Childcare Type and Quality among Subsidy Recipients with and without Special Needs.
Amanda L Sullivan, Elyse M Farnsworth, Amy Susman-Stillman
PMID 29955205WHAT IT FOUND
Subsidies let families of children with special needs use more non-parental care and more hours, but did not consistently improve childcare quality.
At age 4, fewer subsidized children had adequate overall quality than unsubsidized children, and more were in settings exceeding recommended child-to-caregiver ratios.
Key findings
01At 9 months, 88% of families of children with special needs who used subsidies had 33 or more hours of care per week, compared with 49.5% of families without subsidies.
02At age 4, 70.3% of children with special needs in subsidized care had adequate global quality, compared with 79.5% of children with special needs in unsubsidized care.
03At ages 2 and 4, children with special needs in subsidized care were more likely to be in settings exceeding recommended child-to-adult ratios: 15.6% versus 5.6% at age 2 and 19.7% versus 8.4% at age 4.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study used existing national data from children born in 2001, so childcare policies and practices may differ now. Quality was observed only for a random subset, about 100 children at age 2 and 400 children at age 4, and not at 9 months. It is a secondary observational analysis, not a trial, so it cannot show that subsidies caused the differences in care type or quality. Special needs were identified broadly from parent report, birth records, and test scores at least 1.5 standard deviations below the mean, so the group may not match one clinical diagnosis. Some provider information, such as licensing or accreditation, was missing because providers did not respond. Reported frequency counts were rounded to the nearest 50. The supplied text does not report child developmental or therapy outcomes from these care experiences.
Declared interests
No author conflict-of-interest statement or funding source is reported in the supplied text. The paper notes that use of the data was approved by the researchers’ university institutional review board and followed requirements of the ECLS-B sponsor, the Institute of Education Sciences.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that subsidized childcare is better quality or improves child outcomes. This paper did not test therapy or developmental outcomes, and it found that subsidies increased care hours and non-parental care without consistent quality gains.