Transcript Document

Multiple Child Care Arrangements and
Young Children’s Behavioral Outcomes
Taryn W. Morrissey
Abstract
Using data from the NICHD Study of Early Child Care and Youth
Development (SECCYD), this project examined the prevalence and
characteristics associated with the use of multiple, concurrent,
nonparental child care arrangements during the preschool years, and
how experiencing multiple arrangements impacts children’s behavior.
Among both low- and higher-income families, older children, those
primarily cared for in informal child care, those living in cohabitating or
single-parent households, and those whose mothers were employed
fewer than 40 hours per week were more likely to be in multiple
arrangements than their counterparts. High-quality primary child care
and low maternal satisfaction with the primary care arrangement
predicted the subsequent use of multiple arrangements. Experiencing
2 concurrent arrangements, but not 3 or more, was associated with a
small increase in externalizing problems. Limited support was found
for the moderating effects of primary child care type. Potential
implications for policy and research are discussed.
Study 1: Why do Families Use Multiple Child
Care Arrangements?
1. Preference-driven: Multiple arrangements are preferred patchworks of care
designed to expose children to a range of settings, caregivers, and peer
groups.
2. Employment-driven: Multiple arrangements are necessary to provide child
care coverage during parents’ work hours.
3. Market-driven: The structure and characteristics of primary early care and
education (ECE) programs do not individually meet families’ child care needs
and preferences, so families combine several arrangements.
Figure 3 provides a framework in which child care choice is the result of
parents balancing their preferences for quality with the practical constraints of
employment factors and cost, within the larger constraint of the ECE options
available in the market (adapted from Blau, 2001).
Figure 3. A model of supply and demand concerning parent choice in child care.
Early Care & Education (ECE) Availability
SUPPLY
Cost, type, and quality of child care
# of adults and children in the home
Parent’s satisfaction with child care
Family structure
Child age
Numbers and Combinations of Child Care
Arrangements
Consistent with national surveys (e.g., Capizzano & Adams, 2000), at any point
before entering school, between 10% and 33% of children with employed
mothers in the NICHD SECCYD experienced a “patchwork” of 2 or more
nonparental child care arrangements during a single week. As shown in Figures
1 and 2, the rate of multiple arrangements increased with age, and most
children in multiple arrangements were in a combination of formal (regulated
center or family child care) and informal (relative, nanny, or babysitter) care.
Figure 1. Numbers of concurrent, nonparental child care arrangements among
children with employed mothers in the NICHD SECCYD.
100%
90%
80%
Number of Child
Care Arrangements
70%
0
1
2
3 or more
60%
50%
40%
30%
10%
Employment Factors
DEMAND
Parent’s education and attitudes
Race/ethnicity
Children’s age and health
Parent’s work hours
Parents work schedule
Budget (income)
Study 1: Analyses
Random effects logistic regression models were used to compare the preference,
employment, and child care characteristics among children with employed
mothers in a single child care arrangement to those in multiple arrangements (0 =
one arrangement, 1 = two or more) at 6, 15, 24, 36, and 54 months in the NICHD
SECCYD (N = 759). The moderating effect of family income was tested using
interactions between low-income status (1 = income-to-needs ratio < 2.00, 0 =
ratio >= 2.00). The changing influences of child’s health, family income, maternal
wages, child care quality, costs, and maternal satisfaction with child care were
tested using predictors lagged one time point.
Table 1. Random Effects Logistic Regression Analysis Predicting the Use of Multiple
Arrangements Among Children 6-54 months with Employed Mothers (N = 759)
Mothers’ attitudes toward maternal employment
6
15
24
36
54
n = 806
n = 807
n = 800
n = 805
n = 759
Employment Factors
Mother works >40 hours per week
Age in months
Figure 2. Combinations of child care types among children in 2 or more child care
arrangements in the NICHD SECCYD.
70%
60%
50%
Child Care
Combinations
40%
2 Regulated Care
2 Informal Care
Combination
30%
20%
Child Care Factors
Mother’s marital status
Married (reference)
Cohabitating
Single
Child’s primary type of child care arrangement
Center care (reference)
Grandparent care
In-home care
Family child care
Quality of primary child care arrangement
Child’s age (in months)
B (SE)
Quality of primary child care (lagged)
Mothers’ satisfaction with primary care (lagged)
0%
6
n = 67
15
24
36
54
n = 65
n = 71
n = 113
n = 431
Age in months
Note: Additional child (e.g., gender), family (e.g., maternal education), and child care
characteristics (e.g., hours in care) were included in the model but were unrelated to the likelihood
of using multiple child care arrangements.
• Children primarily cared for by grandparents or in-home providers were
more likely to have secondary arrangements than children cared for
primarily in centers. One reason for this is that many parents supplement
informal care with part-day early education programs, e.g., preschool or
nursery school programs, that require wraparound care. A second possibility
is that many informal caregivers are employed in other capacities and tend
to be less reliable than regulated family or center child care.
• The associations between family and child care factors did not vary with
family income status, suggesting that the characteristics of primary child care
arrangements and family structure are important to families’ child care
decisions across the income spectrum.
Prior studies suggest that experiencing multiple arrangements is associated
with increased behavioral problems, particularly among boys (Youngblade,
2003), children with difficult temperaments (de Schipper et al., 2004), and
children in low-quality primary arrangements (Tran & Weinraub, 2006). Moving
among arrangements may be a stressful experience for children, and
contribute to poorer social adjustment.
However, most previous research has used cross-sectional data and statistical
techniques that may not adequately control for selection factors into child care.
As demonstrated in Study 1, several child, family, and child care characteristics
are associated with selection into multiple arrangements, and many of these
factors are also associated with children’s outcomes; these factors must be
taken into account to isolate the relationship between child care and children’s
development. Within-child fixed effects regressions reduce the likelihood of
omitted variables bias by comparing each child’s score to the same child’s
average score across time, differencing out both measured and unmeasured
stable effects.
Odds Ratio
Study 2: Analyses
-.03† (.01)
.97
-.66** (.20)
.52
.80* (.39)
.69* (.30)
2.23
1.99
2.28*** (.34)
1.13*** (.29)
.30 (.23)
.29† (.16)
9.78
3.10
1.35
1.34
.06*** (.01)
1.06
.72* (.28)
2.05
-.38* (.16)
.85
Lagged Factors
10%
• Cohabitating and mother-headed households were more likely to use
multiple arrangements than married households, where fathers are more
involved in child care.
Study 2: What are the Impacts of Multiple
Arrangements on Children’s Behavior?
Preference Factors
0%
• The availability of paternal care and the characteristics of children’s primary
child care arrangements, particularly the hours, the ages served, quality, and
parental satisfaction with the arrangement, emerged as relevant factors in the
decision to use multiple child care arrangements.
• The number of hours mothers were employed was negatively related to the
use of multiple arrangements, but the causal direction is unclear. These
mothers may be able to secure single arrangements that meet their child care
needs, or single arrangements facilitate demanding employment hours.
Preference Factors
DEMAND
Significant Predictors
20%
Study 1: Results
†p
< .10, *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.
The associations between the number of concurrent child care arrangements
and children’s behavioral outcomes were examined using both randomintercept and within-child fixed effects regression with data from the NICHD
SECCYD. Multiple imputation was used to reduce potential bias resulting from
missing data, which increased the sample size from 588 to 832 children who
were in 1 or more nonparental care arrangement and whose mothers were
employed at least once at 24, 36, and 54 months.
• Predictor: The number of concurrent child care arrangements, dummy-coded
(0 = one arrangement, 1 = two arrangements, 2 = three or more)
• Outcomes: Mothers’ reports from the Externalizing and Internalizing scales of
the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL: Achenbach, 1991) at 24, 36 and 54
months, and the Prosocial Composite and Disrupt scales of the Adaptive Social
Behavior Inventory (ASBI: Hogan et al., 1992) at 24 and 36 months
• Controls: Both stable (e.g., gender, race) and time-varying (e.g., parenting
quality, family structure) covariates were included in the random-effects
models. Time-varying covariates only were included in the fixed effects models.
Hypotheses
1. Children exhibit more behavioral problems and less prosocial behavior when
experiencing multiple arrangements than when in single arrangements; this is
moderated by gender, temperament, age, and the type and quality of the
primary care arrangement.
2. Random-intercept and fixed effects models will produce slightly different
results if all relevant, stable selection factors are not controlled.
Table 2. Predicting Children’s Behavioral Outcomes from Number of Nonparental
Child Care Arrangements at 24, 36, and 54 months: Random-Intercept and WithinChild Fixed Effects Regression Results (N = 832)
Outcome
Random Effects
ASBI Prosocial Composite
B
Fixed Effects
SE
B
SE
1 arrangement (omitted)
2 arrangements
-.10
.13
-.06
.18
3 or more arrangements
.003
.31
-.20
.41
ASBI Disrupt Scale
1 arrangement (omitted)
B
SE
B
SE
2 arrangements
.21
.16
.11
.25
3 or more arrangements
.30
.38
.47
.51
CBCL Internalizing Scale
B
SE
B
SE
1 arrangement (omitted)
2 arrangements
.25
.49
.30
.59
3 or more arrangements
.17
1.20
-.21
1.32
CBCL Externalizing Scale
B
SE
B
SE
1 arrangement (omitted)
2 arrangements
.82†
.43
.98*
.49
3 or more arrangements
-.36
1.03
-.43
1.15
Note: Separate models were run for each outcome. Child (e.g., gender), family (e.g., parenting quality),
child care (e.g., quality), and background (e.g., proportion of time mother was partnered) characteristics
were included as controls.
†p
< .10, *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.
Study 2: Results
• The experience of multiple child care arrangements is largely unrelated to
children’s concurrent prosocial and disruptive behavior.
• However, experiencing 2 arrangements was associated with a small
increase in externalizing problems (r = .03). Moving among 2 arrangements
may be stressful for young children.
• In contrast, experiencing 3 or more arrangements was unrelated to
children’s behavior. Children in 3 or more arrangements were more likely to
be in in-home care than those in 2 arrangements, which may partially
account for this difference.
• Child gender, temperament, age, and the quality of primary child care did
not moderate the relationship between number of arrangements and
children’s behavior. There was limited evidence that the primary use of
family child care moderated associations between behavioral problems and
prosocial behaviors and the experience of 3 or more arrangements.
• Random and fixed effects regression models produced similar results,
suggesting that an omitted, time-invariant variable does not account for the
relationship between multiple arrangements and children’s behavior.
Conclusions & Implications
• Multiple child care arrangements are common among preschool-age
children, and the use of multiple arrangements is related to the
characteristics of children's primary arrangements.
• Given the conservative nature of fixed effects models, the small but
significant association between number of arrangements and
children’s externalizing problems underscores how the stability of child
care throughout a single day or week can impact behavioral outcomes.
• The impacts of multiple arrangements on children’s development
should be taken into account when designing early childhood policies,
particularly considering the high rate of full-time parental employment
and the growth in part-day prekindergarten programs, which together
may lead to the use of multiple arrangements.
References
Blau, D. M. (2001). The child care problem: An economic analysis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Capizzano, J., & Adams, G. (2000). The number of child care arrangements used by children under five: Variation across states.
Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
de Schipper, J. C., Tavecchio, L. W. C., van Ijzendoorn, M. H., & van Zeijl, J. (2004). Goodness of fit in day care: Relations of
temperament, stability, and quality of care with child’s adjustment. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19, 257-272.
Tran, H., & Weinraub, M. (2006). Child care effects in context: Quality, stability, and multiplicity in nonmaternal child care arrangements
during the first 15 months of life. Developmental Psychology, 42, 566-582.
Youngblade, L. M. (2003). Peer and teacher ratings of third- and fourth-grade children’s social behavior as a function of early maternal
employment. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 44, 477-488.
This project was funded by Child Care Bureau Research Scholars Grant #90YE9989.
Author Affiliation: Dept. of Human Development, Cornell University, [email protected]