Massachusetts Child
Care Market
Price Survey
Board of Early
Education & Care
March 8, 2011
Kenley Branscome
Kate Giapponi & Emma Cohen
Applied Policy Analytics
Two Canal Park
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02141
Public Consulting Group, Inc.
45 State Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02110
Overview of Discussion
o
o
o
o
o
Page 2
Mandate for Market Price Surveys
Child Care Market Prices and Affordability
Scope of the Massachusetts Market Price Survey
Survey Methodology & Update on Progress
Next Steps – Planned Analyses & Reporting
Massachusetts Market Price Survey
Mandate for Market Price Surveys
Federal Requirement & How Other States Compare
o The U.S. Office of Child Care requires states to conduct a market price survey every
two years as part of Child Care & Development Fund (CCDF) requirements. Purpose is
to help ensure that state child care payment rates are high enough to enable families
to competitively find and afford care using child care assistance
o Federal CCDF rules encourage states to set reimbursement rates that are at or above
the 75th percentile of prices in the private market. Viewed as a benchmark rather
than a federal requirement
o Both the 2006 and 2008 surveys found that the state did not meet the 75th percentile
benchmark in any region for any type of care. Nationally, only six states met that
benchmark in 2010. Down from nine states in 2009. (Schulman & Blank, 2010)
o Closing the gap between EEC rates and the 75th percentile would be a significant
challenge, given that previous surveys show most rates at or below 25th percentile*
Page 3
*
Massachusetts Market Price Survey
The 2006 market price survey found that EEC rates were below the 25th price percentile for family child care in three regions, center-based infant care in three regions, toddler care in
five regions, preschool care in four regions and after-school care in two regions. The results from the 2008 survey were similar, but it found a few more rates falling below the 25th
percentile, including preschool rates in all regions and after-school rates in three regions.
Market Prices & Affordability
How Massachusetts Compares to Other States
o Prices for early childhood services are higher in Massachusetts than in any other
state, with an average cost of $18,773 per year for infants and $13,158 for
preschool-aged children (NACCRRA, 2010)
o When placed within the context of a family’s budget, the challenge of
affordability and the importance of child care assistance is clear for low-income
families
o Faced with the high price of care, low-income families are more likely to turn to
informal types of care and likely to rely on multiple care arrangements (Adams,
Tout & Zaslow, 2007; Burnstein & Layzer, 2007). These factors have been shown to
have a negative impact on child development
o State child care assistance brings center-based care and regulated family child care
within the grasp of low-income families (Adams & Rohacek, 2002; Snyder,
Page 4Bernstein & Koralek, 2004)
Massachusetts Market Price Survey
Scope of the Market Price Survey
Project Goal - Conduct a credible study of market prices in each region of the
state and across all program types to assist EEC in evaluating the adequacy of rates
for the purpose of demonstrating equal access to child care for low-income
families. The study will:
• Examine the market prices for the 25th, 30th, 40th, 50th, 60th and 75th
percentiles for each type of care with each of EEC’s rate regions
• Highlight significant price changes between 2008 and 2010
• Compare market prices to practitioner wages
• Consider other questions raised by the Evaluation Subcommittee during
the 2008 market price survey – e.g., absentee policies, etc.
• Examine possible alternatives to existing rate areas, especially in regions
with clusters of prices that are higher than the region as a whole
Page 5
Massachusetts Market Price Survey
Overview of Methodology
Survey of Random Sample of Programs
o Sample Design – Relies on a random sample of 4,800 programs, stratified
by EEC region and type of care
o Outreach Campaign – Letters and e-mails sent from Commissioner to all
programs in the sample in English and Spanish with link to on-line survey.
Followed up by reminder postcards and up to three phone attempts
o Data Collection – Data were collected through an on-line questionnaire,
with follow-up phone calls to programs that did not respond on-line
o Progress Update – More than 3,800 responses received. While analysis
phase has just begun, the overall response rates are estimated at 89% for
center-based/out-of-school-time care and 75% for family child care
Page 6
Massachusetts Market Price Survey
Project Workplan
Project Timeline, Milestones & Deliverables
2010
Oct
11
25
Nov
8
22
2011
Jan
17
Dec
6
20
3
31
Feb
14
28
Mar
14
28
Apr
11
25
May
9
23
June
6
20
Survey Development
Survey Data Collection
Final Work Plan
October 29,2010
Page 7
Survey Development
Complete & Data
Collection Teams
Trained
December 17, 2010
Analysis & Reporting
Additional Analyses
Data Collection Began
75th Percentile
Calculations
December 27,2010
March 15, 2011
Final Market
Price Survey
Report
April 8, 2011
Final
Report on Market
Prices-Wages and
Regional Price
Variations
June 1,2011
Massachusetts Market Price Survey
Next Steps
Planned Analyses & Reporting
o The research team will provide EEC with the following analyses and
reports:
•
•
•
•
Initial report with 75th percentile calculations (March 15)
Complete and final Market Price Survey report (April 8)
Analysis of market prices and wages (June 1)
Analysis of regional price variations and price clusters (June 1)
o The analyses and reports will also address specific topics raised during a
recent meeting with the Planning & Evaluation Committee, including a
comparison of EEC rates to those in other states, analysis of available data
in the Professional Qualifications Registry, and a review of cost-based
reimbursements/incentives used in other states
Page 8
Massachusetts Market Price Survey
Sources
o
Adams, G., Tout, K., Zaslow, M. (2007). “Early Care and Education for Children in Low-Income Families:
Patterns of Use, Quality and Potential Policy Implications.” Paper prepared for the Urban Institute and
Child Trends Roundtable on Children in Low-Income Families, Washington, D.C.
o
Adams, G. & Rohacek, M. (2002). More than a Work Support? Issues Around Integrating Child
Development Goals Into the Child Care Subsidy System. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 17, 418-440.
o
Burstein, N. & Layzer, J.I. (2007). National Study of Child Care for Low-Income Families: Patterns of Child
Care Use Among Low-Income Families. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates, Inc.
o
Schulman, K. & Blank, H. (2010). National Women’s Law Center. State Child Care Assistance Policies
2010: New Federal Funds Help States Weather The Storm.
o
Snyder, K., Bernstein, S., & Koralek, R. (2004). Parents’ Perspectives on Child Care Subsidies and Moving
from Welfare to Work. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
o
National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies. (2010). Parents and the High Cost of
Care.
Page 9
Massachusetts Market Price Survey