Child Care Quality: Does It Matter and Does It Need to be Improved? (Full Report). Table 3


Blau (1999 c) Not specified variable None Mother report of group size,

C:A Ratio,

CG training;

Type of care, no. of arrangements, hours, cost Mode of Care (CC control) BPI (Behavior Problems Index)

PIAT (math & reading achievement)

PPVT (language)

See text
Broberg et al. (1990) 84 children in Sweden Time 1 =prior to care; M age = 16 mos.

Time 2 = 1 yr later;

Time 3 = 2 years later

Pos & neg events (Belsky & Walker Spot observ checklist None Type of Care Social status, quality home envir, parents perceived social support, child temperament, child sociability Griffith’s Developmental Scales-Scale C (Verb/Ling ability at 28 mos and 40 mos) ANOVA: no care group difference in verbal abilities at 28 or 40 months

PLS:- no effect of child care quality nor type of care on verbal ability at 28 or 40 months.

Broberg et al. (1997) Initial sample of 146 was recruited at 12- 24 mos. 123 assessed at 8 yrs.


  Composite: Adult Child interact – 16, 28, 40 mos Composite: C:A Ratio3, # hrs in care per day: 16, 28, 49 mos Time in child care Social status, inhibition, paternal involvement, home environment Griffith’s Developmental Scales-(Lang Subscales)

Standardized School Readiness Test (numerical subscales)

Struct qual related at 40 mos (.30*) & 80 mos (.22*) w/ math 2nd grades.

Verbal in 2nd predicted by (1) verb at 40 & 80 mos, (2) # mos in CC, (3) consistent high paternal involvement

Math in 2nd pred by (1) mat at 80 mos, (2) struct qual, (3) inhib scores, (4) process qual.

Not predicted by # sibs, gender, qual home. SES not entered in equation.

Burchinal et al. (in press) 89 Recruited in first yr; Reassessed at 12, 24, & 36 mos. ITERS, ECERS C:A Ratio3, Group size, Teacher education   Child age, child Gender, poverty status, home environment Bayley (Cog: 12, 24, 36 mos)

Lang: Receptive & Express (vocab) Communic Skills (12, 24, 36 mos; Communicative, Social Affective, Symbolic Skills (12, 18, 24 mos)

Quality care increased linearly b/w 12 & 36 mos

12 mos concurrent: process quality related to cognitive skills, receptive language, overall communication

C:A Ratio3 & group sized related to overall communication. HOME related to cognitive & overall communication.

24 mos (concurrent): Process quality related to cognitive skills, receptive language, expressive language, & overall communication skills. Structural not related. HOME related to overall communication.

36 mos (concurrent): process qual related to cog, recept & express lang. Ratio & Gp size related to cog skill, expressive lang. T. Ed related to express lang. HOME not related.

HLM (separate for process qual, ratio, T ed) controlling for sex, poverty, HOME

Process qual: higher qual over time related to better cog, recept lang, express lang, & overall communic skills. Assoc w/ expressive lang increase w/ age

Ratio: related to higher scores over time on receptive lang & overall communic skills; & to rate at which express skills acquired.

T. Educ: related to higher cog & receptive lang skills for girls only

Chin-Quee & Scarr (1994) 127 Recruited preschool, follow-up 5-9 yrs ECERS

Amount & Type of Verbal Interact b/w Child & CG1

  Childs experiences in CC5, Age of entry into CC5, # Hrs. Attendance Maternal Education & Maternal IQ (PPVT-R), Values Conform, Value Soc Skills Report Cards (Social & Cog Dev)

Teacher report peer relations, cooperative beh, Acad Achieve

HMR: (1) mat ed, mat IQ, values conform, values soc skills; (2) CC Exper: Age began care, Total time in care; (3) Quality: ECERS

Quality of Care in infant & preschool yrsà NOT related to school age outcomes

HMR: (1) same; (2) same; (3)Prop control utterances, Prop expressive utterance

Quality indicators(prop control & express utter) failed to predict school age outcomes

Deater-Deckard, et al. (1996) 141 Time 1 = toddler or preschoolerTime 2 = 4 yrs later Composite of ITERS, ECERS, Profile, CG education, wages C:A ratio   SES, child sex, child age, parenting stress, harsh parental discipline Composite scores of mother-reported behavior problems and social withdrawal and teacher-reported behavior problems and social withdrawal No significant correlations between Time 1 process quality and Time 2 child outcomes or between Time 1 C:A ratio and Time 2 child outcomes

Also Time 1 process quality and C:A ratio did not predict Time 2 outcomes in hierarchical regressions that controlled for Time 1 adjustment.

Field (1991)

Study 1

28 5-8 yrs

in full time care by 2

Not assessed

All high qual

C:A Ratio3

CG1 education

CG1 stability

Amount time in care Maternal extraversionà child outcome BRS: (Sociability, Socioemot Adj)

Piers-Harris (Self-Concept)

Buck I/E scale

Partial correlations (maternal extraversion): amount time spent in high qual, stable care & later adjust (5-8) associated w/ all child outcomes.
Field (1991)

Study 2

56 6th grade (M = 11.5) full time care by 2 Not assessed

All high qual

C:A Ratio3, CG1 education, CG1 turnover Amount time in care No family variables associated w/ time in care BRS (socioem adjust & sociability)

Piers-Harris (Self-Concept)

Peer Interact Beh

Acad Meas: gifted prog, lang arts, math grades

Simple correlations: amount of time in high quality programs. Stable care & later adjustment at 6th grade

Amount of time in high quality care associated with all child outcomes.

Hagekull & Bohlin (1995) 52

Swedish children

Recruited at 6 wks until 4 yrs Stimulation

Emotional Tone b/w Adults & Children

C:A Ratio3, Group Size, CG1: Child-oriented Education & Experience, Security Aspects, Available Space


Overall rating of quality of care includes both SES7, overall quality of home, child gender, temperament (10, 15, 20 mos) TBQ


Hagekull & Bohlin: Ego Strength/ Effectance & Soc Comp

29 mos (concurr): observed day care qualityà maternal report positive emotional expression

4 yrs (long): observed day care quality --: aggregated reports internalizing problems & ego strength/effectance


29 mos: children from low quality homes, in good qual DCreduction in externalizing behaviors. Children from medium or high quality homes, DC6 quality not important in explaining externalizing behaviors

4 yrs: Children, low SES7, in good quality care à less aggressive, no effect on higher SES7.(2) aggressiveness of easy children positively affect by high quality DC6. Difficult children no decrease in aggressiveness in high quality setting (3) for boys, good qual care associated w/ less internalizing/ social withdrawal problems & more ego strength/effectance

Howes (1988) 87 45-57 mos followed for 2 yrs   CG1 training in child development, small group size, low C:A Ratio3, planned & indiv educ prog, adeq physical space Age of entry

Length of day

# diff arrangements

Maternal education, family struct maternal employ Academic progress (1st grade CG1 report)

CBP: (Behavior Problems, School Skill)

HMR: (1) family characteristics (2) CC5 char

Higher child care quality predicted:

  1. better acad skills for boys only
  2. better social skills both girls & boys
  3. fewer behavior problems both girls & boys

smaller # arrangementsà better academic skills for boys & girls

Howes (1990) 80 children 45 center care b-4 1 yr

other full time between 1 & 4

CG involvement/ investment in child compliance

(toddler period: 18, 24, 30. 36 mos)

Composite: C:A Ratio3, CG1 training, CG1 stability (toddler period)   Family social

Family structure

Child Age



Structural Quality– concurrent (toddler)

M.E.: High qualityà more compliant at care, more self-regulation in lab. Longit (Preschool): M.E.: high qualityà more social pretend play, more positive affect, less CG1 rated difficult. Longit (Kindergarten): high qualityà less CG1 rating of hostility

Process Qual (Long), age partialled out: Preschool: CG1 involvement/investmentà observed social play, social pretend play, positive affect, less CG1 rate difficult & hesitant. Kindergarten: CG1 involvementà less parent ratings of internalizing & externalizing; less CG1 rate of distract, hostile, higher rate verbal IQ, consideration.

See summary sheet for further analyses.

Jacobs & White (1994) 36 c Kind, 4 yrs at recruit

32 Kind, not enrolled

Kindergarten ECERS None   SES7 PPVT-R: (Recept lang)

SSC: (Social)

MANOVAs (same results w/ no covar & w/ SES & PPVT cov)

children in center care higher on interest-participation than children in no-care; no difference b/w high & low quality care

no care effect on cooperation-compliance

children in high-quality center highest on receptive language, followed by no care & then low quality

NICHD (1998) ECCRN 1,085


24 & 36 mos ORCE positive caregiving rating at 6, 15, 24, and 36 mos   Quantity, entry age, stability, group type Income/needs, psych adjust, c. gender, c. temp Mother reported behavior problems & social competence; caregiver report of problems; laboratory observations of compliance & negativity C. in higher qual child care during 1st 3 yrsà more compliant & cooperative during observations; CG reported fewer behavior problems
NICHD (in press-b) ECCRN   6, 15, 24, 36 mos Positive CG1 composite,

Language stimulation

  Quantity, type Maternal PPVT-R, child gender, HOME & maternal stimulation Bayley MDI , Bracken School Readiness, Macarthur CDI; Reynell Dev Lang Positive caregiving & language stimulation significantly related to cognitive & language outcomes at 24 & 36 mos

HMR: 1) selection variables, 2) child gender, 3) family envir, 4) quantity & type of care, 5) positive caregiving (PC), 6) frequency of language stimulation (LS) – see summary sheet

Cognitive & Lang predicted by Process qual at 15, 24, 36 mos

Lagged effects: Cog: at 24 mos only concurr LS pred

Lang (express) at 24 & 36, c. w/ higher LS earlier assess better scores.

Lang (receptive) at 36 mos, predicted pos by earlier LS

NICHD (submitted) ECCRN 669


24 & 36 mos Positive Caregiving (ORCE)


  Amt time in CC5

Available other Children

Maternal education, maternal attitude toward employment, child gender, cog/ ling perf at 24 & 36 mos, mat sens in play, mat psych adjus, fam struc # c in home) Mother and caregiver report of peer competencies; observed peer interaction in child care and structured task. 24 mos: More Positive Caregivingà Child more positive sociability at 24 mos, lower proportion negative interaction w/ peers observed.


Peisner-Feinberg et al. (1999) 826-year 1

157-year 2

463-year 3

418-year 5

4.3 (year 1)

5.1 (year 2)

6.0 (year 3)

8.0 (year 5)

ECERS, CIS, UCLA ECOF, AIS, PPS, IEOS, STRS CG1 education, CG1 exper4, gender, ethnicity, beliefs   Maternal education, child gender, child ethnicity PPVT-R, WJ-R (letter-word, math), CBI, ASB --Children who attended CC5 w/ higher quality classroom practices had better language & math skills from the preschool years into elementary school.

--Children w/ closer CG1-child relationships in CC5 had better classroom social & thinking skills, language ability, & math skills from the preschool years into elementary school.

--Better quality CC4 was more strongly related to better math skills & fewer problem behaviors from the preschool years through second grade fro children whose mothers had less education.

Pierrehumbert et al. (1996) 47 Swiss 1-5, recruited 3-9 mos Positive Contact (Ainsworth interactive scale) None   SES7, child gender, attachment w/ mom, positive contact w/ mom Developmental Quotients



Attach security, SES, & positive contact w/ CG1 predicted increase in cognitive index between 2 & 5 years
Vandell et al. (1988) 20 Obs at 4 & at 8 yrs None C:A Ratio3, Group size, space, materials available, CG1 education   Family struc, age of entry in full-time care, family social class PRS

Harter PCS

Parent Ratings socioemotional adjust (Santrock & Warshak)

HMR: 1) family social class 2) day care quality

Better care qualityà 1) more friendly & fewer unfriendly interact; 2) higher observer ratings pos affect & social comp, & 3) fewer peer nominations of shy. No prediction of Parent ratings

Partial Correlations (family social class parialled out)

Positive interaction w/ adults at 4 yrs = 8 year social competence, peer acceptance, empathy, conflict negotiation, impulse control

Unoccup behs at 4 yrs = 8 yr less social comp, conflict negotiation, reaction to frustration, peer acceptance

Vernon-Feagans, Emanuel, & Blood (1997) 67 Recruited before age 1, followed until 4   Adults present (C:A Ratio3), group size     SICD: (Receptive & Expressive Language) Children in high quality centersà better expressive language & receptive language.


aFull references are available in reference section.

bQUALITY MEASURE ACRONYMS ALPHABATIZED: AIS: Adult Involvement Scale; CIS: Caregiver Interaction Scale; ECOF: UCLA Early Childhood Observation Form; ECERS: Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale; ECOI: Early Childhood Observation Instrument; IEOS: Instructional Environment Observation Scales; ITERS: Infant-Toddler Environmental Scale; ORCE: Observational Record of the Caregiving Environment; STRS: Student-Teacher Relationship Scale

cCHILD DEVELOPMENTAL OUTCOME MEASURE ACRONYMS ALPHABATIZED: ASBI: Adaptive Social Behavior Inventory; ASB: Teacher Assessment of Social Behavior; BCL: Behavior Checklist; Boehm: Test of Basic Skills; BPI: Behavior Problems Index; BRS: Behavior Rating Scale; BSQ: Behavior Screening Questionnaire; Buck I/E Scale: Buck Internalizer/Externalizer Scale; CBCL: Child Behavior Checklist; CBI: Child Behavior Inventory; CBP: Child Behavior Profile; CTBS: Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills; MacArthur CDI: Communication Development Inventory; MDI: Mental Development Index (Bayley II); MSCA: McCartney Scale of Children’s Abilities; ORCE: Observational Record of the Caregiving Environment; PBQ: Preschool Behavior Questionnaire; PEI: Parent as Educator Interview PIAT: Peabody Individual Achievement Test; PPS: Peer Play Scale; PPVT-R: Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised; PRS: Peer Relations Scale; RCSA: Rutter Child Scales (A & B); SCS: Social Competence Scale; SICD: Sequence Inventory of Communication Development; SRA: Science Research Associates Achievement Battery; TBQ: Toddler Behavior Questionnaire; WJ-R: Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Achievement-Revised

1CG: Caregiver, 2ECE: Early Childhood Education, 3C:A Ratio: Child:Adult Ratio, 4Exp: Experience, 5CC: Child Care, 6DC: Child Development, 7SES: Socioeconomic Status

View full report


"report.pdf" (pdf, 132.7Kb)

Note: Documents in PDF format require the Adobe Acrobat Reader®. If you experience problems with PDF documents, please download the latest version of the Reader®

View full report


"table1.pdf" (pdf, 43.75Kb)

Note: Documents in PDF format require the Adobe Acrobat Reader®. If you experience problems with PDF documents, please download the latest version of the Reader®

View full report


"table2.pdf" (pdf, 43.32Kb)

Note: Documents in PDF format require the Adobe Acrobat Reader®. If you experience problems with PDF documents, please download the latest version of the Reader®

View full report


"table3.pdf" (pdf, 33.67Kb)

Note: Documents in PDF format require the Adobe Acrobat Reader®. If you experience problems with PDF documents, please download the latest version of the Reader®