Using Early Care and Education Administrative Data Naneida Lazarte-Alcala, Ph.D. Oklahoma Department of Human Services

Overview 1. Addressing policy-relevant research questions 2. Developing internal partnerships 3. Leveraging resources to support linking administrative data 4. Collaborating with external researchers and community partners Highlight two specific projects: Child Care Administrative Data Analysis grant and CCDBG Implementation Research and Evaluation Planning grant

Addressing policy-relevant questions Goal : To assess the efficacy of early care and education programs and services in increasing access by low-income families to high-quality programs and promoting learning and school readiness outcomes Information needs: Identify gaps in the availability of quality early childhood education and family services across the state Determine the effect of CCDF subsidized child care on school readiness Investigate changes in profile of families who receive CCDF subsidies

Addressing policy-relevant questions Child Care Administrative Data Analysis grant: Objective #3: Investigate changes in profile of families who receive CCDF subsidies

Addressing policy-relevant questions Child Care Administrative Data Analysis grant: Objective #3: Investigate changes in profile of families who receive CCDF subsidies a) Preparation: Identify data contacts and coordination Understand the process for accessing and using the data from each data system Data security and human subjects protection Prepare specific data needs, criteria to extract sample, and methods of calculation

Addressing policy-relevant questions Child Care Administrative Data Analysis grant: Objective #3: Investigate changes in profile of families who receive CCDF subsidies a) Preparation (Cont.): Determine data usability: Source(s) Data elements and definitions Quality Appropriateness

Addressing policy-relevant questions Child Care Administrative Data Analysis grant: Objective #3: Investigate changes in profile of families who receive CCDF subsidies b) Implementation: Data from four data systems were matched: CCDF subsidy benefits, provider licensing and STAR rating, family and child demographic characteristics, and child welfare status It included detailed information on relevant school readiness risk factors

Addressing policy-relevant questions Child Care Administrative Data Analysis grant: Objective #3: Investigate changes in profile of families who receive CCDF subsidies b) Implementation (Cont.): Total of 30 variables: child factors, child welfare status, provider factors, subsidy information, head of household characteristics, and family factors Demographic profile of families that received CCDF subsidies in 2010 was developed Implemented trend analysis to compare profiles across years : 2010-2016

c) Results highlights: The ratio of eligible children with CCDF subsidy benefits had a steady decline from 17.7 percent to 12.5 percent The profile of families receiving CCDF subsidy benefits has significantly changed over the last seven years

Addressing policy-relevant questions c) Results highlights(Cont.): The participation of older children; those identifying themselves as ‘Black’, ‘AI/AN’, or Hispanic; living in a foster home or relative’s home; with a substantiated finding of abuse or neglect; in foster care has increased (‘White’, own residence, without a substantiated finding of CA&N, not in FC are still the characteristics of the majority) The setting is increasingly becoming a center, larger in capacity, and certified with a 3 Stars level (2 Stars are still the more frequent program among children receiving)

Addressing policy-relevant questions c) Results highlights(Cont.): The monthly subsidy, family copayments, and caretaker employment as the qualifying event for accessing subsidy have increased (subsidy of $201.00 and $400.00, copayment of $50.00 or less, and caretaker employment as the qualifying event for accessing subsidy are still the characteristics of the majority) Subsidy recipients tend to live to a greater extent in households where the head is younger and single, family income has slightly increase, are less likely to receive SNAP or TANF

Developing internal partnerships Involving key staff members Fostering an effective collaboration: Common goal Trust and mutually beneficial relationship Equal access to information and knowledge Relationship management: Understanding and addressing the needs of the partners Learn how to communicate with partners Permanent, relevant communication

Leveraging resources Finding relevant funding opportunities: Address policy-relevant questions and/or requirements Low or no-cost sharing Peer learning community Involving key collaborators Leading internal grant application approval Leading and coordinating grant application production, support and submission

Collaborating with external partners CCDBG Implementation Research and Evaluation grant (Phase I): Assessing the Impact of Child Care Subsidy on Program Access and Quality Objective #2: To examine how parents use information about subsidized programs to select care Objective #3: To explore alternatives for supporting providers as they self-assess program quality to promote continued quality improvement; and

Collaborating with external partners CCDBG Implementation Research and Evaluation grant (Phase I): Assessing the Impact of Child Care Subsidy on Program Access and Quality Combine primary and secondary data: Data collection specifically for the project objective Data from four data systems were matched: CCDF subsidy benefits, provider licensing and STAR rating, family and child demographic characteristics, and child welfare status

THANK YOU Contact Information: Naneida Lazarte Alcala Office of Performance Outcomes and Accountability Oklahoma Department of Human Services 405-521-4175 Naneida.lazartealcala@okdhs.org