Investing in Early Childhood Development: Science, Benefits and Common SenseJoan Lombardi, Ph.D.April 12, 2007Prepared forAn Agenda for Shared Prosperity forumSponsored byThe Economic Policy Institute and The Institute for Americas Future

If we are serious about shifting the odds for at risk children, we need to start earlyYoung children need good health, strong families and positive early learning experiences to assure they are ready to succeed in school.To reach these goals we should increase investments in at risk children, beginning in the prenatal period and continuing through school entry. These investments should be followed by improvements in the quality of K-3.

What does science tell us?Early experiences matter- early experiences have a long term impact on health, behavior and learningThe interaction of what we are born with and early experiences shapes the architecture of the brain Domains of development are integrated: social, emotional, cognitive, physical

Key elements of early experiences that predict later outcomes, among othersPovertyPrenatal and early health careNutritionParent child relationshipsParental sensitivityMaternal educationEarly learning experiences

Abecedarian: Academic BenefitsSource: Carolina Abecedarian Study, W. Steven Barnett, NIEER

Perry Preschool: Educational EffectsSource: High Scope Educational Research Foundation

Perry: Economic Effects at Age 27Source: High Scope Educational Research Foundation

Perry Preschool: Economic Effects at 40

Source: High Scope Educational Research Foundation

Return on Investment: Perry Preschool

Total Benefit-Cost Ratio = $8.74 to $1

Estimated Total Annual Rate of Return = 16%

Public Rate of Return = 12%

Source: Art Rolnick and Rob Grunewald, Minneapolis Federal Reserve

Source: Heckman and Masterov, The Productivity Argument for Investing in Young Children, October 2004. Human Capital Rate of Return

Low-Income Status Varies by Age Source: National Center for Children in Poverty. (2006). Basic Facts About Low-Income Children: Birth to Age 18.

An uneven start

SOURCE: Valerie Lee and David Burkam, Inequality at the Starting Gate, Economic Policy Institute, 2002, p.18.

School readiness by mothers education level

Source: Child Trends and Center for Health Research. (2004). Early Child Development in Social Context. Data from K. Denton, E. Germino-Hausken, and J. West (project officer), America's Kindergartners, NCES 2000-070, (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics, 2000).

parental edu 1

38576986

32506179

22313946

Less than high school

High school diploma/GED

Some college, including vocational/technical

College degree or more

Percent

Percentage of First-time Kindergartners Demonstrating Positive Indicators of School Readiness by Mother's Education Level, 1998

developmental screening

87.8

84.3

81.5

86.2

88.4

81.5

76.6

77.3

82.6

86

88.2

83.7

80.7

87.5

70.6

86

Chart 6-1: Developmental Screening and Well-Child Visits

* Persons of Hispanic origin may be of any race. Estimates for whites, blacks and Asians do not include persons of Hispanic origin. These estimates reflect the new Office of Management and Budget (OMB) race definitions, and include only those who are identified with a single race. Source: Original analysis by Child Trends of 2002 National Health Interview Survey data.

Early Child Development in Social ContextChild Trends and Center for Child Health Research, 2004

Percent

Percentage of Children Under Age Six Who Received a Well-Child Check-Up in Past Year, 2002

health insurance 1

12

13

13

11

11

11

12

14

13

14

14

16

13

11

11

11

Chart 6-2: Health Insurance Coverage

* Children are considered to be covered by health insurance if they had government or private coverage at any time during the year. Sources: Data for 1995-2002 from: Child Trends, Child Trends DataBank Indicator: Health Care Coverage. Retrieved January 21, 2004 from URL: http://www.childtrendsdatabank.org/indicators/26HealthCareCoverage.cfm. Original data from the Current Population Survey, March Supplement. Other data from: Federal Interagency on Child and Family Statistics, America's Children, Key National Indicators of Well-Being, 2002 (Washington, DC: Federal Interagency on Child and Family Statistics, US Government Printing Office, 2002): Appendix A.

Early Child Development in Social ContextChild Trends and Center for Child Health Research, 2004

Percent

Percentage of Children Under Age Six Not Covered by Insurance Any Time During the Past Year,* 1987-2002

dental visits

73.0548.26

8.42.49

*Children were classified as having unmet dental needs if at any time during the past 12 months, they needed dental care (including check-ups) but did not receive it because their families could not afford it.Source: Child Trends original analyses of National Health Interview Survey data.

Chart 6-8: Dental Visits and Unmet Dental Needs

Early Child Development in Social ContextChild Trends and Center for Child Health Research, 2004

Not covered by health insurance

Covered by health insurance

Percent

Dental Care in Past Year Among Children Ages Two to Five, by Health Insurance Status, 2002

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, (2001). National Household Education Survey of 1999 Data Files.

Many young children are spending some time in non-parental care on a regular basis

Percentage of Income Paid for CareSOURCE: Giannarelli and Barsimantov, Child Care Expenses of Americas Families, Urban Institute, 2000. *Higher Income is over 200% of poverty, very low income is under 100% of poverty.

State investment in early childhood grows but still far from meeting the need

States investing in 0-5 but funding limited, particularly for 0-3 (Home visiting, Early Head Start, prek with set aside for 0-3, public private partnerships 0-5) In 2005-06, 38 states invested in prekindergarten initiatives spending nearly $3.3 billion, with 942,766 children participating

While the number of 4 year olds served has grown, the number of 3 year olds has remained relatively stable

Quality varies across the states, almost half the states do not meet the benchmark of requiring a BA or higher for all lead teachers.

Source of Prek data: The State of Preschool 2006, NIEER

Federal policies fail to keep up with what we know from science is important for early development and later success

Too many families still not covered by FMLA, and of those covered, far too many cannot afford to take unpaid leaveHead Start- about half of the eligible servedEarly Head Start, only 3 % of the eligible servedChild Care and Development Fund-only one in seven eligible served, limited investments in quality

With flat federal funding, number of children receiving child care assistance has declinedSources: Child Care Bureau and Analytic Perspectives, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2008, slide by CLASP.

Current Federal and State Funds for Head Start, Prek, and Child Care* Federal and state spending on Head Start and Prek

$10.2b Total spending on Head Start and State prek 6.8b Federal Head Start (06) 3.3b State Prek Initiatives (05-06)

$11.7b Total Federal and State Child Care Subsidy (This assumes $8.5 Federal for 05 CCDBG and TANF transfer and direct)

$3.5b in Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit and DCAP (est 06)

* Does not include SSBG, Title I, special ed or CCFP

05-06)

Three different estimates for additional investments needed

Cost-Effective Investments in Children (J. Isaacs. Jan, 2007)* For high quality early childhood education for three and four year olds $18b additional in 2008, $20b additional in 2012 For home visiting and healthy development of infants $1b additional in 2008, $4 b additional in 2012

*This assumes a very limited investment in infants and toddlers, particularly in quality child care for 0-3

Next Steps for Federal Child Care Policy (M. Greenberg, Feb 2007)** $18b per year additional (11b federal and 7b state) for child care guarantee and basic quality improvements** $ 5 b per year (for making the CDCTC refundable and increasing the credit-- based on Urban Institute estimates of $25 b over five)

**This assumes a limited additional investment in quality

Success by Ten: Intervening Early, Often and Effectively in the Education of Young Children (Ludwig and Sawhill, February 07)

$40b additional for transforming and expanding the current early education system into a more intensive program based on Abecedarian and other intensive models.*** This proposal calls for a phase in over ten years. Ludwig and Sawhill also call for improving early grades in school through the use of redirecting Title I funding for programs that have proven effective. ***Estimate is $56b higher than under current law if all eligible children participate, $40b with 75 percent participating.

Time for a New National Investment in Early Childhood DevelopmentExpand FMLA and provide incentives to states to provide paid leave Assure access to quality health care for all young children and their families and provide developmental screening and follow upInvest in Head Start 0-5, with a special focus on expanding Early Head StartTransform child care to support working families and their children by assuring access to all families below 200 percent of poverty and requiring states to develop a quality improvement systemProvide an infusion of new resources to states to promote early learning 0-5 through a diverse delivery system (parenting support, quality improvements for child care 0-5, preschool, family literacy)

At least triple investments over current spending.

If you look at the findings from a program in North Carolina, called Abecedarian, you see similar effects. I am going to quickly go through selected data from three main studies which have the longest tracking of data. I will also mention a few more recent studies. Many of you have likely heard the Perry Preschool data before - that's most likely because the evaluation was done with strong methodology and because it tracks the participants over the longest period - 40 years. Half day programSee important effects - note the difference in special education placements - would see real savings from that, also graduation rate

Also see higher rate of earnings and home ownership and receipt of welfareMore had earnings, were employed, and had savings accountThese economists find significant rates of return from those programs. It is important to note, that Perry preschool costs were high with well qualified teachers and small class sizes and a population that was significantly at risk. Part of what is interesting about the data is that these programs are being looked at from the tough cost -benefit approach - most social programs can't show a return. Another way of looking at the rate of return is to compare it to other investments that could be made later, Jim Heckman, a nobel prize winning economist, has studied the economics of human skill formation during his career and has recently focused on early education and shows the return rate in this figure. He also talks in great detail about skills of motivation, persistence and self control as key workforce skills - that are fostered early. describes how individual productivity can be fostered by investments in young children, particularly children in poverty or other adverse circumstances. The reports findings are based on an analysis of the impact of current workforce conditions, workforce skills, the impact of baby boomer retirements, crime and family environments. For example, the report finds that America's workforce is not gaining in quality or productivity, but rather seeing slower growth. He argues that if this trend continues, there will be fewer educated individuals in the workforce and lower productivity than in previous periods. Key findings of the report include:Cognitive and noncognitive abilities are important for a productive workforce, and gaps that emerge early are difficult to change. Because skills are accumulated, starting early and over time, investing in young children is an investment in future productivity and public safety. Family environments are important in determining education and skills. Growing numbers of children face adverse environments that restrict the development of these skills. Early education and other early interventions such as home visits can mitigate the effects of poor family environments. Key workforce skills such as motivation, persistence and self-control are developed early. Heckman concludes that K-12 schooling comes too late, and other remedies are prohibitively costly as well (e.g., job training programs and second-chance GED programs).

The younger the children, the more likely they are to be poor Some research suggests that the younger the children, the more harmful persistent and intensive poverty is to young children There are increasingly evidence-based strategies to help families with young children, especially very young children