Table 9.3
Program Impacts on Child Care Costs for Employment at Interview
for All Sample Members and for Those Employed at Interview
Sample Program Control Difference Percentage
Site and Program Size Group Group (Impact) Change (%)
A. For All Sample Members
Monthly cost of child care paid by respondent ($)
Atlanta Labor Force Attachment 1890 13 15 -2 -16.3 mntempai
Atlanta Human Capital Development 2199 18 15 3 20.6 mntempai
Grand Rapids Labor Force Attachment 1158 62 48 14 ** 29.8 mntempai
Grand Rapids Human Capital Development 1158 42 48 -6 -12.3 mntempai
Riverside Labor Force Attachment 1678 34 24 10 ** 40.9 mntempai
Lacked high school diploma or basic skills 1012 25 17 8 47.2 mntempai
Riverside Human Capital Development 1350 30 17 13 ** 77.5 mntempai
Columbus Integrated 728 34 23 11 * 47.7 mntempai
Columbus Traditional 723 28 23 5 23.0 mntempai
Detroit 426 56 37 19 * 51.7 mntempai
Oklahoma City 511 23 24 -1 -4.3 mntempai
Portland 610 51 35 17 48.5 mntempai
Out-of-pocket child care paid by respondent (%)
Atlanta Labor Force Attachment 1890 10.2 10.9 -0.7 -6.3 pktempai
Atlanta Human Capital Development 2199 12.9 10.9 2.0 18.6 pktempai
Grand Rapids Labor Force Attachment 1158 25.5 22.0 3.5 16.0 pktempai
Grand Rapids Human Capital Development 1158 18.0 22.0 -4.0 * -18.0 pktempai
Riverside Labor Force Attachment 1678 14.0 11.6 2.3 20.0 pktempai
Lacked high school diploma or basic skills 1012 10.5 8.4 2.1 25.2 pktempai
Riverside Human Capital Development 1350 13.1 8.4 4.7 ** 55.7 pktempai
Columbus Integrated 728 17.8 13.2 4.6 * 35.0 pktempai
Columbus Traditional 723 14.5 13.2 1.4 10.4 pktempai
Detroit 426 22.7 14.5 8.3 ** 57.4 pktempai
Oklahoma City 511 18.5 16.7 1.8 10.7 pktempai
Portland 610 21.5 15.3 6.2 * 40.7 pktempai
(continued)
Table 9.3 (continued)
Program Control Percentage
Site and Program Group Group Difference Change (%)
B. For Those Employed at Interview
Monthly cost of child care paid by respondent ($)
Atlanta Labor Force Attachment 34 41 -7 -18.1 jobstlin
Atlanta Human Capital Development 50 41 9 21.1 jobstlin
Grand Rapids Labor Force Attachment 115 97 19 19.4 jobstlin
Grand Rapids Human Capital Development 87 97 -10 -10.1 jobstlin
Riverside Labor Force Attachment 82 69 13 19.4 jobstlin
Lacked high school diploma or basic ski 72 64 8 11.7 jobstlin
Riverside Human Capital Development 87 64 23 36.0 jobstlin
Columbus Integrated 69 56 14 24.8 jobstlin
Columbus Traditional 64 56 8 15.1 jobstlin
Detroit 134 110 24 22.1 jobstlin
Oklahoma City 48 53 -4 -8.4 jobstlin
Portland 104 100 4 4.0 jobstlin
Out-of-pocket child care paid by respondent (%)
Atlanta Labor Force Attachment 27.2 29.7 -2.5 -8.3 jobstlin
Atlanta Human Capital Development 35.3 29.7 5.7 19.2 jobstlin
Grand Rapids Labor Force Attachment 47.1 44.2 3.0 6.7 jobstlin
Grand Rapids Human Capital Development 37.1 44.2 -7.0 -15.9 jobstlin
Riverside Labor Force Attachment 34.1 33.6 0.5 1.6 jobstlin
Lacked high school diploma or basic ski 30.1 31.7 -1.6 -5.0 jobstlin
Riverside Human Capital Development 37.8 31.7 6.1 19.3 jobstlin
Columbus Integrated 36.5 32.0 4.5 14.1 jobstlin
Columbus Traditional 33.1 32.0 1.1 3.3 jobstlin
Detroit 54.6 43.1 11.5 26.7 jobstlin
Oklahoma City 38.9 36.7 2.2 5.9 jobstlin
Portland 43.4 44.1 -0.6 -1.5 jobstlin
Home Pages:
NEWWS
Human Services Policy
(HSP)
Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation
(ASPE)
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS)
Last modified on 09/10/01