Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
34428987
label
National Reports/Studies on Child Care [1]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
34428987
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
National Reports/Studies on Child Care [1]
citationUrl
collections
Records of the First Lady's Office (Clinton Administration)
Jennifer Klein's Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
34428987
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
42-t-7422560-20140536S-035-015-2016
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
c24feecbb4d1a78d
ocrText
FA MILIES MATTER
FAMILY-CENTERED
CHILD CARE
VOLUME I
M. Elena Lopez
Heather B. Weiss
Sybilla Dorros
HARVARD FAMILY RESEARCH PROJECT
Heather B. Weiss, Director
M Elena Lopez, Associate Director
Harvard Family Research Project
September 4, 1997
Ms. Jennifer Klein
Special Assistant to the
President for Domestic Policy
2nd Floor West Wing
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20502
Dear Jennifer:
I apologize for my tardy response to your letter asking for further suggestions for the
White House Conference on Child Care, but my husband was in a serious accident and I
had to put work aside for awhile. It was a pleasure to meet you and Elena in June and
discuss not only the conference, but also other follow-up activities. I have several
suggestions about them that I describe below.
First, as I mentioned at the meeting, I believe that quality child care includes a family
support component and that this should be reflected in the models showcased at the
conference. I have a suggestion for one to include that meets this criteria and has other
features that also distinguish it as a national child care leader. It is Georgia's statewide
pre-kindergarten program now available to over 70% of the state's four year olds through
an innovative public school and private provider delivery system and financed through
Governor Zell Miller's lottery for education. (It also funds the Hope scholarships and
technology for the schools.) This program is the only statewide Pre-K initiative in the
country and one of the few with a high quality ongoing evaluation designed to test the
program's contributions to school readiness and success. It is administered through the
newly created (April 1996) Office of School Readiness and run by some of the most
skilled public managers I have encountered.
This Office has responsibility for licensing all the services of the private providers who
contract with the state to provide Pre-K services, and through this route the state is
beginning to improve the quality of child care beyond just that for four year olds. They
have a good training and monitoring system and an innovative partnership with Head
Start to provide wraparound services for their half-day program. Both the program and
the Office have substantial support from the governor, the legislature and the public.
Harvard Family Research Project
38 Concord Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02138-2357
Telephone: (617) 495 - 9108
Fax: (617) 495 - 8594
E-mail: hfrp@hugse harvard.edu
Web Site: http://hugse1 harvard.edu/~hfrp
-2-
In short, many features of Georgia's model - the combined public school and private
provider delivery system, universal coverage, the family support component with
parenting education and referral to community services, the emphasis on quality and
accountability, the innovative and entrepreneurial state management provided by the
Office of School Readiness, and visionary gubernatorial stewardship - make it one from
which other states can learn a great deal. I hope that you will invite them to participate at
the conference so that they can share their work with others.
My second suggestion is that one of the central themes of the conference be an emphasis
on family-focused care and the connection between child care and broader community
services for families. This could be accomplished through model showcasing, through
the agenda for the day's discussions and in follow-up reports and other activities. If
parents as well as other caregivers are to provide the stimulation and nurturing that
children's early brain development requires, the child care customer is more than the
child - it's the family as well. The child care community is just beginning to recognize
its critical role in reinforcing and supporting parents and this is starting to be reflected in
their provider training and definitions of high quality practice. The enclosed two-volume
report describes the key components of family-focused child care and describes a number
of programs that now provide it. One, Atlanta's Sheltering Arms, is a good example
because it is a very old and well-established child care agency that has reframed its whole
approach to include family support as both its program philosophy and a major service
component. (See volume two for program descriptions and page 52 for Sheltering
Arms.) The Department of Education has provided substantial leadership for family
involvement as a key component in improving educational outcomes; it would be a big
step forward if ACYF and HHS did the same for child care programs where the evidence
also suggests nurturing parents, as well as good child care, are critical for early
development.
Finally, one of the best and most challenging points that you made at the June meeting
was that the conference not be a one-shot effort but result in a major and sustained effort
to improve the quality and accessibility of care for America's children and families. The
President, as Arkansas's governor and co-architect of the national education goals,
brought early childhood into the education picture by championing goal one - school
readiness. He and the first lady recently underscored the importance of early care and
education through the critically important conference on brain development. As a result,
Americans are beginning to understand better why high quality child care is critically
important. Will you maintain this momentum with post-conference follow-up efforts
that build bridges and joint initiatives between the often balkanized education and child
care communities? Is there a way to highlight the importance of the quality of care
through federal incentives or rewards to states that improve it perhaps similar to the
-3-
abstinence and teen pregnancy provisions in the welfare reform legislation? I look
forward not only to the conference proceedings but also to the follow-up work.
Thank you for considering my suggestions and I send my best wishes for a successful
conference. Please do not hesitate to get in touch if I can be of assistance.
Sincerely yours,
Heather R. Weass
Heather B. Weiss
cc: Joan Lombardi
FAMILY-CENTERED CHILD CARE
Volume I
M. Elena Lopez
Heather B. Weiss
Sybilla Dorros
DRAFT
HARVARD FAMILY RESEARCH PROJECT
Cambridge, MA
July 1997
This project was supported by generous grants from the Francis Families Foundation and the Ford
Foundation. The contents of this publication are solely the responsibility of the Harvard Family Research
Project.
HARVARD FAMILY RESEARCH PROJECT
Founded in 1983 by Dr. Heather Weiss, the Harvard Family Research Project (HFRP) is today at the center
of a national movement to strengthen and support American families. HFRP's pathbreaking research
provides practitioners, researchers, and policymakers with timely, insightful information about effective
family support initiatives.
Disseminating its research widely, HFRP links people, programs, ideas, and resources together to create
innovative family support programs and services and family-sustaining policies. HFRP's research helps
states create systems to monitor and assess programs and services, and helps communities better integrate
family support services in neighborhood programs. Using HFRP data, schools are learning more about the
specific benefits of parent involvement and the best strategies for successfully engaging the entire family.
HFRP's research findings are enabling practitioners to design culturally appropriate programs, and helping
training and education programs effectively prepare teachers to work with families.
© 1997 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College (Harvard Family Research Project). All rights
reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any way without the written permission of the
Harvard Family Research Project. The contents of this publication are solely the responsibility of the
Harvard Family Research Project and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its funders. Published in
1997. Printed in the United States of America.
FAMILY-CENTERED CHILD CARE
VOLUME I
CONTENTS
I.
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study
II.
CHALLENGES TO CREATING FAMILY-CENTERED CHILD CARE
Professional and Policy Context
Practice-based Perspectives
III.
BUILDING BLOCKS OF FAMILY-CENTERED CHILD CARE
Philosophical Orientation
Roles and Relationships
A Continuum of Services
IV.
A TRAINING FRAMEWORK FOR FAMILY-CENTERED CHILD CARE
Status of Family Support Training
A Range of Training Needs
A Comprehensive Training Framework
Organizational Support
V.
RECOMMENDATIONS
APPENDIX A:
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
REFERENCES
I. INTRODUCTION
Dramatic changes in American family and work life during the past decade have
necessitated a significant shift in childrearing practices. Increasingly, as more mothers enter
the work force, young children are raised in child care settings. An estimated 13 million
children are in child care and other early childhood programs each day (Adams and Poersch,
1996). This sharing of family responsibilities between homes and child care programs
accentuates the need for high quality and affordable child care. It also argues for "family-
centered" practice in child care programs.
A family-centered child care model combines care for children with support for the
whole family and applies family support principles in child care practice (Galinsky and
Weissbourd, 1992; Dean, forthcoming). These principles uphold the primacy of the family in
child development, build on family strengths, and respect the diversity of families. They
acknowledge the reciprocal nature of family well-being and child development; therefore,
programs seek to serve the whole family (McWilliam, 1994-1995). Family-centered child
care goes beyond child-level services: It is designed to promote child development and to
reinforce good parenting.¹ It supports the family's ability to carry out other functions such as
the provision of basic needs, economic support, and participation in community life. Through
direct and referred services, programs help parents cope with family and work-related stresses.
1
In this report, we extend the term "parent" to all adult kin caregivers who actively participate in a child's
upbringing.
1
Such services typically consist of parenting classes, peer group support and recreation, and
access to social and health services.
Research over many years has confirmed the significant contributions of
comprehensive early childhood programs toward positive child and adult outcomes. Analysis
of thirty-two early childhood/family support programs suggests that programs that promoted
positive parent-child interactions had a positive influence on parental behavior and child
development (Brady and Coffman, in press). With regard to comprehensiveness, programs
that had a home visiting component, either alone or in addition to a center-based component,
had a higher proportion of significant effects favoring program participants. Furthermore,
level of comprehensiveness (i.e., intensity, range of service, and targeting of both parent and
child) was significantly related to positive outcomes for both parents and children (Cariaga-
Lo, Miller and Weiss, 1995). This research suggests that programs that start early, offer
home and center-based components, and address the needs of both parents and children, tend
to have more impact on families than programs with a more narrow focus.
Parallel to the research, policies that have emerged over the last decade recommend
expanding the role of child care and early education programs to include more family support
services. Goal 1 of the National Education Goals states that children will start school ready to
learn. To accomplish this, programs should provide children with learning and developmental
experiences and access to health care, and parents with access to the support and training they
need. (United States House of Representatives, 1994) Throughout the country, local
2
collaborations are developing between Head Start and child care programs in order to extend
Head Start's health, social service, and family involvement components to children enrolled in
centers and child care homes (Poersch and Blank, 1996). In the private sector, a number of
foundations support comprehensive programs for children and families. For example, the
Carnegie Corporation of New York (1996) has invested in state initiatives for infants and
toddlers that adopt a family-centered approach. Such an approach involves investment in four
areas: parent education, quality child care, primary health care, and family centers.
Implementing a family-centered approach in child care programs is difficult, however.
Programs and practitioners face many challenges, not the least of which is the lack of training
for providers to help them work effectively with parents. Most early education programs
emphasize work with children but require little training and supervision for supporting parents
(Powell, 1991). As long as training remains child focused, the providers who work with
families cannot be expected to demonstrate family support principles in their practice (Larner,
1995).
Despite current gaps in family-centered training, however, the training system holds
the promise for making family-centered child care more widespread and has the capacity to
influence current and future providers so that they are better prepared to support families. It
can also shape professional norms so that greater attention is paid to family relationships as
criteria for quality child care.
3
In 1995, the Harvard Family Research Project began a study of child care programs²
and training institutions. The study emerged from the dearth of research on the need to
prepare child care providers to work with families. Its purpose was to develop a training
framework for the professionals in the field as a first step to encourage discussion and action
toward family-centered child care practice. This report examines child care programs that
have successfully incorporated family support and the implications for training and
professional development. It is the first report of a three-part series; the other two address the
principal training sources for child care and early education, namely, child care resource and
referral agencies and community colleges.
The questions that guided the preparation of this report were:
What are the challenges to integrating family support and child care and how
are local programs meeting them?
How can providers be supported to develop better relationships with parents
and families?
What steps can be taken to build a training program and system for family-
centered child care?
2
Unless otherwise specified, the programs to which we refer throughout this report are those in the study,
which include both center and family child care.
4
This report presents a framework for training providers in family-centered child care.
It is based on the various themes that emerged from the research. The perspective set forth is
that training must be grounded in practice as well as theory. Because practitioners have
important insights into children and families and the changes that can lead to improved staff
training and service delivery (Hess, McGowan, and Meyer, 1996), this report documents
"practice-based knowledge." The perspective of experienced practitioners offers a lens for
understanding the challenges of family partnerships and for designing appropriate professional
development opportunities.
Background of the Study
The Harvard Family Research Project conducted an in-depth study of twelve
exemplary child care programs, including both child care centers and family child care homes.
(See Appendix A for research methods.) The programs were chosen through a nomination
process in which several informants from national child care organizations were contacted and
asked to provide the names of child care programs with a family focus. From the pool of
sixty programs that were nominated, the research team selected twelve programs that offered a
breadth, depth, or innovation of services to families (a wide range of services, intensive
services in one area, or a unique approach to serving families). Programs were also selected
to reflect services to a range of families according to income and cultural background and
rural and urban locations. Programs represent family child care homes, centers that offer
parenting programs, and multiservice centers that offer health, mental health, and social
5
services for families. The following chart describes these twelve programs. (See Volume II
for detailed information about their services and organization.)
The study was conducted through extensive telephone interviews with program
directors, coordinators of training and family services, and providers. The research team also
reviewed documents provided by the programs. From these sources of information, the team
prepared profiles of each program, which were sent back to directors for verification.
Information from the interviews and documents was analyzed for emerging cross-program
themes and a training framework.
6
Table 1. Summary of Child Care Programs
PROGRAM NAME
PROGRAM
TYPE OF
NUMBER
POPULATION
DIRECTOR
SETTING
SERVED
SERVED
Associated Child Care
Tracy Lang,
Family Child
100 children,
Ethnically diverse;
Services--Chelsea
Program
Care Network
ages two
low-income families,
Chelsea, MA
Director
months to six
mostly single parents
years
Calvary Bilingual
Beatriz Otero,
Child Care
235 children,
Ethnically diverse;
Multicultural Learning
Director
Center
birth to age
low- and moderate-
Center
fourteen years
income families
Washington, D.C.
Cambridge/Somerville
Pat Cronin,
Family Child
230 children,
Low-income and at-
Family Day Care
Program
Care Network
ages eight
risk families; 50%
Somerville, MA
Manager
weeks to five
ethnic minority
years
Community Family
Linda Sella,
Two Compre-
65 children,
Ethnically diverse,
Development, Inc.
Program
hensive
ages six weeks
low- to middle-
Poughkeepsie, NY
Director
Family
to twelve years
income families,
Centers
mostly single parents
Community Lab School
Cathy
Child Care
120 children,
Mostly Caucasian,
for Family-Centered Child
McFerrin,
Center
ages six weeks
dual-income, middle-
Care
Program
to kindergarten
income families
Forth Worth, TX
Director
age
KCMC Child
Dwayne
Fourteen
2,000 children,
Ethnically diverse;
Development Corporation
Crompton,
Compre-
ages two to
low- to moderate-
Kansas City, MO
Executive
hensive
eight years
income families
Director
Centers
The Family Farm
Ann Fisher,
Family Child
8 children, ages
Mostly single teen
Chapel Hill, NC
Project
Care
six weeks to
parents, ethnically
Coordinator
twelve years
and economically
diverse
Gardner Children's Center
Frederick J.
Multiservice
200 children,
Predominantly low-
San Jose, CA
Ferrer,
Child Care
ages two years,
income, Latino;
Executive
Center
nine months to
priority given to
Director
twelve years
children under
Protective Services
Los Niños Child
Betty Koufos,
Two Centers--
12 infants, ages
Mostly Latino, low-
Development and Family
Program
one Child
birth to two
to middle-income
Program
Director
Care and one
years; and 60
families; also teen
Napa, CA
Infant Center
children ages
parents
two to five
years
7
Pacific Oaks Children's
Yolanda Torres,
Child Care
200 children,
Upper-middle- and
School
Director
Center
ages three
middle-income
Pasadena, CA
months to nine
families, 37% ethnic
years
minority
Sheltering Arms Child
Elaine Draeger,
Twelve
1,600 children
Mostly African-
Development and Family
Executive
Multiservice
served, ages six
American, mostly
Support
Director
Child Care
weeks to five
young, single-parent,
Atlanta, GA
Centers
years
low-income families
Webster Child Care
Sonia Hartman,
Child Care
165 children,
Primarily Caucasian,
Center
Executive
Center
ages 6 weeks
middle-class families
Webster Groves, MO
Director
through six
years
8
II. CHALLENGES TO CREATING FAMILY-CENTERED CHILD CARE
Professional and Policy Context
Because of the shared responsibilities involved in childrearing, the child care arena is
an ideal place to promote family support principles and practices. However, the potential of
the field has not been fully tapped, for several reasons.
In the United States childrearing has largely been a private rather than a shared public
responsibility. As changing economic conditions drive more women to the work force, deeply
held cultural beliefs and practices about childrearing roles are being tested, resulting in
uncertainty and ambivalence. Many mothers find themselves torn between work and family
life: Those at work frequently harbor guilt about being away from home, and those at home
think they should be connected to the world of work. This situation often leads to
repercussions in caregiving relationships. Parents and child care providers tend to view each
other in an "us versus them" framework (Modigliani, 1996). Low-income families, who are
less likely to have access to high quality non-relative care, usually choose child care that is
"familiar" -- provided by relatives and friends -- rather than other forms of care which fall
into a "stranger" category (Mitchell, Cooperstein, and Larner, 1992).
With the rise of a new occupation of child care providers come efforts to legitimize
the profession. The culture of the profession -- consisting of beliefs, norms, and attitudes -- is
marked by an elaboration of child development principles and standards of practice.
Professional training has tended to focus around developmentally appropriate practices for
children. Without an equal focus on understanding adult development and parenting,
however, a hierarchical attitude among practitioners of expert (teacher) and non-expert
(parent) is likely to emerge. Criteria for quality child care have also been child-focused,
dwelling on the structural aspects of the environment, such as child and teacher ratios and
group size; health and safety standards; and teacher qualifications based on their knowledge of
child development. Unless family support is integrated in a substantial manner in developing
such criteria, it will be difficult to promote widespread family-centered child care.
9
The policy environment has reinforced a child focus. Over the past decade, state and
local governments have assumed greater responsibility for the availability and quality of child
care. Regulations aimed at promoting quality care have focused almost exclusively on
structural aspects and physical and safety standards. Only 15 states mention in their
regulations for family-based care the rights of parents to visit their children in the caregiving
setting. This number increases to 31 for center-based care, but in half of these states the
regulations are characterized by "limited" parental rights to visit (National Research Council,
1991).
Furthermore, social and economic features of the child care delivery system pose
significant challenges for developing more comprehensive services for the whole family.
Child care is poorly funded, understaffed, and lacking in professional stature (Larner, 1995).
These factors make it difficult to respond to the broader needs of families through
coordination with community services, much less through direct service provision. Child care
quality, affordability, and compensation remain the profession's priorities for policy and
program development.
Practice-based Perspectives
Child care providers enter the profession because they enjoy being with children.
They do not necessarily have an interest in children's families, nor are they necessarily
prepared to work with them. In her book, Parents Speak About Child Care, Kathy
Modigliani (1996) describes the guilt, sense of loss, and fears of parents who put their
children in child care. While some providers are sympathetic and supportive, others harbor
misgivings and even look down on families. They also often feel taken advantage of by
parents and sense a lack of respect for their profession. Modigliani (1996: 65-66) concludes:
mothers and caregivers are worlds apart. Their needs often conflict. Their
perspectives are so different that they do not understand one another, although they
are not aware of this problem.
10
Such tensions undermine the support that both families and providers need and place at risk
the consistency and continuity of care required for children's optimal development.
In this study, informants identified four typical sources of difficulties between
providers and parents: (1) lack of time and family involvement in child care programs; (2)
lack of clarity of roles for parents and providers; (3) differing views of childrearing practices;
and (4) concerns of families under stress.
Lack of time and family involvement in the program
More than half of mothers in the work force have children under six years of age
(United States Department of Commerce, 1995), and they are increasingly having their
children cared for by non-relatives (Hofferth, Brayfield, Dietch, and Holcomb, 1991). All of
the informants in the study confirmed that the parents of the children in their programs were
either working or undergoing training in order to work. Given their busy lives, the parents
did not have the time to get involved with the programs in ways that providers had hoped for.
Busy parents often do not have time to communicate effectively with providers. One
informant lamented the fact that many working parents may not even know the name of their
child's teacher. Although programs often have regularly scheduled meetings between
providers and parents, much of their contact occurs only during the limited -- and often
frazzled -- time while parents are either dropping off or picking up their children. One study
estimated that the typical center-based child care worker sees a parent for approximately 13.7
minutes of each week (Hughes, 1985). It is not surprising that this leads to frustration on the
part of the provider:
Sometimes staff are frustrated because parents are on the run when they drop off and
pick up their children. Staff find it difficult to articulate quickly and well when parents
have a question and there is not enough time for a deep discussion. (Yolanda Torres,
Pacific Oaks Children's School, Pasadena, CA)
11
Parents and providers are under constant pressure to balance their professional,
financial, family, and personal needs. The changing demands of different spheres of life
require flexibility on the part of parents and providers alike. Providers have to understand
that parents have many roles to juggle and that their priorities may not always match those of
the provider, especially when time commitments are involved. Parents, likewise, need to
understand that providers attend to a number of children, some of whom have multiple needs.
Providers have their own priorities related to children needing extra help or attention.
The stress created by this lack of time is reflected in reactions of the providers in such
statements as, "I wasn't as friendly as I should have been" and "I didn't follow-up with the
parent as quickly as I could have." Demanding schedules of parents and providers often
create communication problems between them. Time constraints also hinder the opportunity
for providers to gain training in effective methods of supporting families. If a provider takes
time off to get training, release time personnel must be found, and this is not always easy to
do.
Lack of clarity of roles for parents and providers
One potential source of conflict in the parent-provider relationship is that the providers
may come to view themselves as surrogate parents. Because children may spend more time
with their providers than with their own parents, the providers may try to assume too much
responsibility in the lives of the children.
Teachers sometimes forget that they are not the parent. They have to be clear that
parents are the primary teachers and that [the staff] are there as facilitators and
supporters. (Beatriz Otero, Calvary Bilingual Multicultural Center, Washington, D.C.)
One director believes that while the provider should not try to play the role of a surrogate
parent, parents need to understand that the child is spending a significant part of the day with
another adult, and thus, the role of that adult in the child's life is significant.
12
Providers' multiple roles -- caregivers of children, partners with parents, self-employed
workers or employees -- can create ambiguity; as such, these roles are constantly redefined
and adapted to deal with contextual issues. While providers are expected to be friendly and
supportive towards families, they often question the boundaries of their roles, especially when
parents make extra requests on a regular basis.
Providers may develop friendships with families, which can interfere with some of the
professional concerns that might arise. Maintaining a personal relationship with families
while simultaneously having to enforce program rules can be stressful for providers. For
family child care providers, balancing the caregiving and business aspects of their jobs can be
difficult. They must deal directly with parents about sensitive issues such as making
payments on time or making payments even when a child is absent.
While providers may seek to be empathetic and understanding of families' situations,
they set limits to their tolerance. A common issue is that of the parent who is chronically late
in picking up a child. In some of these cases, providers feel that they are being taken
advantage of, especially after they have tried to work with the parent to develop a solution.
Providers also feel that late pick-ups may be detrimental to a child because the child might
feel abandoned.
Differing views of childrearing practices
Child care programs often try to recruit staff from their own communities and
sometimes even from among the parents whose children are enrolled in their programs in
order to ensure that the providers reflect the values and characteristics of the families served.
This practice also tends to motivate parents to get more involved in the program. Despite
these attempts to bridge the gap between providers and parents, several informants in this
study spoke of the difficulties involved in trying to manage differing views of childrearing
practices and ways in which these affect their relationships with family members.
13
The differing views of childrearing practices identified by informants primarily affect
issues of learning, discipline, and gender roles. Parents' expectations of learning activities
offered at centers may differ from providers' expectations; these expectations may also differ
from those held by other parents. Some parents, for example, have difficulty understanding
that learning occurs through play and that providers are also teachers. The issue of gender
arises in the context of curriculums that allow children to explore and create a variety of roles
for themselves.
Some parents have a difficult time understanding our staff are providers rather than
caretakers. We have a play-oriented curriculum and the goal is to prepare children
for the next level of development. It is purposeful play as opposed to play without
design. (Beatriz Otero)
Fathers object to [their] sons sitting in the play area and holding and feeding a
"baby"; or trying out high heels from the costume area. They believe that boys playing
with dolls makes them homosexual. They tell their sons not to cry because it is not a
manly thing to do; or they teach their sons to be aggressive and to hit back when
fights break out. (Beatriz Otero)
Concerns regarding discipline arise because ways of disciplining a child vary widely
from culture to culture. Views toward corporal punishment, in particular, differ considerably.
Some parents ask providers to use it, even when doing so goes against the values of the
providers and the policy of a center. Some providers may agree with the views of parents but
feel obliged to uphold the policies of a center, resulting in tension between the providers and
parents. In such circumstances, the tension might be alleviated through an open discussion
about the harm or benefits to a child of various forms of discipline.
14
Concerns of families under stress
One of the most significant challenges that providers face is serving families
undergoing extreme stress. Providers often do not know how to deal effectively with families
experiencing pressures related to poverty, divorce, substance abuse, or child neglect.
Establishing and maintaining meaningful contacts with these parents are challenges. In some
cases, providers feel that parents are not giving their children proper attention and care. They
may find it difficult to avoid being judgmental and to identify family strengths. Providers
sometimes have to make hard decisions where there is no one right answer.
It's difficult when a parent shows up at the center and you suspect that they 've been
using a drug. How do you intervene? Do you allow the child to get into the car with
that parent? Those are big issues for us. (Christie Speck, formerly with Los Niños
Child Development and Family Program, Napa, CA)
Another challenge for programs in the study is reaching single, teenage parents.
Successfully influencing young parents to make wise choices and take responsibility can be
difficult, complex, and trying. Child care providers find it difficult to engage some mothers
in a meaningful relationship based on caring for the child. They worry about the situations of
these mothers, especially when they leave home and lack an extended family support network.
Providers also make an extra effort to motivate them to complete their schooling.
One of our parents dropped out of school. She said she just couldn't make it, but we
kept on encouraging her, and finally she did enroll (for a GED). She discovered she
could learn and she went on to enter a technical school and pursue a career. That's
the kind of thing we are able to do a lot, helping parents see the long term. (Elaine
Draeger, Sheltering Arms, Atlanta, GA)
Programs serving middle-income families often deal with stresses related to parenting
issues and balancing work and family commitments.
15
We do a lot of talking with parents about reducing stress in their children's lives.
Many of these parents work 10, 12, 14 hours a day, plus do a lengthy commute.
People are on this board and running to activities, and it leaves very few hours to
spend with their children. Often we try to say gently, 'your child needs your attention
-- you need to set aside some time to spend with him.' We try to help parents
understand how important their interactions with their child can be, because they in
group care a long time everyday. We also have many divorce situations where
children are reacting to stress and parents may be placing us in the middle of
conflicts. (Diane Bellem, Sheltering Arms, Atlanta, GA)
Families facing extreme stress require extra support, time, and energy from providers
and other practitioners in child care programs. There are no clearly defined step-by-step
procedures for working with families in a variety of complex situations. The challenge is to
be able to work individually with families in accordance with family support principles
emphasizing mutual respect, partnership, and family strengths.
16
III. BUILDING BLOCKS OF FAMILY-CENTERED CHILD CARE
Despite variation in their size and resources, the programs in the study display
common characteristics that set them apart from traditional child-centered programs. (See
Table 2.) Their philosophical orientation focuses on child development and support of the
whole family. Relationships between parents and child care providers are based on a model
of partnership rather than one of expert to parent. Services are offered to families, and
parents have the opportunity to assume governance roles.
Table 2. Child-Centered and Family-Centered Child Care
PROGRAM
CHILD-CENTERED CARE
FAMILY-CENTERED CARE
CHARACTERISTICS
Philosophical
Development of the whole
Development of the whole
orientation
child
child and support of the whole
family
Role of providers
Providers are experts
Providers respect families'
knowledge; engage in mutual
learning
Role of families
Family involvement in
Family involvement in child's
child's learning
learning and in policy/program
development
Services
Focus on child
Focus on family (child and
adult)
17
Philosophical Orientation
Both the home and child care program exert important influences on children's
learning and development; equally important, however, is the reciprocal relationship between
the home and program (Bronfenbrenner, 1986). Children's learning is enhanced by the
mutual support that exists among adults who share in their care and education. James
Coleman (1991) called such a relationship "social capital," and described it as the "strength of
social relationships that make available to a person the resources of others." A parent can
utilize the relationship with a child care teacher to share information and identify goals and
actions to further a child's development. In the same manner, a teacher can rely on parents to
reinforce a child's progress. It is this "closure" in the relationship among adults that
reinforces consistent and appropriate nurturing. Where the child care setting connects parents
to each other, it builds another network of resources that families can draw upon for
information, guidance, and help.
Positive linkages between parents and child care providers are likely to occur when
programs make a concerted effort to adopt a family support philosophy, strengthen parenting
knowledge and skills, and foster parent-to-parent relationships.
Adopting a family support philosophy
The programs in the study share a strong commitment to family support principles.
Each program's brochures and manuals for providers and families clearly define the
program's policy of respecting families and encouraging their participation. This statement
also sends a message to staff about the important role of families, and to parents about their
value as partners in caregiving.
The commitment to families is implemented in various ways: through the types of
services provided, the values associated with home and family, and the special efforts to make
programs places where families feel welcome. Programs serving low-income families stress
support and assistance for children and families so that they can achieve their goals in life.
18
Those serving middle-class families view their services as positive experiences to enrich the
whole family or as places that welcome parents and offer relief from daily stress. One
program developed a training model of family child care to demonstrate its belief that the
home environment is the optimal setting for care. Another designed its center to have spaces
for parents to use for different functions, such as to concentrate on career development, learn
about community resources, and relax and network with other parents. Still other programs
have developed special activities for fathers and grandparents who are primary caregivers.
Strengthening parenting knowledge and skills
The programs support parents by sharing with them parenting information and
providing opportunities for mutual learning. By offering many opportunities for informal
exchanges and formal sessions on parenting, the programs address the challenge of differing
views of childrearing practices.
Providers and other child care staff reach parents through different media and in the
home language of families. The information is made available through newsletters,
workshops, and courses as well as through informal conversations. Many programs also have
lending libraries containing materials on parenting. At least one child care service places
lending libraries in family child care homes to accommodate the parents who do not have
time to go to public libraries.
Through parenting sessions or workshops held throughout the year on topics chosen by
parents, parents learn from each other, and providers also learn from parents. Some topics,
such as toilet training, discipline, and sibling rivalry, are of concern to all parents in a
program, while other topics reflect concerns of smaller groups of parents who seek guidance
on specific issues such as grief or raising children with disabilities.
19
Equally important to what is communicated is how parenting information is conveyed.
Rather than being judgmental, providers seek to make parents comfortable and to engage in
honest conversations.
A lot of families didn't show up in our parent meetings because they were afraid to
talk about what going on in their homes. They felt that I might be judging them or
trying to change what they were doing with their children. They feared I would turn
them in (to social services) if they told me they spanked their children. So I had to sit
with them and talk about their concerns. I brought in a teacher from a community
college who is a single parent and I found that our families can relate to her because
many of them are single parents. I also invite facilitators who can conduct the
sessions in Spanish. We talk about what we can do to help a child be a little more
cooperative without using bribes or resorting to screaming and nagging. We take real
situations that families go through and discuss ways of bringing some peace into our
homes. (We have) created a much more relaxed environment. and now we get pretty
good participation. (Christie Speck, formerly with Los Niños Child Development and
Family Program, Napa, CA)
Additionally, providers share child development information informally with parents.
They give advice on many aspects of child development and often become role models for
teenage parents or first-time parents. They also use these conversations to learn about parent
perspectives and to understand a child's behavior that arises from a particular home situation.
A few programs offer provider home visits to help providers and parents establish a
mutually beneficial working relationship. These visits permit providers to gain a more
complete understanding of a child's home life and the views held by parents.
20
When you go into a home and you are trying to talk to parents, and dad gets beeped
four times, and the neighbor's dog barks the whole time, the teachers see what kind of
environment the kids are coming from. When they see a parent who is uptight all the
time, they can take the perspective of families. It's not, 'I can't stand working with
her, but 'They (families) are really struggling and what can we do to support them?'
(Renee Mayse, Webster Child Care Center, Webster Groves, MO)
Fostering parent-to-parent relationships
Connections among parents are important. Parents serve as resources for one another
to broaden their learning of child development; they also share their experiences as parents
and individuals, and provide mutual support. Some program directors, feeling that parents are
often isolated and lack opportunities to form social relationships, promote parent activities
such as shared meals to encourage them to get to know each other and establish supportive
relationships.
Parents also come together to participate with their children in activities such as field
trips. Some programs organize social events for parents only, giving them time for respite.
In these instances, in order to encourage attendance, programs provide child care.
Roles and Relationships
Family-centered child care is both a model and a process. It is a model of caregiving
that nurtures children and supports their families. It is also a process of developing
relationships with families. Studies of relationships in child care settings have reported
tensions between parents and child care providers and negative attitudes among providers
(Kontos and Wells, 1986; Galinsky and Weissbourd, 1992; Modigliani, 1996). This is
unfortunate because a healthy parent-teacher relationship has the potential to enrich the child's
development at home and in child care; to become an entry point for comprehensive support
to promote family well-being; to prevent increased stress for parent, child, and teacher; to
nurture the personal and professional growth of the teacher; and to offer the support and
21
security that enables parents to work well and to parent well. The programs in the study offer
insights into building parent-program relationships.
Building parent-program relationships
What makes for a healthy relationship between parents and providers? The informants
from the programs in the study identified the following elements: shared values, mutual
respect and trust, and effective communication. By focusing on these areas as goals for
practice, programs are able to address some of the challenges previously noted, including the
lack of clarity of roles for parents and providers and the differing views on childrearing
practices.
Shared values
A good relationship exists when parent and teacher affirm the shared nature of
caregiving and the importance of mutual support. They seek common ground in doing what
is best for the child's safety and well-being, and his or her positive development. To achieve
this goal involves a mutual learning process in which communication plays a vital role.
Matching families and their child care arrangements is critical to establish and
maintain supportive relationships. Directors and providers offer parents clear information
about their philosophy and how that is reflected in policies regarding family visits, arrival and
departure, communication, curriculum, children's illness and other aspects of daily caregiving.
Programs in the study also try to bring some aspects of the home culture into the child care
setting. While most rely on trying to establish regular communication with families, a few
programs encourage visits to the neighborhood and homes of families. The latter are
especially useful when providers and families come from different socioeconomic and cultural
backgrounds. One program, The Family Farm (Chapel Hill, NC), has developed a workshop
on "Family Rituals," intended to familiarize family child care providers with the daily routines
of family life and ways that can be emulated in the child care setting.
22
Mutual respect and trust
Mutual respect requires a commitment from both parents and providers to learn as
much as possible about each other's ideas and attitudes regarding childrearing in its familial
and cultural contexts. Some informants believe that trust grows out of the knowledge of
childrearing practices: Parents have to know why providers do certain things, and providers
have to know why parents do what they do. This knowledge prepares both to develop
confidence in each other's competence. Providers must also be open to learning from families
and understand that parents, especially those who are poor and stressed, try to do the best for
their children.
Relationships of trust do not happen automatically. Each party must earn the
credibility and trust of the other. The coordinator of the Family Farm, for example, in trying
to be sensitive to parents' feelings and needs, lets parents know that she will listen to their
concerns and suggestions. Furthermore, part of its training program includes handling
sensitive communication. Trainees reflect upon and clarify their own position on issues such
as death, religion, and sexuality and learn to discuss these with families so as to avoid
misunderstandings. The goal is to make parents feel comfortable with their child care
arrangements (Hearth Family and Community Resource Center, 1995).
Maintaining trust also means recognizing that mistakes should not deter long-term
relationships. One director comments "We get frustrated by some of the choices that families
make in their lives because they're not always healthy choices. It's frustrating, but we have
to remind ourselves that we make mistakes just like the families in our program do. We
have to be here to support each other and try to understand each other and keep the trust."
Effective communication
Consistent and frequent communication between parent and teacher builds secure
relationships between them. For many providers the best way to support parents is by
23
listening and asking questions that clarify parents' attitudes and feelings. Good
communication is essential when imparting child development information, especially to
young or inexperienced mothers. Tracy Lang of Associated Day Care Services (Chelsea, MA)
notes that family child care providers in her network "give untold reams of advice to parents
from teething to sleeping habits." She observes that parents may often feel more comfortable
talking to providers than to a pediatrician or members of their own families. In these
interactions, it is necessary to know how to give constructive criticism as well as positive
reinforcement. Additionally, developing good communication skills is critical to handling
sensitive and difficult communication such as the differences in child rearing practices. The
challenge for providers is to present clear explanations and show respect.
When programs serve groups from different cultural backgrounds, communication can
be especially difficult. Misunderstandings between parents and providers often result from
language barriers. Most of the programs in this study offer training on cross-cultural
communication and hire bilingual staff or people from the community share the same
backgrounds as the families served.
At the Los Niños Child Development and Family Program parents and providers work
together to develop a program that respects the diversity of the community. Staff members
are not familiar with all of the cultures represented in the program. Workshops on
multiculturalism address the differences and fears that make relationships uncomfortable.
These training sessions are open to both parents and staff members to work through issues
together. One staff member has said, "What's exciting is the presence of parents. Cultural
differences are issues all of us have to deal with. It's not like the directors and coordinators
have the answers to share with parents. We have to let go of the notion that we're the
experts. We have to work (with parents) to make the program a place that everybody feels
good about."
24
Mobilizing family involvement
Recognizing the primacy of parents in their child's development, the programs in the
study make numerous efforts to engage parents in stimulating interactions with their child.
They work with parents to discover a level of participation that works best for them -- one
that balances their desire to be involved with their child's care with other demands on their
time. By treating parents as consumers, programs are better able to address the challenge of
limited time and involvement. Family participation takes many forms: preparing breakfast for
children at the child care program, taking part in classroom and family activities, promoting
reading, working with providers to design curricula, creating learning projects for home use,
and developing an individual learning plan for a child with special needs.
Rather than assume the role of experts, providers involve parents in making choices
with regard to their child's development and matters related to the child care program and its
activities for both children and families. For some programs in this study, developing a
family-centered program has meant a shift from doing things for parents to doing things with
them.
For example, Lang stresses that Associated Day Care Services' family child care
services have evolved to help parents understand that they have rights and choices. Parents
who come seeking child care are given the names of four or five providers whom they can
visit. A staff member also offers consumer information and guidance. The entire selection
process seeks to ensure that parents are satisfied with their child care choices.
The programs offer many opportunities for family involvement. According to Diane
Bellem, the Family Support Coordinator at Sheltering Arms, "Flexibility is the key to any
successful family-centered child care program. We try to have ongoing activities so that
parents can plug into them whenever they can." At the same time, the program's providers
and staff members recognize that parents have little discretionary time and know that parents'
first priorities are making a living and taking care of their children.
25
Family involvement also means parents' being able to shape policies and programs.
All the center-based programs encourage parents to join advisory committees or boards. At
Community Family Development (Poughkeepsie, NY), parents elect the 22-member Board of
Directors, which includes four of their peers. The Community Lab School (Fort Worth, TX)
has two decision-making committees: family services and fundraising. Ten to twelve parents
serve as representatives of their children's age group on these committees.
At the Gardner Children's Center (San Jose, CA) providers undergo training to instill
parent leadership through parent meetings. The goal is to have parents assume decision-
making responsibilities. The center holds intensive work sessions with the staff. A one-hour
parent meeting can take three to four hours to prepare.
A Continuum of Services
Each of the programs in the study has developed ways to support families in ways that
go beyond child care. The programs assess family interests and needs and obtain parent
suggestions. They try to adopt a parent's perspective to understand a typical day's schedule
or sources of stress, and problem-solve around these concerns. Through creative and flexible
programming, they seek to ease the hectic lives of parents and support them in their roles as
parents and bread winners.
Meeting family needs
Programs that are family-centered listen to the concerns of parents and engage in
problem-solving. They design services to meet the interests and needs of the families that
they serve. For example, to help low-income working families struggling to pay for child
care, Community Family Development (Poughkeepsie, NY) has developed a scholarship fund
using money from private and public sources to pay for child care. The program also
simplifies the lives of working parents by providing transportation to and from the public
schools for its before- and after-school care for school-aged children. At
Cambridge/Somerville Family Day Care (MA), a local service organization that works with a
26
network of family child care homes, the providers work closely with social workers to offer
consistent support to a large number of families under protective services.
In their efforts to help parents schedule time with their children in an unhurried and
relaxed environment, the Community Lab School (Fort Worth, TX) offers "stress-reduction
services." In response to a parent survey, the school, which primarily serves middle-class
families, provides services that include prepared take-out dinners; one-day dry cleaning;
stamps for purchase and mail drop; shoe repair; sale of snacks for children for the drive
home; and aerobics classes for parents and joint parent and children exercise classes. The
center has a parent lounge where parents can view educational videos and relax for a few
minutes with their children before heading back to the rush hour commute. There is also a
designated room for mothers to breast feed their infants.
Many of the programs offer developmental services for children. These include on-site
screening, counseling, and referrals to specialists when needed. A number of programs also
provide services for children with special needs, a group that often has difficulty finding child
care. For example, KCMC Child Development Corporation (Kansas City, MO) has developed
a comprehensive program staffed by a disabilities specialist, mental health specialist, and
family involvement coordinator. The program offers assessments, screenings, and referrals.
The child care center is physically designed and equipped to attend to children's special
needs.
Collaborating with community agencies
Collaboration with other agencies is an important strategy to provide families with a
continuum of services. Family child care providers are part of networks or link with child
care resource and referral agencies that give them access to additional resources such as
family literacy programs, parent groups, health information and referrals, and social workers.
Center-based programs form partnerships with schools, retired communities, health centers,
and child care resource and referral agencies for comprehensive programming. Additionally,
27
collaboration for training on family support is working to make the concept and practice more
widespread.
Agency partnerships enable programs to provide specific services that lie outside their
expertise. Rather than develop the capacity to deliver these services, programs often save
money by contracting out the service or negotiating for on-site publicly available services.
For example, the Pacific Oaks Children's School contracts with a private agency to handle
services for children with special needs and their families. The agency also helps the school
and parents find appropriate placements for children when they transition out of Pacific Oaks.
The Gardner Children's Center is part of a county consortium of child care agencies that
contracts with a counseling agency for mental health services. The agency supervises a
doctoral intern who consults with staff and provides direct services to families.
Collaboration paves the way for instituting family support models in child care centers.
For example, the Webster Child Care Center has developed its staff capacity to offer
parenting services through the Parents as Teachers (PAT) program. This is made possible
through an agreement with the local school district to recruit families for PAT. The child
care providers enroll in a five-day training course which leads to certification as a parent
educator. Over two-thirds of the center's providers have been trained as parent educators.
The PAT training equips the providers to communicate child development information to
parents and to discuss a child's daily activities and development with them.
28
IV. A TRAINING FRAMEWORK FOR
FAMILY-CENTERED CHILD CARE
The successful practice of family-centered child care will, in large part, depend upon
the preparation of providers. The personal beliefs and values of these practitioners influence
family-program relations (Burton, 1992). Studies have shown that relationship building is
critical to the success of various types of programs that work with families (Bruner, 1992;
Lopez and Hochberg, 1993; Shartrand, 1996). The research indicating that parents and child
care providers are "worlds apart" suggests that much work lies ahead to build appropriate
training systems.
Status of Family Support Training
This study indicates that training for family support is both limited and highly
variable. In the communities where the programs operate, few opportunities exist for family
support training from community colleges and resource and referral agencies. Most of that
training occurs within programs, led by a center director, social worker, or family support
coordinator. Topics are determined by staff needs and parent concerns. Three programs have
sought to systematize training through nationally recognized family support models such as
the Parent Services Project and Parents as Teachers. Three others, noted below, have
developed their own curriculums, which they are now disseminating to other programs in their
community and beyond:
The Community Lab School for Family-Centered Child Care (Fort Worth, TX),
created by the First Texas Council of Camp Fire, holds separate training sessions for
center directors and family child care providers on the principles and practice of
family-centered child care. The training includes a research component, offered in
cooperation with area universities, to assess the overall effectiveness of implementing
the School's program model in various sites.
29
Sheltering Arms (Atlanta, GA) builds on and strengthens the family component of the
Child Development Associate (CDA) competencies. For each of the competency
areas, trainees learn ways to communicate information about curriculum content to
parents, and ways in which parents can contribute to curricular activities. The training
program is offered to early childhood practitioners in the community working toward
their CDA credentials.
The Family Farm (Chapel Hill, NC) has trained family child care providers according
to a comprehensive curriculum that emphasizes their relationships with children,
families, and the earth. Each year it helps a specified number of providers become
registered with the state, gain accreditation from the National Association for Family
Child Care, or complete their CDA degree.
While programs provide staff with opportunities to participate in conferences and
workshops, directors talk about the need for more sustained approaches such as regular
technical assistance from consultants under contract and daily coaching and modelling from
directors and experienced staff. Some also feel that available training tends to focus on
introductory levels and express the need for training that builds basic as well as advanced
skills. Frederick Ferrer, of Gardner Children's Center, notes, for example, that seasoned
providers do not need more training in making finger puppets but rather in ways of guiding a
child whose incarcerated father will be coming home, or ways of helping a boy with leukemia
return to the preschool classroom.
Training is especially valuable when it is:
Systemic: Providers gain credentials that in turn are linked to compensation and/or
transfer to other career pathways;
Comprehensive: Providers learn about child and family development as well as
topics related to management and child care policies affecting their work;
30
Continuous: Providers advance from basic to more specialized knowledge and skills
(and in the process, become mentors for others);
Inclusive: Opportunities for joint training of parents and providers enable greater
communication and trust building between them;
Reinforcing: Providers form networks of support to engage in continuous learning
from one's peers.
A Range of Training Needs
The practices of the 12 programs suggest common areas for training as well as
adaptations to match the environments of child care programs and the types of families that
they serve. Differences across child care settings affect the types of practices and training
necessary for family-centered child care. For example, more communication between family
members and providers occurs in family child care homes than in child care centers. As
informants from family child care homes and networks attest, this can create a greater
exchange of information. Training can instill the importance of making this an opportunity
for providers to educate parents informally about child development and childrearing. It can
also attune providers to elicit from parents and family members information about their own
childrearing values, their children's current mental and physical state, and other important
information for the care and education of their children.
On the other hand, child care in a home setting may pose unique obstacles to providers
that center providers do not face. Family child care providers can benefit from training about
how to manage boundaries and create a balance with parents who have become more like
friends or family members than clients. These providers can also improve relationships with
parents through consumer satisfaction training that considers their position as independent
business owners. Finally, as increasing numbers of providers work alone, out of their homes,
they can feel a sense of professional isolation. Training can stimulate continuing professional
31
support by offering providers the opportunity to network with each other and with other
service agencies in the community.
Differences in the types of communities and families served will affect practices and
training. Providers working with teenage parents will benefit from training on adolescent
development and ways to communicate with and motivate young parents to reach their goals.
As informants have expressed, because providers often must model parenting practices, they
need to have training in sound parenting principles. They also have to know how to act on
behalf of young parents with their high schools, and inspire them to complete their schooling.
Providers dealing with families where there is documented abuse or neglect in the home will
benefit from knowledge about family interventions and case management procedures, and
skills related to team work with other professionals who serve the same families.
Training will also need to be relevant to community contexts. Building cultural
competence, for example, takes on special meaning in different contexts. In some cases, it is
appropriate to emphasize preserving the language and culture of an ethnic group. In others,
where communities tend to be highly mixed, training might focus on multicultural, anti-bias
approaches to working with children and families (Chang, Muckelroy, Pulido-Tobiassen,
1996).
A Comprehensive Training Framework
This section offers a framework to prepare child care practitioners to work with
families. The framework -- illustrated in Figure 1 -- outlines basic knowledge, attitudes, and
skills that apply to all child care providers. How it is to be implemented will depend on the
variation in settings and types of families served by programs. The framework is based on
the findings of the study and illustrates knowledge development that is grounded in practice.
It is one that can be used by different institutions for both pre- and inservice training.
32
Child development
Providers need to be knowledgeable in early child development not only to be
competent with children but also to inform parents about the "whys" and "hows" of teacher
practices. At the same time, providers have to be open to learning from parents and to
incorporate aspects of the home into the child care setting.
Parent/family development
Providers need the attitudes, knowledge, and skills to implement a family support
philosophy. Based on the family support elements found in child care programs, an expanded
version of training on parent/family development is illustrated in Table 3. The seven areas of
training include general family knowledge, parent-provide communication, family support,
family involvement in learning and development, family investment in child care, family-
community linkages, and family involvement in decision making. Table 4 lists examples of
topics for each of these areas of parent/family development training.
Teacher development
Providers need to identify areas of personal and professional growth that can improve
their work with children and families. Appropriate training would include skills to enhance
communication, build self-confidence, and promote leadership. Personal qualities and life
situations also influence workplace behavior. Useful training would include managing time
and stress, balancing work and family life, and handling gender, race, and age issues.
33
Organizational development
Providers need to be aware of the ways that their programs can develop family
supportive family policies and procedures. The child care profession is just beginning to
acknowledge that parents are consumers seeking to maximize their purchasing power (Larner,
1996). Training for providers should emphasize the importance of their being responsive to
family wants and concerns, sponsoring family activities, and engaging parents in decision
making.
Community development
Providers need to know the ways to build community support for families. Training
should inform providers about ways in which they can encourage informal and helping
relationships among families. It should also provide information on the benefits of a
comprehensive support system for children and families. Providers need to develop skills to
work in collaboration with other professionals to contribute to community knowledge of the
cultures, concerns, and aspiration of the families that they serve.
Policy development
Providers need to know about family and child policies that bear upon their work. For
example, training would inform providers about evolving welfare policies and the kinds of
supports that child care can provide needy and highly stressed families. Training might also
inform providers about new provisions and ways that increased demands for child care will be
met. Training should also address ways in which providers can influence policy development
in their respective states and communities.
34
Figure 1: Goals of Child Care
Training and Development Opportunities
Child
Development
To provide information
about child development.
To plan and lead culturally
and developmentally
Policy
appropriate programs.
Parent/Famils
Development
Development
To be aware of child and
family policies that have an
To promote knowledge
impact on the work of
about families.
providers.
To develop skills in commu-
nication and collaboration.
Family-Centered
Community
Child Care
D. Development
Provider
To promote informal and
Development
helping relationships among
families
To understand how personal
qualities and life situations
work.
To use community resources
for enriching and helping
11 Organizational
activities.
To take on leadership
Deve Copment
responsibilities.
To familiarize communities
To be aware of policies and
with diverse childrearing
procedures that support
practices.
families.
35
Table 3. Training Framework on Parent/Family Development
CHARACTER-
TYPE OF
TRAINING GOAL
ISTICS OF
TRAINING
FAMILY-
CENTERED CHILD
CARE
Philosophical
General family
To promote knowledge about different families
orientation:
knowledge
culture, childrearing practices, and living
development of the
environments
child and support of
the whole family
To promote an awareness of and respect for
different family structures and lifestyles
Family support
To promote knowledge about family support
principles and their application in real-life
situations
Role of
Parent-provider
To provide techniques and strategies for two-way
providers: respect
communication
communication
parents' knowledge
and engage in mutual
To develop cross-cultural communication skills
learning
Role of families:
Family
To provide information on ways to involve parents
involvement in child's
involvement in
in their children's development outside the child
learning and in policy
learning and
care setting
and program
development
development
To provide various strategies for bridging the home
and child care environments
Family investment
To introduce ways parents can work together with
in child care
providers both in and out of the child care setting
Family
To introduce ways to support and involve parents
involvement in
in decision making around child and family issues
decision making
To introduce ways to support and involve parents
on policy, program and curriculum development
Services: focus on
Family-community
To introduce ways of supporting families' social,
family
linkages
educational, and social service needs through
parenting programs, peer networks, family centers,
and referrals to community resources
36
Table 4. Selected Examples of Training Topics³
AREA
SELECTED EXAMPLES OF TOPICS
General family
Knowledge of how community conditions influence family functioning
knowledge
Knowledge of cultural beliefs about childrearing (e.g. discussing stereotypes and
differing values)
Knowledge and skills to work with families of children with special needs
Skills in supporting teenage parents
Family support
Skills to work with the knowledge, strengths, and experience of parents
Skills in understanding one's personal definition of family support
Knowledge and skills in group dynamics
Skills in conflict management
Parent-provider
Skills in "active listening"
communication
Skills in parent-teacher conferences
Skills in explaining child development to a parent
Skills in managing communication around difficult issues
Family
Knowledge of parents' role as child's first teachers
involvement in
learning and
Knowledge of culturally and developmentally appropriate early childhood
development
practices
Skills to promote learning activities in the home
Skills involving families in curriculum development
Family investment
Skills to involve parents as resources; as participants and contributors to socials; as
in child care
classroom volunteers
Family
Knowledge and skills to address power relationships (e.g. differences between
involvement in
expert-client and partnership relations)
decision making
Skills in facilitating parent leadership and management of social functions (e.g.,
field trips, family dinners) and of committee work (e.g., policy, fundraising)
Family-
Skills related to linking families that share similar interests
community
Knowledge and skills to refer families to community services
linkages
Skills to work with other professionals in the community
3
See C. Dean (forthcoming) for a typology of specific competencies for family support and Lee & Seiderman
(forthcoming) for specific training practices.
37
Organizational Support
While training is necessary to build family-centered child care, it alone is insufficient
to bring about change. Family-centered child care involves changes at interpersonal,
organizational, and policy levels. The training and development of child care providers must
be accompanied by an organizational capacity to support them through family-oriented
policies and fair compensation. Additionally, policies have to commit resources for training
and promote greater coordination among training programs. Only when these components are
addressed in a sustained manner is it likely that widespread family-centered child care will be
achieved.
The programs in this study support providers' work with families in one or more of
the following ways:
Developing family-focused policies and family involvement activities
Programs support families as well as staff by clearly expressing a family support
philosophy and reflecting this in their policies and procedures. The focus on families
penetrates multiple aspects of service delivery, from hiring staff from the community who
represent the families being served to sponsoring family activities. Inservice training builds
staff knowledge and skills to work with families. Programs aim for flexibility so as to meet
the individual and collective interests of families.
Creating a family service coordinator position to support providers
Programs benefit from having a family service coordinator. The coordinator serves as
a liaison with families, often becoming the person who facilitates parent group meetings.
This person shares information with providers and trains them. The coordinator also becomes
an important contact for family child care providers to link families with additional support
services.
38
Recognizing and supporting providers
Programs encourage providers in their work with children and families by recognizing
their work and showing appreciation in the way they are treated on a day-to-day basis. The
director plays a critical role in this process. A director should be a "hands-on" person,
available to the staff and willing to give support and encouragement. Resource and referral
agencies and organizations that network with family child-care providers link the providers so
that they can become part of informal support groups. Additionally, some center-based
programs provide opportunities for career advancement, with experienced providers and
family services coordinators serving as mentors for newly hired providers and for those in
other child care programs.
Working for fair compensation
Programs seek the funds to make wages more livable and benefits more
comprehensive. If programs are to build sustained relationships with families, they need to
retain providers. The field as a whole -- and even some programs in this study -- experiences
high staff turnover rates. Despite the high cost of child care to families, child care workers
are still very poorly paid. Seventy percent of the child care work force earns an income
below the poverty level (Dean, forthcoming). The National Association of Child Care
Resources & Referral Agencies reports that although many providers are college educated, the
average wage in the industry is $6.70 an hour, while the national average for all workers is
$11.25. For providers to be respected, they need to be paid comparable wages.
39
V. RECOMMENDATIONS
Family support can be implemented in child care. Providers and other staff members
who come into frequent contact with parents play a key role in supporting families. It is
through personal relationships that providers build respect and trust and learn to negotiate
differences in childrearing viewpoints. Individual knowledge of families can help providers in
their interaction with children. It also paves the way to assist families who need additional
services.
Although working with families is an important part of their daily routine, child care
providers have few opportunities to acquire training in this area. Programs often develop
inservice training to meet staff needs. Indeed, a small number of programs are emerging as
local innovators who train other child care programs in their communities.
Instituting family-centered child care requires policy changes that allocate resources for
training and facilitate coordination among training programs. Some specific recommendations
for policymakers and training institutions follow.
Make family support training a priority
States should adopt family support criteria in setting standards of program quality.
This, in turn, should be backed by ongoing training and professional development
opportunities. Resources for training are extremely limited in most programs. Child care
agencies allocate the bulk percent of their budgets to salaries. Often, training is the last item
that is squeezed into a budget and the first to be removed in a shortfall.
Find ways to build a comprehensive training system
Efforts should be made to address the fragmentation of training. Currently, training in
early childhood education is provided by many types of organizations -- resource and referral
agencies, community colleges, private and public four year colleges and professional
41
organizations -- with little or no connection to each other. Training in family support is also
provided by different sources, including institutions of higher education, national program
models, and local programs. Policies should encourage linkages between the early childhood
and family support training fields at preservice and inservice levels. Additional family
support training should be established and course offerings across training institutions should
build upon each other toward degree attainment.
Develop the infrastructure for family support training
Training for family support in child care is limited and highly variable. Support
should be provided for research and model development for family support training in child
care, and for the creation of a clearinghouse to document and disseminate information about
innovative programs among training institutions as well as programs. Support should also be
given to the evaluation of training programs so that more effective curriculums and
pedagogies can be developed.
Create innovative partnerships between higher education and programs
Institutions of higher learning play a key role in training and certifying early childhood
professionals. As such, they must be part of the effort to develop training partnerships with
child care programs. This would be fertile ground for the development of reciprocal
knowledge building, one that applies theory to illuminate practice and uses practice to shape
new ways of thinking about family processes. This type of close working relationship can
encourage the growth of innovative training methods. It can also provide a basis for
community education, for example, through mentorships whereby students learn from
experienced providers in program settings.
Make training opportunities accessible across categorical programs
Better use can be made of existing inservice training opportunities. Efforts should be
made to make training at the community level inclusive and to bring together providers from
42
Head Start, school programs, family child care, and child care centers. This would provide a
means for programs with limited training resources to gain access to training and promote
equity. It is also likely to encourage peer networking and learning that can continue beyond
the training period.
Use a community-based approach to training
Community resources can be effectively utilized to meet the specific training needs of
providers. Child care programs can work together to assess training needs, approaches,
barriers, and opportunities. Collaboration enables them to address common issues and
develop joint training. This is an especially appropriate strategy when training funds are
limited and their optimal use is critical. As many of the individual child care programs do
not have the resources required for training, centers and family child care networks can form
consortia to access funding for training.
43
APPENDIX A:
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Program Outreach
Several informants from national child care organizations were contacted by phone and
asked to name other key organizations and informants in the field of child care. They were
also asked to nominate exemplary child care programs with a family focus. These initial
phone calls resulted in a comprehensive list of 56 national child care organizations that
included professional associations, advocacy organizations, child care information
clearinghouses, federal and state offices, and child care research centers. Letters were sent to
these organizations requesting nominations for local exemplary child care programs with a
family focus. A second mailing, to all members of National Association of Child Care
Resource and Referral Agencies, also requested nominations of family-focused child care
programs. Finally, a small group of national experts in the child care field was convened to
discuss the design of the research project and its program outreach strategies. This meeting
resulted in additional program nominations. In total, these varied outreach strategies resulted
in over 60 program nominations.
Sample Selection
Directors of all nominated child care programs were called and asked about the family
support services and provider training offered at his or her site, as well as the population of
children and families served. After sufficient information about each nominated program was
obtained, nine were selected, based on the following criteria: 1) Each program offered a
breadth, depth, or innovation of services to families (a wide range of services, intensive
services in one area, or a unique approach to serving families) and/or substantial family-
centered training for child care staff; 2) programs that were nominated more than once were
given priority; and 3) the nine programs selected represented a balance of three major types of
child care settings -- family day care, center-based child care, and comprehensive family
centers.
A second group of four programs was selected specifically to represent child care
programs serving culturally and economically diverse communities. A total of thirteen
programs were chosen for the study.
Document Review
The thirteen selected child care programs were contacted and asked to send any
materials that described their program, including brochures, training materials, program
philosophies, mission statements, and other documents. Program profiles were created from
this written information. Missing information was noted and asked about in subsequent
interviews with each program director.
Interview Procedures
One-hour audio-taped phone interviews were conducted with program directors.
Information was gathered about the program's history, philosophy, family-focused services,
provider training, and program challenges and successes. Follow-up phone calls with program
directors and phone interviews with other staff members were conducted when necessary.
Data Analysis
Information collected through interviews and written material was analyzed for
emerging themes within and across programs, resulting in written program profiles and a
cross-program summary. Profiles were then sent to program directors requesting feedback to
verify that all program information was accurate and complete. Profiles were adjusted
accordingly.
REFERENCES
Adams, Gina C. and Nicole Oxendine Poersch. Key Facts About Child Care and Early Education:
A Briefing Book. Washington, DC: Children's Defense Fund, 1997.
Who Cares? State Commitment to Child Care and Early Education. Washington, DC:
Children's Defense Fund, 1996.
Brady, Anne. and Julia Coffman. Preparing the Next Generation: Recommendations for Meeting
the Accountability Demands on Family Support and Parenting Programs. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard Family Research Project, in press.
Brofenbrenner, Urie. "Ecology of the Family as a Context for Human Development: Research
Perspectives." Developmental Psychology 22.6 (1986): 723-724.
Bruner, Charles, Megan Berryhill and Mark Lambert. Making Welfare Work: A Family Approach.
Des Moines: Child and Family Policy Center, 1992.
Burton, Christine B. "Defining Family-Centered Early Education: Beliefs of Public School, Child
Care, and Head Start Teachers." Early Education and Development 3.1 (1992): 45-59.
Cariaga-Lo, Liza, Pamela B. Miller, and Heather Weiss. The Harvard Outcomes Evaluation
Database: Summarizing the Effectiveness of Family Support and Education Programs.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard Family Research Project. 1995.
Carnegie Task Force on Meeting the Needs of Young Children. Starting Points: Meeting the Needs
of Our Youngest Children. New York: Carnegie Corporation of New York, 1994.
Chang, Hedy Nai-Lin, Amy Muckelroy, and Dora Pulido-Tobiasse. Looking In, Looking Out:
Redefining Child Care and Early Education in a Diverse Society. Ed. Carol Dowell. San
Francisco: California Tomorrow Publication, 1996.
Child Care Law Center. Child Care Contracts: Information for Providers. San Francisco: Child
Care Law Center, 1991.
Child Custody Disputes: With Whom Can the Child Go Home? San Francisco: Child Care Law
Center, 1992.
Legal Aspects of Caring for Sick and Injured Children. San Francisco: Child Care Law Center,
1997.
Child Care Resource and Referral Issues 6.3, Spring 1997.
Coleman, James. "Parental Involvement in Education." Policy Perspectives Series. Washington,
DC: US Department of Education, 1991.
Dean, Christian. Child Care Training and Credentialing Initiatives. [in this volume], 1996.
Family Resource Coalition. Training in Family Support: Towards a Conceptual Framework.
Chicago: Family Resource Coalition, 1991.
Hearth Family and Community Resource. The Family Farm: Information for Families. Chapel Hill:
Hearth Family and Community Resource, 1996.
Hess, Peg, Brenda McGowan, and Carol H. Meyer. "Practitioners' Perspectives on Family and Child
Services." Children and Their Families in Big Cities: Strategies for Service Reform. Ed.
Alfred H. Kahn and Sheila G. Kamerman. NewYork: Columbia University School of Social
Work, 1996. 121-137.
Hofferth, Sandra, et al. National Child Care Survey, 1990. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute
Press, 1992.
Hughes, Robert Jr. "The Informal Help-giving of Home and Center Childcare Providers." Family
Relations 34.3. (1985): 359-366.
Galinsky, Ellen and Bernice Weissbourd. "Family-Centered Child Care." Yearbook in Early
Childhood Education: Issues in Child Care 3. Ed. Bernard Spodek and Olivia N. Sarcho.
New York: Teachers College Press, 1992.
Infant Health and Development Program. "Enhancing the Outcomes of Low Birth-weight,
Premature Infants." Journal of the American Medical Association 263.22. (1990): 3035-
3042.
Kontos, Susan and Wilma Wells. "Attitudes of Caregivers and the Day Care Experiences of
Families." Early Childhood ResearchQuarterly 1. (1986): 47-67.
Larner, Mary. Linking Family Support and Early Childhood Programs: Issues, Experiences,
Opportunities. Chicago: Family Resource Coalition, 1995.
Parents' Perspectives on Quality in Early Care and Education." Reinventing Early Care and
Education: A Vision for a Quality System. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1996. 21-
42.
Lee, Lisa and Ethel Seiderman. The Parent Services Project Model for Integrating Family Support
into Child Care. [in this volume], 1996.
Link, Geoffrey, Marjorie Beggs, and Ethel Seiderman. Serving Families. Fairfax, CA: Parent
Services Project Inc., 1997.
Lopez, M. Elena and Mona R. Hochberg. Paths to School Readiness: An In-Depth Look at Three
Early Childhood Programs. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Family Research Project, 1993.
McWilliam, P.J. "Teaching Family-Centered Skills through the Case Method of Instruction."
Educating and Supporting the Infant/Family Work Force: Models, Methods and Materials.
Ed. Linda Eggbeer and Emily Fenichel. Dec. 1994-Jan. 1995: 30-34.
Miller, Shelby, Elaine Replogle and Heather Weiss. "Family Support in Early Education and Child
Care Settings: Making the Case for Both Principles of Practice." Children Today 23.
(1995): 26-29.
Mitchell, Anne, Emily Cooperstein and Mary Larner. Child Care Choices, Consumer Education,
and Low-Income Families. New York: National Center for Children in Poverty, 1992.
Mitchell, Anne, Louise Stoney and Harriet Dichter. Financing Child Care in the United States: An
Illustrative Catalog of Current Strategies. The Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation and the
Pew Charitable Trusts, 1997.
Modigliani, Kathy. Parents Speak About Child Care: Stressed-out Mothers, Invisible Fathers, and
Short-changed Children. Boston, MA: Families and Work Institute, 1996.
Morgan, Gwen. Child Care Training and Delivery to Support Families. [in this volume], 1996.
National Research Council. Caring for America's Children. Ed. Anne Meadows. Washington, DC:
National Academy Press, 1991.
Phillips, Deborah. "Reframing the Quality Issue." Reinventing Early Care and Education: A Vision
for a Quality System. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1996.
Poersch, Nicole Oxendine and Helen Blank. Working Together for Children: Head Start and Child
Care Partnerships. Washington, DC: Children's Defense Fund, 1996.
Powell, Douglas. Parents and Programs: "Early Childhood as a Pioneer in Parent Involvement and
Support." The Care and Education of America's Young Children: Obstacles and
Opportunities. Ed. Sharon L. Kagan. Chicago: University Chicago Press, 1991. 91-109.
Public Policy Research Centers, University of Missouri-St. Louis. Parents as Teachers in Child
Care Centers: A Developmental Assessment for Training and Technical Assistance. St.
Louis: Public Policy Research Centers, 1995.
Shartrand, Angela. Supporting Latino Families: Lessons from Exemplary Programs Vol II.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard Family Research Project, 1996.
Shartrand, Angela, Holly Kreider and Margi Erickson-Warfield. Preparing Teachers to Involve
Parents: A National Survey of Teacher Education Programs. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
Family Research Project, 1994.
Sparks, Dennis "A Paradigm Shift in Staff Development." The ERIC Review 3.3, Winter 1995: 2-4.
Smith, Shelly L., Mary Fairchild and Scott Groginsky. Early Childhood Care and Education: An
Investment that Works. Washington, DC: National Conference of State Legislatures, 1997.
St. Pierre, Robert, Jean Layzer, and Helen Barnes. "Two-generation Programs: Design, Cost, and
Short-term Effectiveness." The Future of Children: Long-term Outcomes of Early
Childhood Programs 5.3. (1995): 76-93.
United States. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of the United
States. Washington, DC: GPO, 1995.
United States. House of Representatives. Goals 2000: Educate America Act. Washington,DC:
GPO, 1994.
Weissbourd, Bernice. "Making Child Care Family-Centered: AVision for the 90s." Child and Youth
Care Forum 21.6. (1992): 385-397.