monthly cost of full-time child care in Travis County
is $506 for infants and $431 for toddlers. For low- or moderate-income families,
the proportional burden of child care is extremely high, as shown in the following
figure.
Figure 4.1.7
Cost of Child Care in Travis County as a Percent of Family Income, 1990
Graphic Misssing
Sources: Austin Families Incorporated; 1990 U.S. Census.
The average cost of child care has increased almost 50% in the past five
years in Travis County. Thus, affordability has become a more severe problem
for large numbers of families. Child care is considered affordable when it
requires no more than 10% of annual income.
According to the Community Action Network and CENTEX Child Care Management
Services, the percentage of subsidized child care slots compared to number
of children at 150% of poverty reflects another substantial gap. Approximately
16% of those eligible for subsidized child care are receiving such care.
The Child Care Management Services (CCMS) program operates as a clearinghouse
to process child care vouchers for a ten-county region in central Texas. The
purpose of these vouchers is to help cover the cost of child care of low-income
families. It is estimated that 2,000 to 3,000 people are on the CCMS waiting
list. This number represents an unduplicated count of low-income clients that
are eligible for subsidized child care. CCMS provides services to 35% of their
clients. This indicates that there is a gap of 65% between identified families
who apply for and those who receive child care vouchers.
Return to Top of Page
OUTCOME: Increased school completion and employment
preparedness of teen and other young parents
The PEPS program (Pregnancy Education and Parenting Skills) is one of the
major intervention services that has been identified to measure teen parents
that remain in school until they graduate. In Travis County, four of the seven
school districts offer this program to their students: Del Valle ISD, Austin
ISD, Manor ISD, and Round Rock ISD. Figure 4.1.8 addresses the number served
by the PEPS program within the Austin ISD.
Figure 4.1.8
Number of Students Served Through Austin I.S.D.'s
Pregnancy-Related Services Home Instruction Program
Grade |
95-96 |
96-97 |
97-98 |
| 7th |
5 |
1 |
1 |
| 8th |
8 |
11 |
6 |
| 9th |
43 |
55 |
36 |
| 10th |
40 |
28 |
42 |
| 11th |
29 |
26 |
24 |
| 12th |
30 |
16 |
18 |
| TOTAL |
155 |
137 |
127 |
Return to Top of Page
OUTCOME: Decreased school dropout rate
This outcome has been identified in three different issue areas and is more
fully documented under education. The relevance to the early education and
care issue area is twofold. Many teens who drop out of school become parents
at an early age (or drop out because they become parents) and thus generate
a potential added demand for subsidized child care services since their wage-earning
ability is low. Secondly, the school dropout pattern reduces the labor pool
of potentially qualified entry-level staffing in the child care industry.
This is more severely felt during periods of very low unemployment, as Travis
County currently enjoys.
Return to Top of Page
D. OTHER KEY OUTCOMES AND STATUS
The Community Guide identified other outcomes,
and subsequent consultations with key groups added several additional important
outcomes. They are listed below with annotations that include clarification,
availability of data, and recommendations for further treatment.
The following outcomes have been fully incorporated into other issue areas:
- Fewer children who have experienced abuse or neglect (Public Safety)
- Fewer children who are involved in gangs and/or delinquent behavior (Public
Safety)
- More children who have finished high school and enrolled in college (Education)
- Fewer children who are vulnerable to drug or alcohol addiction (Substance
Abuse)
- More parents who have pursued higher education and career advancement
(Education)
The following outcomes are overly complex or ambiguous and require the identification
of measurable indicators and data which measure those indicators:
- More parents and other members of the community who understand the benefits
and impact of high-quality child care (this could be monitored through an
annual community social survey)
- More parents and members of the community who are informed and vocal proponents
of quality early education and care (same as above)
- More child development sites that demonstrate high-quality criteria in
their programs (needs more specification and incorporation into the state's
licensing process)
- More children who are well-employed as adults and grow up to be active
members of their communities (needs a 20- to 30-year longitudinal study
to measure)
- Increased number of children who reach school ready to learn (needs more
specificity and can only be addressed with difficult assumptions about causality)
- Increased parental involvement in children's early education
The following outcomes are measurable and should have data available; however,
no reliable data have been identified:
- Increased number of children who reach their optimal levels of development
- Increased number of children with developmental delays who demonstrate
age-appropriate social, emotional, language, intellectual and physical competencies
- More parents who remain involved in their children's education
- Increased number of child development staff who demonstrate improved teaching
skills
Return to Top of Page
E. TERMS, CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS
Accredited Centers: Meet quality standards of the National Association
for Education of Young Children
Desginated Vendors: Meet the quality standards of Centex Child Care
Management Serivces
State-licensed centers: Meet the minimum standards of the Texas Department
of Protective and Regulatory Services
Return to Top of Page
Assessment Home
|