#UnequalStart @RussellSageFdn

Cradle to Kindergarten: A New Plan to Promote All Children’s Development Ajay Chaudry, Taryn Morrissey, Christina Weiland, and Hirokazu Yoshikawa BRIEFING April 24, 2017 Georgetown Center on Poverty and inequality & U.S. Senate HELP and Finance Committees

Take aways Most children in the U.S. are not entering school ready to learn. Income gaps in achievement and development are very large and begin early. Income gaps in families’ access to and the quality of early learning opportunities are large and growing. The earliest years are the most promising period for brain and skill development, yet it is when the U.S. invests the least. Greater investments in a cohesive vision of high-quality early childhood interventions can promote improved, more equitable development and give all children a level playing field.

Selected school readiness skills for children ages 3 to 6, by parent education. Half of children in the U.S. are measured as not “school-ready” at kindergarten entry in terms of early literacy, cognitive skills, social and emotional development, and approaches to learning. 49 percent measured with low literacy skills and 48 percent with low math skills at KG entry in 2010 ECLS-K (Bassok & Latham 2016) Children in low-income families and those whose parents’ have education levels below a college degree are significantly more disadvantaged in their school readiness. Two-thirds of children whose families have incomes in the lowest quintile of the distribution with low literacy and math skills (Bassok & Latham 2016) This slide shows the variation in some selected school readiness skills and the gradient by parent education. Source: 2012 (NHES)

Estimated trends in test performance by family income level, age 13. These figures show reading and math scores for high, mid, and low income families from 1970 to 2010. There are two important trends to take away from these: 1) Income gaps, particularly in reading scores, have widened l since 1970. 2) This is not a problem of poverty – children in middle income families are not able to keep up with those in high-income families. Source: (Reardon)

Average cognitive and achievement skill impact at the end of preschool program treatment. What the research tells us about investing early in high-quality early education Early education benefits all children, with larger benefits to more disadvantaged children. Average impact of 1 year of preschool at end of the 4 year old year is 1/3 of a year of additional learning beyond comparison groups. This figure is from a large meta-analysis of 74 studies examining the impacts of early education programs on children’s cognitive skills and achievement, dating back to the 1960s. Notably, the vast majority of effects are above 0 – meaning that nearly al have a positive effect on cognitive outcomes, with recent evaluations averaging about ¼ to 1/3 of a SD, which is a sizeable effect. - Changes over time in counter-factual At-scale, high quality universal public preschool programs in Tulsa & Boston have shown substantial impacts on children’s early learning (more than half a year of additional learning beyond comparison groups) Boston Pre-K put on there (not counted in the fit-line) demonstrates higher possible benefits with elements that we describe in the book that can contribute to high quality Both “model” preschool programs (e.g., Abecedarian and Perry Preschool) and large-scale programs (Head Start) show significant long-term benefits for participants and society. Decreased grade retention, special education assignment, juvenile and adult crime Increased high school graduation, adult earnings, improved health Source: Magnuson & Duncan, 2016, The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences

Educational investments in the early years have greatest benefit – but we do too little. Public investments in children are lowest in developmental and learning period when they matter most: before children enter universal publicly supported schooling (birth to age 4) (Aber and Chaudry, 2010; Heckman, et. al. 2010, 2014) Most public expenditures on children are on K–12 education; Federal and state government expenditures for children birth to age 3 average about $5,000 per child, a fraction of the approximately $14,000 per child in public investments on children 6 and over. Low-income children are at the greatest disadvantage before they ever enter school. As a developmentally crucial stage with long-term consequences that shape children’s education paths and the ability to make the most of educational investments that follow. The accumulated early developmental disadvantage in school readiness creates an early gap that is difficult to overcome and persists/further widens in the school years. Because investments in low-income children may be especially cost effective in their earliest years (Shonkoff and Phillips 2000), the developmental inequities in public investment appear especially irrational. Source: Kena et al. 2016

U.S. workers lack access to paid family leave – especially lower income workers. Inequities in high-quality caregiver-child time begin at birth. The vast majority of working parents in the U.S. lack access to paid family leave to recover and spend precious bonding time with their children. Low-wage workers are even less likely – only 1 in 20 has access to paid family leave. Source: US DOL Bureau of Labor Statistics Leave benefits: Access, National Compensation Survey, March 2014

Large disparities by family income in use of early learning programs, especially for youngest children. Rates of center-based ECE for infants and toddlers, by family income and child age, 2011 Growth in the use of center-based early education over the last two decades has increased for children of every age from birth to five years old. Much of the recent growth actually occurring among infants and toddlers, with the increased use of centers for early care and learning driven primarily by higher-income families with working mothers. For many parents, early exposure to centers rather than more informal home-based care is viewed as preparation for later academic success (NICHD Early Child Care Research Network & Duncan, 2003). In fact, 2 year olds from higher-income families are more likely to be in center-based early learning settings than are 3 year olds from low-income families. Source: Chaudry, Morrissey, Weiland, and Yoshikawa (2017) (2008 SIPP Panel Data)

Children from low-income families experience lower quality, as well as less access. THIS is for children at age 4 CENTER-BASED Even when they attend preschool, unfortunately, children from low-income families experience lower quality across all types of care. As shown with the ECLS-B data presented in Panel A in Figures 2.8 and 2.9, there is a fairly consistent income gradient or step function across the care types – quality is higher with each incremental increase in income. Children from the highest-resourced families experienced the highest quality and children at the bottom experienced the lowest quality, with the children from other income quintiles in the middle. Some of these gaps are substantial – as large as 1.4 standard deviations (see Panel B for Figures 2.8 and 2.9).   Figure 2.10 present data on these gaps from a sample of prekindergarten classrooms across six states with similar findings. Here too, we see the familiar step pattern across quintiles in Panel A. In Panel B, differences in quality experienced by children in the top income quintile versus the bottom quintile are as large 0.8 standard deviations. Source: Chaudry, Morrissey, Weiland, Yoshikawa (2017)

Cradle to Kindergarten: A new plan for high-quality early childhood interventions that gives all children a fair shot. Paid parental leave as social insurance for children and working parents. Reliable guarantee of child care assistance for working families to assure all children can access good, stable early care and learning opportunities. Universal early education that starts at age three. Re-imagine Head Start to begin early and provide continuous development services to the most vulnerable children until school entry Our plan addresses these gaps in access and quality through a cohesive, 4-part proposa:

Paid parental leave Current Context Our Proposal FMLA provides only unpaid leave at the birth of a child. Only 60 percent of workers are eligible, and far fewer can afford to take unpaid time when also facing added costs to families of a new baby. U.S. just 1 of 2 among 170 countries with no guarantee of paid leave. 13% of private sector workers currently have access to paid family leave, and just 1 in 20 lower wage workers do. A few states have established paid leave programs (California, New Jersey, Rhode Island, New York in 2018) Paid parental leave to guarantee families with working parents 12 to 16 weeks per family of partially paid, job- protected leave at birth or adoption of a child. Families decide how to split weeks of leave with bonus if both parents take some period. Parents get a percentage of their wages during the weeks each is on leave up to a maximum benefit. Administer as social insurance through Social Security system. Recognize being born and having a child are common experiences like old-age or disability for which we can and should insure economic security. The Family and Medical Leave Act provides for only unpaid leave at the birth of a child, with just 60 percent of workers even eligible, and far fewer able to afford to take unpaid time when also facing the added costs to families of a new baby. New Guinea only other country among those documented by ILO (elsewhere references indicate that Swaziland and Suriname may not have paid leave, but this may be outdated) Just 13 percent of private sector workers currently have access to paid family leave, and only 1 in 20 lower wage workers – arguably those who need it most – have it.

Affordable High-Quality Care and Education Current Context Our Proposal Good child care is a basic need for working parents, but it is very expensive and hard to find. Families with children under 5 spend 11% of incomes on child care. Families with incomes below 200% FPL spend 22%. 15% of eligible families with children receive child care subsidies through Federal and State CCDF funding. States establish most program rules which vary by state and are complex for families to navigate. Child care tax credits provide minimal benefits (max $600) and are not refundable. “Assurance” subsidies support costs of high-quality care and education for low- and moderate-income working families with children under age 5 Family incomes below 250% FPL & state option to go to 400% FPL. Family make co-payments on sliding scale, contributing 3-10% of income. Subsidies adequate to pay for quality. Only licensed care eligible for subsidies. Increased, refundable child care tax credit Tax credit for proportion of paid costs for all types of paid care (licensed and unlicensed). Maximum benefit increased to $3000 for one child. These are families’ actual out-of-pocket expenses --

Universal Early Education Current Context Our Proposal Piecemeal system A few states and cities have universal programs for 4 year olds, and some states have none Fewer public programs for 3 year olds Variation across many dimensions (governance, location, hours of services, workforce, quality assessment) in what exists across states Small, discretionary federal grants to encourage further growth and development of state programs. High-quality universal preschool for children aged 3 and 4. Developmentally focused curricula and professional development Consistent structural quality standards across the system with regular and transparent measurement of process quality. Full school-day and longer school year, with wrap- around care options to meet family needs Mixed auspice (in schools and community centers) Alignment with K-3 education 42 states and DC have some pre-kindergarten services. Georgia, Oklahoma, FL, WV, and DC have universal programs for their 4 year olds and serve a majority of them. 8 states have no state preschool programs and 10 states serve less than 5 percent of population Overall State prek serves an estimated 29 percent of 4 year olds but only 5 percent of 3 year olds.

A New Head Start Begins at (or before) Birth Current Context Our Proposal Beneficial program aimed at most disadvantaged, but serves fraction of eligible ~40% in Head Start ~4% in Early Head Start What happens in the context of universal preschool? Target the most vulnerable young children with services starting before or at birth: Communities of concentrated poverty. Poor families and those facing particularly adverse circumstances (e.g., foster care). Integrate center-based early learning with home visiting and other comprehensive services. Head Start centers as hubs to link with child health and other service providers (e.g., WIC, Medicaid/CHIP). Generate innovations in birth to age 3 services and test program elements to further improvise systems. Head Start launched more than 50 years ago with longstanding mission to serve the most disadvantaged children and families with a comprehensive model of services. Program designed to offer positive developmental opportunities to improve the early intellectual capacity and school performance of children born into poverty Provides attention to core educational experience and access to basic health care, social services, family engagement, and community participation in governance. Head Start has strong ties to communities with a local governance structure. Model worldwide. This approach to combine education, health, and social supports together with early education is still considered as a model by leaders globally for preprimary education worldwide. Recent research indicates a mixed pattern of results and room for improvement in Head Start and Early Head Start.

A 10-year investment plan Program Cost at full implementation (in billions) Existing Funding New Investments Paid parental leave $19.0 Few state programs (including, TDI) and private employers Child Care Assurance Child & Dependent Care Tax Credit $30.2 $13.9 $16.3 State Universal Preschool for 3 and 4 year-olds $33.0 $6.2 (states) $26.8 A New Head Start for Infants and Toddlers $17.2 $9.0 $8.2 Total New Public Investments (federal and state) $70.3

Conclusions Coordinated investments to develop early childhood services infrastructure from birth to age five Builds on evidence of what works and how to support quality elements that matter for children’s developmental outcomes Invests in providing broader access to all children and higher quality provision Flexible for family needs Economic support during period that families bear the brunt of raising children and when foundational brain architecture is vulnerable to disadvantage Shared federal and state responsibility – implications for both levels of policy

#UnequalStart @RussellSageFdn