Search

In collaboration with the Wisconsin Early Childhood Association (WECA), the Public Policy Forum surveyed 1,425 child care center directors, center employees, and family child care providers statewide. The survey was designed to provide a picture of the status of Wisconsin's child care workforce in terms of educational attainment, experience, professional credentials, and wages and benefits earned. The survey results are useful in analyzing providers' readiness for the state's new child care quality improvement initiative, the YoungStar Initiative. Compared to the state as a whole, Milwaukee County's 223 respondents demonstrate higher rates of professional memberships, use of professional development programs, and attainment of credentials. In some categories, the county sample showed higher levels of education among staff. Because many of these factors can earn a provider a higher rating under YoungStar, Milwaukee County providers may be better prepared for the new regulations in these areas. (Contains 12 charts and 3 tables.) [This research was conducted in partnership with Wisconsin Early Childhood Association. Additional funding was provided by the Charles D. Jacobus Family Foundation.]

As policymakers in Madison redesign the state's child care subsidy program--known as Wisconsin Shares--it is important to understand the original vision for the program. This report investigates the development and implementation of Wisconsin Shares and its linkages to the state's landmark W-2 welfare reform initiative. In particular, the authors explore how the specific foundational child care policies enacted to effectuate W-2's larger reform goals impacted child care quality, and the consequences for those now seeking to redesign the program. The authors find that the paramount goal of Wisconsin Shares' designers was to rapidly produce sufficient child care capacity to serve thousands of families transitioning from welfare to work. Conversely, the creation of high quality child care centers--the type that research shows can produce significant dividends for disadvantaged children by making them better prepared to succeed in school--was not an explicit goal, though policy debates at the time included discussion about how quality would be impacted by the new system, and in later years the state funded some quality improvement efforts. With the benefit of nearly 15 years of hindsight, it is now apparent that the key child care policies implemented in conjunction with the implementation of W-2 contributed significantly to the achievement of welfare reform's larger goals, but failed to promote child care quality. This experience provides insights for those now seeking to revamp the child care subsidy program, while also illustrating the challenges inherent in attempting to enhance child care quality by transforming a system that was initially designed with much different objectives in mind. (Contains 1 figure, 10 tables, 8 charts and 68 footnotes.) [This research was partially funded by the Charles D. Jacobus Family Foundation.]

Throughout the United States, investments in high-quality early childhood education are seen by community leaders as a strategy for improving outcomes in areas such as K-12 education, workforce development, and economic development. Indeed, many research studies conclude that high quality early learning environments produce social, educational, and economic benefits for children and the communities in which they live. As a result, many state and local governments around the country are seeking to capture these benefits by investing in quality improvement efforts. Wisconsin is no different; the 2009-2010 state biennial budget calls for the Department of Children and Families to create a strategy for improving the quality of publicly-subsidized child care. While policymakers increasingly are looking to maximize the benefits of high-quality early childhood education, budget realities often dictate that they do so while minimizing the expenditure of public funds. Thus, this report seeks to inform these decisions in Wisconsin by estimating the costs of achieving improved quality in child care and early learning programs in southeast Wisconsin and analyzing policy options associated with quality improvement initiatives. Appended are: (1) Influential Studies; (2) Estimating Program Need and Participation; (3) Estimated Cost of Upgrading Child Care Quality for a Group Child Care Center; (4) Estimated Cost of Upgrading Child Care Quality for a Family Child Care Program; (5) Center Proxy Budget Assumptions; and (6) Family Child Care Proxy Budget Assumptions. (Contains 17 tables, 2 charts, and 67 footnotes.)