Search

This paper investigates economic and psychological hardship during the COVID‐19 pandemic among a diverse sample (61% Latinx; 16% White; 9% Black; 14% mixed/other race) of socioeconomically disadvantaged parents (90% mothers; mean age = 35 years) and their elementary school‐aged children (ages 4–11; 49% female) in rural Pennsylvania (N = 272). Families participating in a local food assistance program reported on food insecurity (FI) and parent and child mood and behavior daily from January to May 2020. Longitudinal models revealed that FI, negative parent and child mood, and child misbehavior significantly increased when schools closed; only FI and parent depression later decreased. FI decreased most among those who received the local food assistance program; Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program receipt uniquely predicted decreases in child FI.

Using nationally representative data on a recent birth cohort of U.S.-born children in low-income households (n = 2,800–3,700), this study investigates associations between the timing and intensity of early childhood food insecurity and children's kindergarten reading, math, and social-emotional outcomes. Descriptive patterns reveal that approximately 20% of low-income 0- to 5-year-old children reside in food-insecure households. Food insecurity experienced during early childhood is unfavorably associated with social-emotional outcomes in kindergarten, controlling for household income and prior assessments of child social-emotional skills. Results are less consistent for cognitive outcomes but similar in magnitude. If replicated, findings may inform policy efforts to reduce disparities in early skills for approximately 15 million U.S. children in food-insecure households.

The federal child-care subsidy program represents one of the government’s largest investments in early care and education, but little is known about whether it increases low-income children’s access to higher quality child care. This study used newly available nationally representative data on 4-year-old children (N = 750) to investigate whether subsidy receipt elevates child-care quality. Results indicate that subsidy recipients use higher quality care compared to nonrecipients who use no other publicly funded care, but lower quality care compared to nonrecipients who instead use Head Start or public pre-k. Findings suggest that subsidies may have the potential to enhance care quality but that parents who use subsidies are not accessing the highest quality care available to low-income families.

The federal child care subsidy program represents one of the government’s largest investments in early care and education. Using data from the nationally representative Early Childhood Longitudinal Study – Birth Cohort (ECLS-B), this paper examines associations, among subsidy-eligible families, between child care subsidy receipt when children are 4 years old and a range of school readiness outcomes in kindergarten (sample n ≈ 1,400). Findings suggest that subsidy receipt in preschool is not directly linked to subsequent reading or social-emotional skills. However, subsidy receipt predicted lower math scores among children attending community-based centers. Supplementary analyses revealed that subsidies predicted greater use of center care, but this association did not appear to affect school readiness.

The federal child-care subsidy program represents one of the government's largest investments in early care and education, but little is known about whether it increases low-income children's access to higher quality child care. This study used newly available nationally representative data on 4-year-old children (N = 750) to investigate whether subsidy receipt elevates child-care quality. Results indicate that subsidy recipients use higher quality care compared to nonrecipients who use no other publicly funded care, but lower quality care compared to nonrecipients who instead use Head Start or public pre-k. Findings suggest that subsidies may have the potential to enhance care quality but that parents who use subsidies are not accessing the highest quality care available to low-income families.