1. Family Child Care Quality: Implications for Children with Disabilities Michael Gamel-McCormick Center for Disabilities Studies University of Delaware Annual International Conference on Young Children with Special Needs and Their Families Division for Early Childhood, CEC December 7, 2004 Chicago, Illinois

2. All of this material is available at: Center for Disabilities Studies University of Delaware www.udel.edu/cds

3. For today…  A brief description of quality child care and the larger child care quality study  The results of the family child care quality sub-study  The results of the children with disabilities child care sub-study  Implications and questions

4. What IS a quality Early Care and Education Program?  Plan and implement curriculum specifically to develop children’s social, emotional, cognitive, physical, and language abilities  Staff have responsive, interpersonal relationships with the children they serve –They listen –They get down to the child’s level –They respond to both verbal and non-verbal interactions –They initiate and continue interactions with children –They expand children’s communications –They place child-teacher interactions above all else except the health and safety of children

5. What IS a quality Early Care and Education Program? (cont.)  Child-teacher ratios allow for quality program planning and interaction: –Infants: 1 teacher to three infants –Toddlers: 1 teacher to four toddlers –Preschoolers: 1 teacher to eight preschoolers –Kindergarten/1 st grade: 1 teacher to 12 children –School-age: 1 teacher to 15 children  Highly trained and experienced teachers  A program structure that supports teachers as they plan and implement curriculum

6. What IS a quality Early Care and Education Program? (cont.)  Opportunities for teachers to continue their education  Supervision of teachers that provides them with on-going feedback, opportunities to self-critique, and resources to improve their teaching  Management practices that oversee all operations of the program (fiscal, service, family interactions) and provide the support for staff to improve their skills  Management that removes staff that do not perform to quality levels  flexibility of programs to meet individual needs of children  inclusion of children of all abilities, including those with specific disabilities

7. What IS a quality Early Care and Education Program? (cont.)  Excellent family-program relations  Incorporation of families’ cultures, backgrounds, and preferences  Appropriate materials and equipment to address children’s needs  Preventative environments and interactions that promote positive behavior  Safe and healthy environments

8. The Delaware Early Care and Education Baseline Quality Study A Report of 585 Early Care and Education Settings in Delaware

9. What settings were measured?  Infant-toddler programs (113)  Three to five year old settings (221)  Head Start settings (82)  Family child care settings (85)  Part-day settings (43)  School-age settings (41)  All randomly selected from the full population of early care and education programs in Delaware.

10. How was Quality Measured?  Three primary measures: –Environmental Rating Scales Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale-Revised Infant/Toddler Environmental Rating Scale Family Day Care Rating Scale School-age Care Environmental Rating Scale –An Interaction Scale (Teacher-Child Interaction Scale) –A Program Questionnaire –Interviews Director and Teacher

11. Overall Findings: Teachers’ Hourly Wages What do you consider your average hourly wage? Program TypeAverage hourly wageRangeN Family child care programs $6.26 $.95 - $15.00 64 Center-based care programs $8.68 $5.54- $19.00 281

12. Overall findings: Teachers’ Hourly Wages What do you consider your average hourly wage? Program TypeAverage hourly wageRangeN Head Start/ECAP programs $10.78 $6.25- $24.00 81 Part-day programs $10.32 $3.27- $23.00 55 Total $8.91 $.95- $24.00 481

13. Overall Findings: Quality of Center-Based Programs Serving Infants and Toddlers 21.3% N=24 53.1% N=60 25.7% N=29 8.8% N=10 20.4% N=23 70.8% N=80 33.6% N=38 32.7% N=37 33.6% N=38 8.0% N=9 46.0% N=52 46.0% N=52 47.8% N=54 38.1% N=43 14.2% N=16 23.9% N=27 50.4% N=57 25.7% N=29 29.6% N=29 50.0% N=49 20.4% N=20 Figure Legend = rating of “poor”= rating of “mediocre”= rating of “good”

14. Overall Findings: Quality of Center- Based Programs Serving 3 to 5-yr-olds 38.6% N=64 48.2% N=80 13.3% N=22 26.5% N=44 42.8% N=71 30.7% N=51 37.6% N=62 42.4% N=70 20.0% N=33 9.7% N=16 47.9% N=79 42.4% N=70 59.4% N=98 20.0% N=33 20.6% N=34 43.9% N=72 34.8% N=57 21.3% N=35 45.5% N=60 42.4% N=56 12.1% N=16 Figure Legend = rating of “poor”= rating of “mediocre”= rating of “good”

15. Overall Findings: Quality of Head Start Programs 62.2% N=51 36.6% N=30 1.2% N=1 52.4% N=43 34.1% N=28 13.4% N=11 43.9% N=36 50.0% N=41 6.1% N=5 18.3% N=15 75.6% N=62 6.1% N=5 68.3% N=56 17.1% N=14 14.6% N=12 65.9% N=54 31.7% N=26 2.4% N=2 69.1% N=38 29.1% N=16 1.8% N=1 Figure Legend = rating of “poor”= rating of “mediocre”= rating of “good”

16. Family Child Care Findings: Settings Providing Services to Children with Disabilities Provide Services Do Not Provide Services Family Child Care Programs 2 (2.4%) 83 (97.6%) All Other Programs 131 (26.2%) 369 (72.8%)

17. Family Child Care Findings: Settings Enrolling Children with Disabilities Children with Disabilities Enrolled Children with Disabilities Not Enrolled Family Child Care Programs 13 (15.3%) 72 (84.7%) All Other Programs 144 (28.8%) 356 (71.2%)

18. Family Child Care Findings: Total Number of Children with Disabilities Being Cared For Children with Disabilities Children without Disabilities Family Child Care Programs 14 (2.4%) 578 (97.6%) All Other Programs 381 (4.9%) 7,381 (95.1%)

19. FCC Overall Quality 2 Rating on the FDCRS “Basic Care Routines” Scale* *Ratings of 1.00-2.99 are considered “poor,” ratings of 3.00-4.99 are considered “mediocre,” and ratings of 5.00-7.00 are considered “good” (Cost, Quality, and Child Outcomes in Child Care Centers Public Report, 1995). = rating of “poor” = rating of “mediocre” = rating of “good”

20. Space and Furnishing Quality Rating on the FDCRS “Basic Care Routines” Scale* *Ratings of 1.00-2.99 are considered “poor,” ratings of 3.00-4.99 are considered “mediocre,” and ratings of 5.00-7.00 are considered “good” (Cost, Quality, and Child Outcomes in Child Care Centers Public Report, 1995). = rating of “poor” = rating of “mediocre” = rating of “good”

21. Basic Care Routines Quality Rating on the FDCRS “Basic Care Routines” Scale* *Ratings of 1.00-2.99 are considered “poor,” ratings of 3.00-4.99 are considered “mediocre,” and ratings of 5.00-7.00 are considered “good” (Cost, Quality, and Child Outcomes in Child Care Centers Public Report, 1995). = rating of “poor” = rating of “mediocre” = rating of “good”

22. Language and Reasoning Quality Rating on the FDCRS “Basic Care Routines” Scale* *Ratings of 1.00-2.99 are considered “poor,” ratings of 3.00-4.99 are considered “mediocre,” and ratings of 5.00-7.00 are considered “good” (Cost, Quality, and Child Outcomes in Child Care Centers Public Report, 1995). = rating of “poor” = rating of “mediocre” = rating of “good”

23. Learning Activities Quality Rating on the FDCRS “Basic Care Routines” Scale* *Ratings of 1.00-2.99 are considered “poor,” ratings of 3.00-4.99 are considered “mediocre,” and ratings of 5.00-7.00 are considered “good” (Cost, Quality, and Child Outcomes in Child Care Centers Public Report, 1995). = rating of “poor” = rating of “mediocre” = rating of “good” Figure 8: Family Child Care Programs

24. Social Development Quality Rating on the FDCRS “Basic Care Routines” Scale* *Ratings of 1.00-2.99 are considered “poor,” ratings of 3.00-4.99 are considered “mediocre,” and ratings of 5.00-7.00 are considered “good” (Cost, Quality, and Child Outcomes in Child Care Centers Public Report, 1995). = rating of “poor” = rating of “mediocre” = rating of “good”

25. Summary  FCCs with and without children with disabilities had similar quality in: –Space and furnishings –Learning activities  FCCs with children with disabilities had poorer quality: –Basic care routines  FCCs with children with disabilities had better quality in: –Language and reasoning –Social Development

26. Trends  Across all types of programs, the quality of care in programs with Children with Disabilities is generally better  In FCCs, that trend only holds true for social development and language and reasoning  Most importantly, the quality of FCCs and the overall quality of child care in general is mediocre to poor