The Quality of Iowa

1

• The Quality of Iowas Child Care
• Where are our strengths? Where do we need to
  improve?

The Midwest Child Care Research Consortium Susan
Hegland, Lesia Oesterreich, Carla
Peterson Department of Human Development Family
Studies Iowa State University Child Care Council
Spring Conference Des Moines Area Community
College Ankeny, Iowa April 5, 2003
2
The Assessment Tool The Environment Rating
Scales

• ECERS Preschool
• ITERS Infant-Toddler
• FDCRS Family Child Care
• Require interrater reliability training
• Require 3-hour observation
• Predict academic social skills through 2nd
  grade

Cost, Quality, Outcomes Study, 1995, 2001
3
Child Care Quality by State and Type of Care, N
365
Good
Mediocre
Poor
4
Percentage of Midwest Care At Each Quality Level,
N 365
5
Percentage of Iowa Care at each Quality Level
n 25
n 23
n 26
6
What areas of good quality and poor quality were
observed in full-day, full-year child care in
Iowa?

• Classrooms for Preschoolers (ECERS)
• Classrooms for Infants Toddlers (ITERS)
• Family Child Care Homes (FDCRS)

7
In Iowa, Shared Visions Programs are higher in
quality than preschool child care centers
Poor
Mediocre
Good
state-funded preschools Zan Edmiaston, 2002
8
Preschool Center Comparisons across States
9
Infant Center Comparisons across States
10
Family Child Care Comparisons across States
11
Strengths observed in preschool classrooms

• Greeting/departing
• Individual greeting
• Pleasant departing
• Parents greeted warmly
• Average item scores in good to excellent range

12
Strengths observed in preschool classrooms

• Basic furnishings
• Sufficient child-sized furniture for
• routine care,
• play,
• learning
• Furniture sturdy and in good repair
• Average item scores in good to excellent range

13
Strengths observed in preschool classrooms

• Staff-child interactions
• Staff show warmth through appropriate physical
  contact
• Staff show respect for children
• Staff respond sympathetically to help children
  who are upset, hurt, angry
• Average item scores in good to excellent range

14
Strengths observed in preschool classrooms

• Interactions among children
• Staff model good social skills
• Peer interaction encouraged
• Staff help children develop appropriate social
  behavior with peers
• Positive peer interactions
• Average item scores in good to excellent range

15
Strengths observed in preschool classrooms

• Discipline
• Staff use non-punitive discipline methods
  effectively
• Program is set up to avoid conflict and promote
  age-appropriate interaction
• Staff react consistently to childrens behavior
• Average item scores in good to excellent range

16
Poor quality items in preschoolers classrooms

• None
• Average item scores below mediocre range on the
  ITERS

17
Strengths observed in infant/toddler classrooms

• Greeting/departing
• Caregiver greets each child and parent warmly
• Caregiver provides pleasant, organized departure
• Parents bring child into caregiving area as part
  of daily routine
• Separation problems handled sensitively
• Written record of infants daily feeding,
  diapering, and naps available for parents to see
• Average item scores in good to excellent range
  on the ITERS

18
Strengths observed in infant/toddler classrooms

• Discipline
• Few discipline problems because program is set up
  to avoid conflict and promote age-appropriate
  interaction
• Alternate methods of discipline used effectively
• Expectations are realistic and based on age and
  ability of each child
• Caregiver reacts consistently to childrens
  behavior
• Average item scores in good to excellent range
  on the ITERS

19
Strengths observed in infant/toddler classrooms

• Safety policy
• All staff trained in safety/emergency procedures
• Facility has passed official fire safety
  inspection
• Substitute available for emergencies familiar
  with caregiving activities, specific children,
  emergency plans
• Emergency exit plans posted practiced at least
  monthly
• At least one person in facility with first aid
  training, including CPR, present at all times
• Average item scores in good to excellent range
  on the ITERS

20
Strengths observed in infant/toddler classrooms

• Peer Interaction
• Children allowed to move freely so natural
  groupings/interactions can occur much of the day
• Non-mobile infants taken out of cribs, playpens,
  swings for some supervised play time near others
• Peer interaction usually positive
• Caregiver models positive social interaction
• Average item scores in good to excellent range
  on the ITERS

21
Strengths observed in infant/toddler classrooms

• Staff cooperation
• Child-related information communicated daily
  among staff
• Time for staff communication provided
• Staff interactions are positive and add a feeling
  of warmth and support
• Responsibilities are divided so that both care
  and play activities are handled smoothly
• Average item scores in good to excellent range
  on the ITERS

22
Poor quality items in infant/toddler classrooms

• Cultural awareness
• No evidence of ethnic and racial variety in
• toys
• books
• pictures
• Average item scores below mediocre range on the
  ITERS

23
Poor quality items in infant/toddler classrooms

• Adult personal needs
• No separate adult restroom
• No adult furniture available outside of
  childrens area
• No storage for personal belongings
• No scheduled time for caregiver to be away from
  job responsibilities
• No staff available to cover unscheduled,
  necessary breaks
• Average item scores below mediocre range on the
  ITERS

24
Poor quality items in infant/toddler classrooms

• Active physical play
• No uncluttered space provided for
  infants/toddlers to crawl and walk around much of
  the day
• Outdoor physical play provided for
  infants/toddlers fewer than 3 times/week
• No age-appropriate gross motor toys and equipment
  (Ex. age-appropriate climbing equipment) used
  daily and in good repair
• Average item scores below mediocre range on the
  ITERS

25
Poor quality items in infant/toddler classrooms

• Diapering/toileting
• Basic sanitary conditions not met to avoid spread
  of germs
• Caregiver does not wash hands adequately after
  each diapering/diaper check or toileting
• Diapers not checked and changed as needed
• Childrens hands not washed after
  diapering/toileting
• Caregiver does not handle toileting accidents
  calmly.
• Average item scores below mediocre range on the
  ITERS

26
Poor quality items in infant/toddler classrooms

• Pretend play
• Enough pretend-play materials not accessible
  daily for number of children present
• Ex. dolls, soft animals, pots pans, unbreakable
  mirror
• Materials not age-appropriate
• Average item scores below mediocre range on the
  ITERS

27
Poor quality items in infant/toddler classrooms

• Books and pictures
• Fewer than 6 infant/toddler books accessible
  daily for much of the day
• Books and pictures used by caregiver with
  children fewer than 3 times a week
• Participation not encouraged only when children
  are interested children may be forced to
  participate
• Average item scores below mediocre range on the
  ITERS

28
Poor quality items in infant/toddler classrooms

• Meals and snacks
• Meal/snack schedule does not meet childrens
  needs
• Food service not sanitary
• Well-balanced, age-appropriate foods not served
  for meals and snacks
• Infants not held while bottle fed
• Infants/toddlers not put to bed with bottles
• Children who finger feed selves do not have hands
  washed.
• Children may be forced to eat.
• Average item scores below mediocre range on the
  ITERS

29
Strengths observed in family/group care homes

• Arriving/leaving
• Individual greeting and good-bye for all
  children.
• Parents greeted as well as children.
• Caregiver uses arriving/leaving time to share
  information with parents.
• Average item scores in good to excellent range
  on the FDCRS

30
Strengths observed in family/group care homes

• Relationship with parents
• Written policies given to parents before child
  starts child care
• Caregiver tells parents about the activities of
  their children
• Caregiver works cooperatively with parents
• Parents welcomed as visitors both before and
  during enrollment
• Average item scores in good to excellent range
  on the FDCRS

31
Strengths observed in family/group care homes

• Tone of caregiver/child interactions
• Caregiver uses physical contact to show affection
  to all children
• Caregiver and children seem relaxed, voices
  cheerful, a lot of smiling
• Average item scores in good to excellent range
  on the FDCRS

32
Poor quality items in family/group care homes

• Help infants/toddlers understand language
• Fewer than 8 books suitable for infants/toddlers
• Caregivers did not name some objects or pictures
  for children
• Books or pictures not used by caregiver at least
  3 times a week
• Average item scores below the mediocre range on
  the FDCRS

33
Poor quality items in family/group care homes

• Helping children use language
• Few materials for helping children practice
  talking
• Ex. toy phones, puppets
• Caregiver does not use one activity a day to
  encourage children to talk
• Average item scores below the mediocre range on
  the FDCRS

34
Poor quality items in family/group care homes

• Diapering/toileting
• Diapering/toileting area does not meet basic
  sanitary conditions
• Caregiver does not wash hands with soap after
  each diapering
• Diapers not checked and changed often
• Childrens hands not washed after
  diapering/toileting
• Caregiver does not handles toileting accidents
  calmly
• Average item scores below the mediocre range on
  the FDCRS

35
Poor quality items in family/group care homes

• Safety
• Phone in home/transportation aid not available
  for emergency use
• First aid supplies not well stocked, ready to use
• Emergency numbers not posted
• Home has not passed official fire safety
  inspections
• Hot water not managed safely
• Obvious safety problems indoors/outdoors
• Alternate caregiver not available for
  emergencies
• Average item scores below the mediocre range on
  the FDCRS

36
Poor quality items in family/group care homes

• Personal grooming (of children)
• No easy place for children to wash hands
• Each child does not have own towel/washcloth (can
  be paper)
• Children do not wash before/after meals
• Extra clothes not available to change children
• Average item scores below the mediocre range on
  the FDCRS

37
Poor quality items in family/group care homes

• Dramatic play
• No dramatic play materials (ex. dress-up clothes,
  garage, dolls) available for children over 12
  months of age
• Few accessories for dramatic play (Ex. beds or
  dishes for dolls)
• Average item scores below the mediocre range on
  the FDCRS

38
Poor quality items in family/group care homes

• Child-related display
• No childrens artwork displayed
• No store-bought or adult-made pictures put up
  especially for children to look at
• Average item scores below the mediocre range on
  the FDCRS

39
Poor quality items in family/group care homes

• Sand and water play
• Sand or water play provided outdoors or indoors
  less than once every 2 weeks year-round.
• Average item scores below the mediocre range on
  the FDCRS

40
Midwest Policy Conclusions

• Quality is augmented by
• Regulation
• Enforcement
• Tiered Reimbursement for Accreditation
• Initiatives that Target Quality
• Initiatives for Professional Development

41
Policy Context for Quality in Iowa

• Less strict regulatory environment
• No licensing for family child care homes
• Less strict center regulations
• Few collaborations between Head Start and child
  care
• Few Iowa child care programs can meet Head Start
  Program Performance Standards
• Fewer initiatives to support quality or
  professional development
• Fewer federal quality dollars spent on
  evidence-based professional development programs
  (e.g., CDA) at state or local levels

42
Why improve child care in Iowa?

• School Readiness
• Language, literacy, and social skills predict
  school performance
• Economic Development
• Lost productivity
• Caring for sick children
• Seeking safe, nurturing child care
• Lost recruitment
• Highest percentage of preschoolers with both
  parents in work force
• Second highest per capita rate of child abuse in
  child care

43
Voluntary registration is confusing

• Registration is an indicator to parents that I
  provide safe and quality care.
• Yes! 78 registered providers
• No! 58 non-registered providers
• It doesn't mean anything. I was registered
  for four years and did not get inspected once. I
  sent for and got my registration through the
  mail.
• Source ISU Extension (CD-DIAL) Larson
  Hegland, Iowa Family Child Care Survey (2003)

44
Regulation helps poor quality care improve

• Parents choose care based on what they can see
• Quality of interaction between caregiver and
  parents
• Quality of interaction between caregiver and
  children
• Regulation provides consumer protection for what
  parents cannot see
• Health safety standards
• Regulation protects consumers
• Gives parents choices
• Regulation helps keep good caregivers
• Persuades poor caregivers to find other
  employment

45
Training helps mediocre quality care improve

• Other states Performance-based training programs
• Linked to good quality (e.g., CDA)
• Iowa uses training to persuade providers to
• Participate in training
• Register voluntarily
• Results of Iowa training show
• Outputs, not outcomes
• Therefore, training provides an inefficient and
  ineffective substitute for regulation

46
Regulation, training, quality
Training
Good
Mediocre
Regulation
Poor
Child Care Quality Levels
47
Training, Regulation, Quality in Other States
Advanced Training
Basic Training
Regulation
48
Training, Regulation, Quality in Iowa
Basic Training
Regulation
49
To improve quality of child care in Iowa

• Improve regulation and enforcement
• Provide consumer protection for safe, nurturing
  family child care
• Provide professional development opportunities
• Use performance-based training models
• Provide tiered reimbursements for quality
• Preserve public funding for comprehensive child
  development programs for children at-risk
• Shared Visions and Head Start

50
Midwest Child Care Research Consortium

• Members of the Consortium
• Center on Children, Families and the Law, U of
  Nebraska
• The Gallup Organization
• University of Nebraska
• University of Missouri
• Iowa State University
• University of Kansas
• Child Care and Early Childhood Divisions IA KS
  MO NE
• CCRRs and other agencies

• Funders
• U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
  Child Care Bureau
• Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, Kansas City

51
Thanks to our Iowa Partners

• Iowa Department of Human Services
• Iowa Cooperative Extension
• Child Care Resource Referral Agencies
• Iowa State University