Table of Contents | Previous | Next |
FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan
4. INCREASE AFFORDABLE CHILD CARE
Approach for the Strategic Objective: Increase access to affordable, quality child care for low income, working families.
4.1 CHILD CARE: AFFORDABILITY
Program Description, Context, Legislative Intent, and Broad Program Goals
The Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) was established, under the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) of 1996, to help working low-income families achieve and maintain economic self-sufficiency and to improve the overall quality of child care. PRWORA repealed the title IV-A child care programs and replaced them with new funding administered under the revised Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) rules and regulations (Section 418 of the Social Security Act).
CCDF is comprised of three funding streams: Mandatory, Matching, and Discretionary Funds. The Mandatory and Matching Funds are appropriated for Fiscal Years 1997 through 2002 under section 418 of the Social Security Act. A State's share of the Mandatory Funds is tied to its spending under the now-repealed AFDC-related child care programs. The Matching Funds are funds remaining after the Mandatory Funds are allocated according to the statutory formula. To receive its share of the Matching Funds, a State must provide match at the current Medicaid rate, expend its Maintenance of Effort Funds, and obligate its Mandatory Funds. The Discretionary Fund (the Child Care and Development Block Grant fund) is appropriated annually by Congress. Discretionary Funds are allotted to States according to a formula based on the proportion of children under age five, children who receive free or reduced price school lunches, and average per capita income.
States are required to spend at least four percent of their CCDF funds on activities to improve the quality and availability of child care. In addition, Congress earmarked small amounts of the Discretionary Fund to be used by States for school-age care and resource and referral services, improved quality, and expanding the availability of quality infant and toddler care. The funds are provided in formula grants to States, which have the authority to make many decisions about priorities, policies, and expenditures in implementing CCDF within the parameters of Federal statute and regulations. Since there is now a single Federal child care program operating under one set of rules, States have the flexibility to serve all families through a single, integrated child care system.
Under the statute governing CCDF, eligible children are defined as those whose parents are working, or in education or training, or who are in need of protective services. Children must be under the age of 13 and reside with a family whose income does not exceed 85 percent of the State's median income (SMI) for that size family. States may serve children 13 to 19 years of age who are under court supervision or are mentally or physically incapable of self-care. In addition, under the new school-age certificate program, young people, up to age 19, may be served. States must spend 70 percent of their CCDF monies to provide child care services for families on, or transitioning off, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), or at-risk of welfare dependency. States are also required to give priority to children with special needs and children from very low-income families. In their biennial plans to ACF, States must provide information concerning policy issues such as family eligibility limits, sliding fee scales, provider reimbursement rates, provider health and safety requirements, and activities to improve the quality and availability of care.
Access to quality, affordable child care is critical to achieving self-sufficiency by welfare clients. Child care subsidies also help the working poor remain self-sufficient. In Child Care: Child Care Subsidies Increase the Likelihood that Low-Income Mothers Will Work, GAO analyzed the trade-offs low-income mothers confront when they want to work but face high child care costs. According to that study, child care subsidies are often a strong factor in a parent’s ability to work, and reducing child care costs increases the likelihood that poor and near-poor mothers will be able to work. The GAO observed that affordable child care is a decisive factor that encourages low-income mothers to seek and maintain employment.
Along with other parts of the PRWORA of 1996, the legislative authority for the CCDF expires on September 30, 2002. However, ACF anticipates continuing to promote the availability of child care services as a key element in its strategy for helping families achieve economic independence. In addition, partnerships among child care providers, Head Start, public and private early childhood education, health, nutrition, mental health, and parental employment preparation programs are essential to meeting the needs of young children and their families. To this end, ACF continues to encourage collaboration at the Federal, State, and individual program levels. Doing so will involve working with our partners to increase the supply of child care, to develop measures and supports for child care quality, and to provide information to help parents make sound choices about child care.
Program Activities, Strategies, and Resources
In FY 2000, States spent $5.1 billion in Federal funds for child care and approximately $2 billion of their TANF block grant funds directly for child care services. States transferred significant amounts of TANF funds from their grants to their State Lead CCDF Agencies. In addition, $1.9 million in State funds (i.e., Matching and MOE) were spent under CCDF in FY 1999. A DHHS survey, conducted by Abt Associates, "The National Study of Child Care for Low-Income Families, State and Community Substudy," confirms that the 17 States studied spent significantly more for child care in 1999 as compared to 1997 (i.e., the median increase was 78 percent). The study also reported waiting lists in 12 of the 17 States.
On December 6, 2000, DHHS released a report stating that nationally, in an average month in 1999, only 1.8 million children in low-income families received child care through CCDF. Although this was an increase from the 1.5 million children served in FY 1998, it was only 12 percent of the children eligible for Federal child care assistance. If all States and Territories had set their eligibility at 85 percent of the SMI (the maximum allowed under Federal law) an estimated 15 million children would have been eligible for subsidies in 1999. However, only nine States and Territories set their eligibility limits at the maximum eligibility level (i.e., 85 percent of the SMI). Another nine set the maximum eligibility below 50 percent of the SMI.
Many States, confronted with a great need for child care and limited resources, are forced to make policy choices that focus assistance on certain parents while excluding others who may be struggling to hold onto a modest job without turning to welfare for help. As a result, a family of three earning as little as $17,352 a year may have too much income to be eligible for child care assistance. States also stretch dollars by establishing low payment rates to providers, or by setting high co-payment rates that may be difficult for families to afford. Almost one-half of the States allow providers to charge additional out-of-pocket costs to parents to compensate for low reimbursement rates. These measures limit parental choice and curtail the ability of families to access quality care.
Since the passage of PRWORA, one quarter of 1 percent of the CCDF has been set-aside for technical assistance (TA). The ACF Child Care Bureau's (CCB) TA efforts have included targeted TA and support to States in systems development. The CCB has placed particular emphasis on helping States to: collect, report, and manage child care data; to improve its quality; and to meet Federal requirements for reporting and consumer education. Other technical assistance includes assisting States to develop inclusion initiatives for children with disabilities, building partnerships with the private sector, and establishing successful linkages between child care programs and programs such as health services, early childhood education, and Head Start.
The Bureau employs a variety of other methods and processes to support State efforts including: consultation, peer consultation, training opportunities, development of written materials, State child care administrator meetings and leadership forums, conference calls, on-site technical assistance, and distributing information memoranda. Through an email list established by the CCB, State child care administrators communicate with each other, providing peer consultation on emerging child care policy issues.
ACF's Regional Offices continually support State efforts in developing their child care programs. For example, Region III developed a "Back-to-Basics" notebook covering essential aspects of ACF from legislation to State child care statistics. This notebook is used to orient new State child care staff and to reorient current staff. Region VII partnered with Federal, State, and community stakeholders to develop a set of health outcomes and measures for the Region VII States' Healthy Child Care America projects. Region IV developed, distributed, and implemented a strategic plan to increase full-day, year-round services among State child care agencies, Head Start agencies, State pre-K, and private foundations. Region X is developing agreements with, and guidance for, State partners on techniques of blending child care and Head Start funds. With a similar vision, Region VIII also established a Regional Early Childhood Council consisting of approximately 40 child care, Head Start, and other early childhood representatives. All ACF Regional Offices sponsor child care meetings throughout each fiscal year. For example, the Region VI Mid-Winter Leadership Conference focused on enhancing child care quality and quantity, promoting public-private partnerships, and providing child care in rural areas.
With the FY 2000 CCDF set-aside of $10 million for child care research, the Bureau awarded a 30-month contract to develop the National Child Care Research Collaboration and Archive. The archive will help improve the quality of child care research, make data more accessible to researchers for analysis, and assist key constituencies to make better use of research findings.
Through its Child Care Policy Research Consortium, the CCB supports research partnerships composed of State administrators, researchers, and practitioners. The Consortium conducts child care research relating to the many policy decisions States must consider daily. In FY 2000, the Bureau added four new research partnerships to the Consortium, increasing the membership from 13 to 22 States. Studies in progress are examining the duration of subsidies and child care arrangements across eight States; the comparison between child outcomes and parent and expert assessments of quality child care; and the effects of welfare reform on child care supply, parental choice, and economic self-sufficiency of low-income families.
The Bureau awarded 12 grants for field initiated child care research in FY 2000 and a second group of 12 with the FY 2001 appropriation. This research will provide the CCB with critically needed information on child care and its effects on child development and family well-being, and will help to develop innovative strategies to meet the needs of low-income families struggling to afford quality child care. In addition, in FY 2000 the Bureau awarded five grants to individual doctoral students to complete dissertations on child care-related topics, and funded one research fellowship through the Society for Research in Child Development. Four new grants were awarded to support doctoral students in FY 2001. Three State Lead Agencies received grants under a new FY 2001 research priority entitled State Data and Research Capacity. The purpose of these grants is to improve the capacity of States to collect child care data and use them for research purposes.
The CCB, in partnership with the ACF Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, awarded a seven-year contract to work with States on a multi-site evaluation of selected child care subsidy strategies. The long-range intent of this contract is to provide reliable information to local, State, and Federal policy-makers about the efficacy of policies and programs related to child care subsidies in promoting outcomes for children and helping low-income families obtain and retain work. Along with this contract, the Bureau awarded a separate task order to conduct a review, analysis, and synthesis of the subsidy-related research that has been completed in recent years. The resulting product will help stakeholders to better understand child care policies and programs in the post-welfare reform context.
In FY 2001, the Bureau awarded 26 new discretionary grants to local councils under the Early Learning Opportunities Act. Other FY 2001 activities included the awarding of 10 grants for technical assistance to improve child care facilities. In FY 2001, in partnership with the Head Start Bureau, a cooperative agreement was also awarded for the development of the Center on the Social and Emotional Foundations for Early Learning.
Program Coordination, Partnerships, and Cross-cutting Issues
Quality early childhood programs provide a crucial linkage for comprehensive, healthy child development to prepare children to be successful in school and later in life. Quality programs also provide needed supports to parents moving toward self-sufficiency through training and work. Recognizing the importance of comprehensive services, ACF encourages its State partners to create linkages between child care and health, family support, early childhood education, and other services at the State and community levels.
ACF continues to collaborate at the Federal level with other agencies to facilitate community-level coordination. This includes coordination within ACF among the Bureau, TANF, Head Start, Office of Child Support Enforcement, Office of Refugee Resettlement, and the Administration on Developmental Disabilities. For example, the Child Care and Head Start Bureaus jointly sponsor the QUILT (Quality in Linking Together) project that helps Head Start and child care grantees form program partnerships.
Within DHHS, the Bureau participates with the Maternal and Child Health Bureau to sponsor the Healthy Child Care America Campaign, which aims to improve health and safety in child care by creating strong links between the child care and health communities. Externally, ACF continues to partner with the Department of Labor’s Welfare-to-Work grants program, States (both individually and through national associations such as the American Public Human Services Association and the National Governors’ Association), various national child care associations, and the research community (e.g., the Child Care Research Consortium, funded by DHHS).
Program-wide Performance
The number of children served through the Child Care and Development Fund increased by more than 6 percent from 1.76 million in FY 1999 to 1.87 million in FY 2000 (measure 4.1a). While ACF came within 3 percent of its target, we are analyzing the data to understand why a few States reported fewer children served in FY 2000 than in FY 1999. A more detailed analysis of the data, including breakouts by age and other categories, will be completed after March 2002.
CCDF grantees have many efforts underway to improve access to child care for low-income families. As work continues in partnership with States to improve data collection, a number of indicators, including informal feedback from grantees, indicate that access to child care for low-income children served by CCDF is increasing.
An important access-related measure is the average percentage spent by families for child care co-payments (measure 4.1c). Some States have reduced the level of parent co-payments or have set lower co-payment amounts for the very lowest income families, enabling more families to participate in the program. In their FY 2000-2001 State Plans, 43 States and Territories (86 percent) reported waiving co-pays for some or all families at or below the poverty level. Twelve States said that all families with income at or below the poverty level are exempt from co-pays. An additional 31 States indicated that only some families at or below the poverty level must pay a fee. With the economic slow-down, many States report problems that may require reconsideration of policies that have expanded the availability and affordability of child care for low-income families. In addition, some States indicate that they are having trouble generating the State funds necessary to earn their share of the CCDF Federal Matching Funds.
On July 1, 2001, States submitted their plans for CCDF implementation for the two-year period beginning October 1, 2001. These plans are being analyzed and when completed ACF will have updated information about State child care policies and programs, including eligibility, co-payments, quality activities, and collaboration.
In developing early childhood programs, States and communities, together, craft resources from a variety of sources, including the Child Care and Development Fund, TANF, Head Start, Early Head Start, Social Services Block Grant, Title I, Even Start, the USDA Child and Adult Care Food Program, State funded pre-kindergarten programs, other State and local funding sources, foundations, charities, and businesses. Collaboration builds on the strengths of each program and blends them together in a coordinated fashion to benefit both children and their families. Collaboration benefits children by promoting continuity in services from infancy through school age and benefits the parents by ensuring that early childhood programs support work.
In the FY 2000-2001 State Plans, 28 States and territories reported that their Lead Agency partners with the entity responsible for administering State TANF funds. Eleven States indicated that they have developed a single, "seamless" system for administering child care subsidies to all families without regard to eligibility. Seventeen States said they developed initiatives to: promote "one-stop shopping" in which TANF recipients can receive child care and other benefits at a single location and to ensure effective referrals or linkages among the agencies that administer child care and TANF cash benefits.
Twenty-five States report collaborating with the State Education Department or another public or private entity to expand services for school-age children. Thirty-seven States collaborate with their State Health Department. In an increasing number of States, collaboration involves outreach on health and safety issues to child care providers and efforts to inform low-income families about the availability of subsidized health care. In their plans, 46 States described collaboration with Head Start and 25 reported joint efforts to promote early intervention for children with developmental disabilities. Twenty-six State Lead Agencies reported active collaborations with Tribal communities to improve service delivery to dually-eligible children.
As demonstrated in the discussion of child care quality under Strategic Goal 2, Objective 5, States have an exciting array of initiatives in progress to improve the quality of child care, including comprehensive consumer education for parents, grants and loans to expand the supply and quality of child care, efforts to support the professional development and compensation of child care workers, and partnerships with business, health, and education to enhance the availability of quality child care.
Data Issues
The Federal Child Care Information System (FCCIS) collects all aggregate and case-level data from the 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the Territories of American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, and the Virgin Islands, as required by CCDF legislation. States are responsible for compiling aggregate data at the State level and transmitting it electronically via the Internet to the FCCIS. (For the majority of States this is done through an automated child care information system). All data received by the FCCIS are stored in a national dataset. Data standards have been set and training and technical assistance provided to all States and Territories on reporting requirements and submission procedures.
Problems with data collection include late submission of data, incomplete data submissions, systems problems, quality controls, and technological delays. Statutory authority limits the type of data the Bureau can collect from States and State flexibility, under the statute governing the CCDF, has led to great variation in State regulations, policies, and standards. This results in numerous challenges for the CCB to produce complete, accurate, and consistent aggregate data. These challenges affect not only the comprehensiveness of the data available, but also data reliability and validity.
Throughout FY 2001, the CCB provided technical assistance (TA) designed to improve data submission and data quality. These TA activities included on-site visits; distribution of documents; enhancements to the TA Tracker software; training workshops; and software to help Tribes collect data and administer their subsidy programs.
One major TA resource, the Child Care Automation Resource Center (CCARC), a component of the Child Care Information System Technical Assistance Project (CCISTAP), is used by the States, Territories, and Tribes for interactive and immediate TA to resolve data collection problems. A unique feature of CCARC is the development of two software utilities (Child Care Data Viewer and Tribal Child Care Data Tracker), which enable States, Territories, and Tribes to use the data submitted to the Bureau for their own (local) purposes.
Other resources for States continuing to experience difficulties collecting and transmitting data are on-site TA visits, training workshops, and presentations at various regional and national meetings. In FY 2001, CCISTAP staff completed six site visits, eight tribal cluster trainings, and made presentations at 14 different conferences.. Two reporting guides were also prepared by CCISTAP to assist States, Territories, and Tribes to meet the technical requirements (e.g., data quality, sampling, optional data elements) of CCDF reporting. In addition, CCB anticipates that its new State Data and Research Capacity Grants will support States in developing their capacity to report accurate data.
Demands for child care subsidies have limited the States’ ability to commit funds for systems development, although there are indications that State expenditures for systems increased in FY 2000, compared to FY 1999. While the Bureau has noted a steady improvement in data quality from the States over the last few years, it is committed to continuing its active role to facilitate States' compliance with CCDF reporting requirements.
| Performance Measures | Targets | Actual Performance | Reference (page # in printed document) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PROGRAM GOAL: Increase the number of children of low income working families and families in training and education who have access to affordable child care. | ||||
| Objective: Increase the use of subsidies for child care services for low-income working families | ||||
| 4.1a. Increase the number of children served by CCDF subsidies from the 1998 baseline average. (Revised: formerly "receiving subsidized child care") (target number expressed in millions) | FY 03: 2.2 FY 02: 2.2* FY 01: 2.1 FY 00: 1.92 FY 99: NA |
FY 03: FY 02: FY 01: 5/02 FY 00: 1.87 FY 99: 1.76 FY 98: 1.51 |
Px 99 | |
| 4.1b. Increase the percentage of potentially eligible children who receive CCDF subsidies from the FY 1998 baseline. | FY 03: 14% FY 02: 14%* FY 01: 12.5% [13%] FY 00: New in 2001 FY 99: NA |
FY 03: FY 02: FY 01: 5/02 FY 00: 12% FY 99: 12% FY 98: 10% |
Px 99 | |
| PROGRAM GOAL: Improve access to affordable quality child care | ||||
| Objective: Improve the affordability of quality child care for families through family co-pays that are reasonable. | ||||
| 4.1c. Reduce the average percentage of family income spent in assessed child care co-payments among families receiving CCDF subsidies to the FY 1998 level and maintain at that level. | FY 03: 5.8% FY 02: 5.8% FY 01: 5.8% FY 00: 5.8% FY 99: NA |
FY 03: FY 02: FY 01: 5/02 FY 00: 3/02** FY 99: 6.2% FY 98: 5.8% |
Px 100 | |
| PROGRAM GOAL: Improve the availability of child care facilities. | ||||
| Objective: Increase the availability of regulated child care. | ||||
| 4.1d. Increase the number of slots in State-regulated child care settings from the FY 2000 baseline. (Developmental--NOTE: This measure is not limited to subsidized child care slots.) | FY 03: FY 02: FY 01: FY 00: New in 2001 |
FY 03: FY 02: FY 01: 12/02 FY 00: 5/02 Baseline |
Px 100 | |
| PROGRAM GOAL: Improve parental ability to work or attend training/education leading to greater economic productivity. | ||||
| Objective: Increase the use of child care subsidies to assist working families. | ||||
| 4.1e. Increase the number of families working and/or pursuing training/education with support of CCDF subsidies from the FY 1998 baseline. (target number expressed in millions) | FY 03: 1.2 FY 02: 1.2 FY 01: 1.1 FY 00: New in 2001 |
FY 03: FY 02: FY 01: 5/02 FY 00: 1.04 FY 99: 975,000 FY 98: 802,000 |
Px 101 | |
| Availability of Data for FY 2001 Performance Report: FY 2001 Data are due from States December 31, 2001. FY 2001 Actual Performance should be available May 2002. *Targets for FY 2002 4.1a has been revised from 2.6 to 2.2;: 4.1b from 13% to 14% **As of December 2001, 1 State has not reported data for either FY 1999 or FY 2000, and another large State's data are being verified. |
||||
| Total Funding for Child Care Programs (dollars in millions) See detailed Budget Linkage Table in Appendix. 8 for line items included in funding totals. |
FY 03: $4816.9 FY 02: $4841.9 FY 01: $4588.6 FY 00: $3550.6 FY 99: $3185.8 |
Bx: budget just. Sections Px: page # performance plan |
||
Performance Measures for FY 2003 and Final Measures for FY 2002
Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) final regulations were released in July 1998. ACF began developing child care performance goals and performance outcome, output, and process measures shortly after the final regulations were released and continued to refine the measures in FY 1999. The Bureau discussed the goals and measures at two national conferences, via 10 telephone conferences, written communications, and in other meetings with its partners in the States, Territories, and Tribes over the past year. The current set of appropriate, achievable program goals and measures was developed through this consensus-building process that incorporated significant opportunities for input from stakeholders. Data for many measures are available through existing reports State grantees are required to submit routinely.
While the number and percentage of potentially eligible children receiving subsidized child care (measure 4.1a) are outputs of the number of budget dollars invested (inputs), these quantities are results-oriented because the availability of child care subsidies directly supports self-sufficiency programs. An adequate supply of child care is an important intermediate stage in improving family economic independence and a continuing necessity for sustaining such independence. ACF also developed outcome measures for both the affordability and the supply of care. The co-payment measure (measure 4.1c) reflects State efforts to support families gradually becoming more self-reliant by assuring that child care costs do not consume an excessive share of family income. Measure 4.1d is an indicator of the general supply of regulated child care available in the market.
The target for measure 4.1a for FY 2002 has been decreased to more closely align with actual performance data in FY 2000 and anticipated performance for FY 2001. Maintaining the FY 2002 target in FY 2003 reflects our desire to postpone estimating growth in this measure until the reauthorization of CCDF is completed.
PROGRAM GOAL: Increase the number of low income working families and families in training and education who have access to affordable child care.
Objective: Increase the use of subsidies for child care services for low-income working families
4.1a. FY 2002: Increase the number of children served by CCDF subsidies
to 2.2 million from the FY 1998 baseline of average 1.51 million
children served per month.FY 2003: Maintain the number of children served by CCDF subsidies
at 2.2 million.
4.1b. FY 2002: Increase the percentage of potentially eligible children
who receive CCDF subsidies to 14 percent from the 1998 baseline of
10%. FY 2003: Maintain the percentage of potentially eligible
children who receive CCDF subsidies at 14 percent.Data Sources: Annual Aggregate Report, ACF-800, Child Care Quarterly Case-Level Report, ACF-801.
Performance measure 4.1a is the average number of children served each month. The number of children served is directly related to the funding provided to the State grantees. The FY 2001 target reflects the increased discretionary funding ($817 million) provided by Congress; the projected increase in the FY 2002 target has been reduced to better align with actual performance data for FY 2000 and expected performance for FY 2001. Maintaining the FY 2002 target in FY 2003 reflects our desire to postpone estimating growth in this measure until the reauthorization of CCDF and TANF is completed.
Measure 4.1b indicates the number of children served through CCDF as a percentage of children potentially eligible for services based on family income, child’s age, and parent employment status. Measure 4.1b is inter-related with measures 4.1c-e that track the amount of co-pay charged to parents and other State-determined policies such as eligibility criteria and provider payments. It is also related to quality measures 5.1a-c under Strategic Objective 5 because costs associated with increased quality can reduce the number of children receiving services.
PROGRAM GOAL: Improve access to affordable quality child care
Objective: Improve the affordability of quality child care for families through family co-pays that are reasonable.
4.1c. FY 2002: Maintain at 5.8 percent the average percentage of family
income spent in assessed child care co-payments among families
receiving CCDF subsidies at the FY 1998 level.FY 2003: Maintain at 5.8 percent the average percentage of family
income spent in assessed child care co-payments among families
receiving CCDF subsidies.Data Sources: Child Care Quarterly Case-Level Report, ACF-801
The above performance measure calculates the affordability of child care for families served by expressing the out-of-pocket cost as a percentage of family income. While the goal is not the total elimination of family co-payments for child care services for families receiving CCDF subsidies, it is to ensure affordable co-payments for families. The desired outcome is to reduce the average child care co-payment to the FY 1998 level and maintain it at that level. Maintaining the amount of family income spent in child care co-payments at 5.8 percent in an environment of increasing child care costs is an ambitious target.
PROGRAM GOAL: Improve the availability of child cares facilities.
Objective: Increase the availability of regulated child care.
4.1d. FY 2002: Increase the number of slots in State regulated child care
settings. (Developmental--Note: This measure is not limited to
subsidized child care slots.)FY 2003: Increase the number of slots in State regulated child care settings. (Developmental--Note: This measure is not limited to subsidized child care slots.)
Data Source: Under development. The number of regulated child care slots was included for the first time in FY 2000 as an optional data element for the annual aggregate ACF-800 data collection. States were asked to provide this information voluntarily in aggregate reports due December 31, 2000. Because only 30 States voluntarily provided this information in their FY 2000 aggregate reports, the Bureau was unable to establish a national baseline for this measure. The Bureau anticipates that more States will provide this information in their FY 2001 reports. If this occurs, the Bureau will establish a baseline by May 2002.
In addition to the issues of whether low-income families can afford child care services, the presence of child care services in the open market is a basic, but important, indicator of accessibility of services. Performance measure 4.1d addresses the availability of regulated child care slots in the market.
PROGRAM GOAL: Improve parental ability to work or attend training/education leading to greater economic productivity.
Objective: Increase the use of child care subsidies to assist working families.
4.1e. FY 2002: Increase the number of families working and/or pursuing
training/education with support of CCDF subsidies to 1.2 million
from the FY 1998 baseline of 802,000.FY 2003: Increase the number of families working and/or pursuing
training/education with support of CCDF subsidies to1.2 million
from the FY 1998 baseline of 802,000.Data Source: Child Care Quarterly Case Level Report, ACF 801, Item #6, Response 1, 2, or 3.
A primary goal of CCDF is to assist low-income families to access child care to enable parents to work or attend training/education thereby enabling them to become independent from public assistance. This performance measure targets increasing the numbers of families served. The FY 2003 target is based on the actual FY 2000 performance data and maintains the FY 2002 level.
| Table of Contents | Previous | Next |