rural family day care

Rural Family Day Care

Diane Adams C o m m u n i t y Coordinated Child Care, Dane County , Wisconsin

Mary Macht University o f Wisconsin

In u rban areas there may be m a n y choices for parents who need child care: a day care cen ter program, a par t -day nursery program, a family day care home , or having a provider o f child care c o m e in to parents ' homes - -o r any combina t i on of these. In rural areas there are fewer choices. One of the mos t realistic opt ions rural parents have is to f ind a qual if ied caregiver in the area who will take the child into her own h o m e for tha t par t o f the day when parents c a n n o t be there .

It is es t imated tha t 91 pe rcen t of all day care in the Uni ted States takes place in h o m e settings called " fami ly day care homes , " and the major i ty of these are unl icensed or uncer t i f ied . The mos t f r equen t form of child care for work ing parents in sparsely popu l a t ed areas is tha t of a family day care home . Other forms of child care are simply no t as accessible in rural areas.

Some advantages Of family day care have been ci ted: For parents , a family day care h o m e can o f fe r a nur tur ing situa-

t ion for thei r chi ldren, with an in formal i ty much like tha t o f the i r own homes , ye t with daily activities p lanned to give each child the care he or she needs.

For the caregiver, there is an o p p o r t u n i t y while remaining at h o m e to provide care tha t enhances the intel lectual , emot iona l , social, and physical g rowth of children. Incidental expenses such as lunch, trans- por t a t ion , and c lo thing incurred by the e m p l o y e d m o t h e r are no t as great when she provides fami ly day care in her home. Many family

Diane Adams is Assistant Director, 4-C (Community Coordinated Child Care) in Dane County, Wisconsin. Mary Macht is a graduate student in the School of So- cial Work, University of Wisconsin. (Interviews were conducted by Diane Adams, Mary Macht, and John Tessendorf.) Requests for reprints should be sent to Com- munity Coordinated Child Care, 3200 Monroe Street, Madison, Wisconsin 53711.

292 Child Care Quarterly Vol. 5(4), Winter 1976

Diane Adams and Mary Maeht 293

day care parents feel they are providing an important service in the communi ty and see themselves as leading the way in giving quality child care.

For the child, family day care is a situation perhaps very similar to his or her own home--and, as a matter of fact, quite often the child has the opportuni ty to form a continuous relationship with the family day care mother and father. Family day care has been found particularly suitable for infants and very young children; they have only a few other young children and adults with whom to relate and thus may not be overwhelmed, as they might in a center program with many children and a larger number of adults (Seefeldt & Ditt- man, 1973, p. 8). Family day care is also an important option for after-school care, since after a busy day school-age children often need a place to go to that is much like home, where they can be free to play with friends or pursue after-school activities offered by the school after "checking in."

Family Day Care in Dane County, Wisconsin

An investigation of family day care in rural Dane County, Wiscon- sin, was initiated by Community Coordinated Child Care (4-C) to answer the question: How do family care providers perceive their roles as caregivers? If they are the only (in some cases) or most frequently used form of child care, it is important to find out how they perceive that role, what they do with the children, and if there are any unmet needs among the caregivers. Parents in an earlier study (Adams, 1974) had indicated that living in the rural areas had one distinct drawback for working mothers of preschoolers in that they could not always find a capable family day care situation for their children. Yet nearly 80 percent of the working parents were currently using a family day care home for their child care.

A questionnaire was developed for use in interviewing a sample of day care providers in rural areas that would seek to obtain information about the (1) experience, (2) role perception, (3) activities, and (4) fees and record keeping of these providers.

Forty-five rural family day care providers were interviewed. Inter- view times ranged from 45 minutes to 21/~ hours and took place in the providers' homes. The "people hours" involved in conducting such a study were not computed, yet they were considerable, given the distances driven, the back roads explored, and the at tent ion given to the necessary confidentiality of respondents ' answers in rural communities.

294 Child Care Quarterly

Impact of Rural Living

When one considers rural areas where populat ion is more sparse and where there are fewer communi ty services, certain implications arise for child care. Individuals who provide care may be isolated, living long distances f rom children needing care as well as from services such as doctors, emergency rooms, and clinics. Small towns of ten provide many of the same services as the metropol i tan areas but tend to operate them on restricted hours.

The impact of rural living on family day care providers could be manifested in a reliance on " reputa t ion" rather than credentials or advertising for care-giving jobs. The benefits of being certified as a family day care provider (certification is performed by the Dane County Depar tment of Social Services) may well be lost in rural areas where certifiers are not actively recruiting providers. Rural providers receive less pay for their work than providers in the metropol i tan areas. The county currently pays its certified providers $.70 an hour for caring for one child, while the average rate charged in this study was $.50 an hour. In part because of their desire not to be seen as professional "sitters," rural providers do not demand high fees for their services.

These assumptions concerning the effects of rural living were borne out for the most part. Indeed, parents telling other parents and "reputa t ion" were found to be crucial to these providers in finding children to care for. There were indeed very few certified providers, and their average rate of pay was in many cases less than half that charged by their urban counterparts. They, however, readily agreed to interviews and revealed much about themselves and their work that would not have been given had they been burdened with suspicion of an investigation, no mat ter how benign, emanating from an urban area.

Let us turn next to a description of how these caregivers describe their experience and training, their role perceptions, their activities with the children, and their fees, hours, and record keeping.

Experience

The rural Dane County family day care providers seem "experienced," evidenced by the fact that they have a total of 129 children of their own and thus have had real-life experiences with young children. One cited her "exper ience" as having been the oldest of 10 children and having had consequent responsibility. These experiences do not, however, mean an individual is necessarily knowledgeable about child care, nor that the person has the feeling for and ability to relate

Diane Adams and Mary Macht 295

to children, both of which are seen as crucial in selecting a family day care teacher (Guidelines, 1973, pp. 21-22).

More important in looking at their experience is the actual years spent in the profession of day care provider. These 45 providers have a total of 212 years of child care providing experience, averaging 4.7 years, with a range of from less than 1 year of experience to 17 years. Figure 1 illustrates the professional preparation of these rural family day care providers.

In terms of health requirements, these providers appear well pre- pared. Ninety-eight percent of them reported having had a medical examination in the past year. Fewer specified having had a TB skin test. (One county requirement for certification is to have either a TB skin test or chest X-ray, often a normal part of a physical exam, there- by assuring freedom from disease.)

These rural providers give evidence of a wide range of formal training in caring for young children. Fifty-three percent have had at least one course, such as a home economics course in high school that dealt with child development, a child development course at the Uni- versity of Wisconsin, child development as part of practical nurse training, or a Parent Effectiveness Training Course. Only two, however, have taken the 40-hour courses available for day care personnel (Young Child I and Young Child II) and offered at communi ty insti- tutions. One provider has taken the certification course offered by a private day care firm. The variety of formal training courses taken by these providers is shown in Table 1.

The providers who have taken some form of continuing education

0% 50% 100%

I I I I I

98% had medical exam J

62% had TB test

55% used newspaper advertising

5B% had taken courses in child care

29% made modifications in home

8% were certified

FIGURE 1. Professional preparation (N = 45).


TABLE 1 Formal Training Courses (N = 45)

High School Home Economics

Child Development, P.E.T., Certification

Number

ll

Elementary Education Courses 4

40-Hour Course

LPN Training

No Courses Taken

2

2

21

Percent

24

ii

9

4

4

47

appear to be no different in terms of fees or number of hours of care they provide from those who are not " t ra ined" in a formal sense. In fact, two of the three highest-paid providers have no t taken any formal training. Other factors than training seem to account for rate of pay.

Fifty-five percent of our sample have advertised in small-town/rural newspapers, which offer local news, social announcements , communi ty events, and want ads and are seen as important sources of information. The providers who did use want ads as their method of advertising services found them either a great help or a great hindrance. One said she got too many calls, another said she got no calls f rom the ad. One said she waited until too late in the summer and the teenagers got all the babysitting jobs! Several said they advertise periodically; some have advertised only once. Two answered ads placed by parents and began to care for children as a result. About half of those who say they advertise feel they had "good results."

These providers give evidence that they depend a great deal on their reputations in the communi ty and on what people say about them to recruit new children--and some never have a lack of children to care for. For ty- four percent feel that parents and providers have difficulty getting in touch with each other. Comments about this difficulty in matching parents" and providers center around the crucial nature of knowing the individuals who c ~ e for children. These providers wish to be known as adequate care givers, and wish parents would make sure they know the providers before leaving their children with them.


Twenty-nine percent have made modificat ions in their homes in order to care for more than their own children, despite the fact that only 8 percent are certified caregivers. Mostly minor~ home improve- ments have been made, such as fixing up a p layroom in the basement or getting extra beds for sleeping. Some consider themselves professional child care workers and work to make their homes more adequate for the care of other children.

The four who are certified (three by the county and one by Meth- odist Children's Services) appear to be no different f rom the noncer- tiffed rural providers in their length of experience, fees charged, training courses, home modifications, and use of ads. Certified and non- certified providers appear equally knowledgeable about the " co r r ec t " course of action with regard to illnesses and accidents. Certified providers comment on their certification as being "good for references," "having some advantages, where things are more cut and dried." In contrast, however, one felt it was "all a big game" where the certifiers seemed "almost embarrassed to come out and certify you . " Two other providers felt it would be a good idea to be certified and planned to look into it. For the most part, uncertiffed providers, who have had less exposure to the purported benefits of certification, expressed a desire to remain "on their own," offering the best care they know how to give.

Role Perception

For most of these providers, whose occupat ion calls for them to stay home at the same time as they provide a service, the interviews gave them an oppor tuni ty to reflect on their role. They expressed both pride in and concern for the children in many instances and re- sponded graciously to questions about their role as a provider.

A look at the concept of teaching will be instructive. Only 16 percent of the sample said in straightforward terms that they did not " teach" anything to the children they cared for. The others said they teach, depending on the ages of the children, " p o t t y training," "how to throw kisses," "manners," "hygiene," and "Christian behavior." In some instances they perform traditional teaching tasks such as reading to children, posting art creations by the children, making play dough, and listening to records. Whether or no t they have considered themselves family day care teachers depends somewhat on their training. All but two of those who had taken child development or early childhood courses gave indication of accepting a role as teacher.

Others did not appear to have an inclination for generating learn-


ing activities and seemed to prefer that sensory and perceptual learn- ings develop incidentally. They ment ioned "free p lay" and "let t ing children go outside" as the teaching they perform--and did not seem aware of the possibilities present for growth and development.

Eighty-five percent wished to be called "babysit ters ," though some of these have children call them by their first name or "Grandma." Using a customary title undoubted ly makes it easier for these providers to have people identify what they do.

Why do they do what they do? One of the most interesting aspects of this study of rural family day care was discovered in the answers to the question about what the providers' motivations are for doing this work. It is the money alone for only 13 percent of the sample. These 6 providers answered unequivocally: "I do it for the money." However, another 12 ment ioned the income plus some other factor, such as "liking kids" or "doing it as a favor." Thus, it was found that 45 percent of the sample see money as somewhat impor tant as a reason for being a family day care provider.

Another viewpoint is that money is not important-- i t is the prefer- ence for staying home and being self-employed, of wishing to "help ou t " a neighbor, or of "feeling responsible" for children who might otherwise be left unat tended. This personal touch is impor tant for over half the sample.

There is a clear indication that family day care is not highly paid, and those who do perform this job for several years find they do not do it for the money they make. Table 2 shows the relation between years of experience and reasons given for providing child care.

Thus, none of the 12 who have done child care more than the average number of years say they do it for income reasons. We do not know if the less experienced are indeed younger and perhaps may need the extra income more. Nevertheless, it appears that motivations and reality match in the case of those who are family day care

TABLE 2 Reasons for Providing Child Care (N = h5)

Years of Experience

0-5 6-17

Like children/companionship 15 12

Like the children, plus the income 12 0

Like the income 6 0


providers for a good number of years. They say that they do not "make m o n e y " and that it comes to be more of a commi tmen t to caring for and loving children. In fact, one said: "I started out for the money, but now feel responsible for giving children the love they need."

These providers not only teach, but become aware of problems they see in the children, both behavior problems and serious needs such as in speech or walking difficulties. They appear to be fairly ac- tive in using spanking as a method of handling behavior problems, with 36 percent of the sample saying they spank children. Many mod- ify this by using "talking to" or "isolat ion," and spanking is a "last resor t" for them.

As for o ther problems they see in the children cared for, the ability to identify and remedy the problem may be less than with center program staff who are able to call on a resource person such as a psy- chologist or a language specialist. For ty- two percent noted condit ions such as "neglect ," "poor eating habits," and "lack of a t tent ion ." In 38 percent of the cases the solution was seen as "tell the parent ." Thus, they instinctively follow one of the mandates of parent involvement, but these providers seem acutely unaware of agency resources to which they could refer parents. In only 18 percent of the cases did they ment ion using any other resources; most of these were seen as places to which one " repor t s" neglect. One said, "I t ' s not the role of a sitter to do anything else but tell the parent when there's a problem."

That they are conscious of the tender thread which of ten becomes a bond between parent and provider is demonstra ted by the fact that 91 percent of our sample talk with the parents at the end of the day of service, discussing the activity of the day and any unusual behavior or exciting discoveries. This sharing is seen as particularly crucial for the family day care provider who cares for very young children, and for parents who seek reassurance that their children are doing well. At least 15 of these providers specified that they do no t discuss the children with parents while the children are present; again, they seem to be following the "bes t " tenets of parent involvement.

In only two cases do these providers have a wri t t en agreement with parents; providers tend for the most part to rely on verbal arrangements. This is part of both the risk in providing care ( that parents may drop the arrangement wi thout warning) and the ~rust tha t exists (as when parents and providers use common language and mutual concern to arrange for a service). The degree to which the role of day care provider bears any professional qualities is unclear. Some, who


enhance their employment by advertising that they have written agreements and by using other resources, have created a role that could be termed "professional," and they intend to stay in the busi- ness. For many others this is a temporary service they will stop providing when their own preschoolers go to school.

Providers in other studies (Urich, 1972, p. 104) seem ambivalent about assuming responsibilities outside their families. These rural providers give evidence that they have chosen the day care provider rote and are satisfied with playing that role.

Act iv i t i es

What do these providers do with the children they care for? Much speculation exists in day care literature about this factor, for actual observation is not always possible. Many times the unsafe, hazardous, or unsanitary conditions of a home are noted by observers, and healthy interaction and growth-producing learning situations may go unnoticed. It is particularly unsuitable to make judgments about either the home condition or type of learning activities encouraged where the family day care provider is an independent operator. Yet it is possible to ask providers what they do with the children and make some assumptions about a typical day in a family day care home.

It has been suggested that when family day care providers are trained, they should know about such areas as developmental stages, books, child health, and activities for young children (Sale, 1973). Often the training done for a "system" of family day care providers includes the type of preparation deemed important for preschool teachers. Family day care may or may not be structured to include the programmatic aspects of a preschool educational program. With the majority of family day care homes unlicense'd or uncertified, there is a high probability that these aspects are not included.

Closely connected with the role perception of " teacher" vs. "care- taker" is the activity pattern for the children. Remembering that these are mothers with the usual 50 to 60 hours per week of house- hold chores facing them, plus the care of small children, it is not sur- prising that most of the providers do not "plan" the day as a day care teacher might. They provide for free play, climbing, swings, cutting, drawing, reading, watching television, and many other activities, but do not always directly supervise the activity.

Seefeldt (1973, p. 72) has suggested that when there is an appro- priate television program, the child care provider should watch with


the children and give them some experience to go with the show. Over 95 percent of the providers in this study showed "discriminat- ing" use of TV, limiting the viewing to "Sesame Street," "Captain Kangaroo," and "Misterrogers," with others stressing that they do not allow TV at all. A number of providers mention watching with the children and singing along with the songs.

The typical morning in a family day care home is unstructured, with the children being allowed free play most of the time. For ty percent of the children cared for begin their day at the family day care home with a breakfast: juice, cereal, toast, and milk was a popular menu. The day care mothers seem to plan activities with the children when the children get bored with free play. All of the homes have a variety of educational materials, such as books, puzzles, play dough, and scissors. A number of homes had a "creative corner," in which to display the handiwork of the children. Fewer had adequate outdoor play equipment, but all mentioned that the children go outside to play, with 56 percent of the providers saying that they themselves supervise outdoor play. This, of course, depends in part on the ages of the children being cared for.

Field trips are also a part of the day in two-thirds of these family day care homes. Children are taken to feed the pigs, to shopping malls, to the library, to the post office, and on picnics. One provider mentioned taking the children to Walt Disney movies.

All of the children receiving full day care are given a warm lunch, with no children bringing lunches. Preparation of food was not mentioned as a learning activity. A typical lunch consists of soup and a sandwich or of macaroni and cheese. Most of the mothers served a midmorning and midafternoon snack. Seventeen different snack foods were mentioned, with cookies, crackers, or fruit the most fre- quent snacks. Other than fruit, "heal th" snacks such as celery, carrot sticks, cheese, and juice were mentioned infrequently.

Most of the children at least rest in the afternoon, with some sleeping as many as 2 to 3 hours. Except for rest time, the af ternoon activities are largely unplanned, with some children being able to watch TV indiscriminately, while most children engage in free play or art activities. Frequently in day care homes older children in the family return from school and interact with these children. It appears that many family day care homes are "family affairs."

The nurturing care of these providers is reflected in such state- ments as: "I do everything as if they were my own children" and "When the children are here, I am with them--the housework is done


at night after the children leave." At least one provider's husband en- ters actively into child care by taking the children out with him on farm chores or in the truck when he goes to town.

The noninsti tutionalized nature of family day care is of ten exactly what parents are looking for. These providers for the most part are natural and relaxed about the activities they provide for children.

Fees, Hours, and Record Keeping

The low wages paid to family day care providers is undoubted ly linked to the low status our society gives to work with young children and to work performed by women (Urich, 1972, p. 104). The general philosophy is that these women are caring for their own children at the same time, and since they do not receive pay for that activity, they therefore cannot command a high wage for caring for others ' children. In addition, family day care providers work in the isolation of mothers and housewives, having little contact with other adults. Their place in the economic chain dictates that they can demand no higher wage than parents--often on a limited income themselves~can afford.

These rural caregivers set their own fees except for those certified providers, who accept the county fee of $.70 an hour. The range of fees is from $3 a day to $10 a day. The most common weekly fee was $25 for one child. Fees vary greatly according to whether there are one, two, or three children from the same family ($25 a week for one, $30 for two or three), and ye t most providers feel they do not give any less time, effort , or a t tent ion to the second child. This time- honored custom of reduced rates to families with more than one child being cared for is being challenged as providers say they now have one set fee. Family day care is still negotiable, and it was not uncommon to find a variety of fees charged by the same provider.

Figuring the actual number of hours per week they spent with the children and the actual fees they collected made it possible to find out how much an hour these providers were making while they were working. The amount of money they collected in a week ranged from about $6 for one child being cared for 15 hours a week ($.40 an hour) to $112 for five children being care for in a total of 55 hours ($2.14 an hour). The average hourly rate comes to $.79 an hour for all children being cared for, far below the minimum wage.

Most providers do not state their fees in this manner and charge either a flat daily or hourly rate. It is only when they care for several children and/or when their basic rate is relatively high (in one instance


$1.00 an hour) that they can approach the minimum wage. Many providers care for one child (at $.50 an hour) for 10 hours a day. In addition, all are paid for their work at the end of service, in most instances weekly. Table 3 illustrates the daily rate and hours of care.

Only three of these providers had the parents provide food or pay for food costs. Food may cost little more than the provider would normally spend for her own children, but if the youngest child of the provider is in school all day or is an adult, as in 22 percent of these cases, the family day care mother has to prepare food especially for these children, bearing the cost herself.

The tendency is to provide care for children when parents need it, whether it be full- or part-time. The ability to organize a long day to integrate the needs of parents, the needs of children for varied activities, nutrit ion and rest, and the needs of the providers' own families appears to be a relatively high-order management task.

Only 6 percent of our sample claim any sort of tax deductions for the services they render; most seemed unaware of this possibility (Southeastern Day Care Project, 1972, p. 1). Keeping accurate records for tax purposes is a realistic consideration, yet many providers do not consider this job as anything more than "doing a favor" or "liking kids."

In terms of record keeping, it is interesting to note that only two keep records on the children and only one says she requires children to have a medical examination before coming into her care. All of the

Dail~ Rate

$ 3.00

4.00

5.o0

6.00

6.50

7.00

7.50

9.0o

10.O0

TABLE 3 Daily Rate and Hours of Care (N

Numbers Receiv- in~ That Rate

z o-14

13

18

6

1

1

3

1

1

= 45)

{ours of Care Numbers Pro- vidin5 Care

3

15-20 9

21-25 2

26-30 1

31-35 5

36-h0 2

41-45 1

46-5o 15

51-55+ 7


providers say they keep emergency telephone numbers where parents may be reached if needed.

Certain expectations about illness are significant. Forty-two percent do not allow a sick child to come to their homes, expecting parents to make other arrangements when the child is ill. This concurs with the earlier rural needs assessment conducted in Dane County, where 60 percent of the mothers of preschoolers who are employed say they stay home if the child is ill.

One other kind of record keeping often done in child care programs is an accident and injury record, kept partly as a protection for the provider. Minor injuries and superficial wounds are recorded, and medicines are administered only with a parental release form.

These family day care providers do not keep accident records, and, when asked what they do in cases of superficial wounds, gave the "correct" answer in only 53 percent of the cases. The technique suggested in the Dane County certification evaluation form is simply to wash the cut and bandage it if necessary. Many providers in this study say they apply medicines such as iodine or first-aid spray. When asked about giving medications, 73 percent of them replied with the "correct" answer, which is, "only with parent permission." The rest said they did, on occasion, give something like aspirin or cough medicine; these seemingly harmless dosages can be harmful if a child is sup- posed to be "o f f medication" for some reason.

Do they ever take a "day off"? Rarely. Forty-two percent said that they arrange for an occasional day off by hiring a substitute (19 cases) or asking the natural parent to arrange something else (17 cases). On- ly 9 said they never take a day off. (A few of these, however, do not care for children 50+ hours a week.) Our impression is that these providers are very much home-bound and feel they must be reliable in order to keep their "customers."

Strengthening Rural Family Day Care

In this study of rural providers we have discovered caregivers who, for the sake of chiidren and families in their communities, provide safe and often enriching care for children. While very few are certified, and most say they would not consider it, they appear to be providing a needed service in their communities. The average 1 : 2 adult- child ratio found in these rural homes is significant in its potential for meeting the needs of young children.

" I t is likely that many parents, regardless of available resources, will continue to choose care outside of organized program systems


for a variety of reasons, such as wishing to maintain control over their own day care situation, the location of the facility, and aversion to governmental or highly organized programs" (Bedger et al., 1975, p. 3). This means the family day care home is almost certain to retain its popular place in the field of child care.

The strengthening of rural family day care appears to be the responsibility of several county agencies and individuals. These providers give evidence that they would welcome "training" opportunities. They expressed an interest in refining a system whereby people needing their services could know about what they can provide. They indicate a desire for greater consideration on the part of parents, for example, that parents not stop to pick up groceries or fix dinner before picking up the children unless that is part of the agreement. They get low pay but seem to raise their fees only in accordance with what parents can pay. Unless subsidized, they will continue to receive a low wage; most indicated they are getting satisfaction from their work, despite the pay.

It appears, on the basis of these interviews, that rural family day care providers are a prime target for continuing education. It would have to be offered in ways other than requiring that people come to metropolitan areas for a course on family day care. Radio, television, and mail correspondence courses could be developed that help meet the needs of these providers. Values regarding child rearing are expressed vociferously, and many of these providers indicate that they do not like "permissive" child rearing; discussion groups as part of continuing education, held in local areas, would make it possible for day care providers with differing value systems and child-rearing ap- proaches to come together for mutual sharing. Training in areas such as health care, accident and injury information, discipline methods, and use of everyday experiences as teaching opportunities could be beneficial.

Whether family day care providers in rural areas could be enlisted as "satellite" homes, associated with an existing child care center program, or be in a modified "system" where one provider enlists the others in developing a list of providers to be posted on a communi ty bulletin board is a thought for speculation. Resistance to being part of any organized family day care group may prevent either the "satellite homes" approach or the "association" from becoming a reality. Many in our sample, however, indicated that they would welcome at least an informal association of providers.

Quality child care is a prime need in the United States. As evi. denced by the interviews with these providers, there is a particular


need in rural areas for care tha t is developmenta l , vo lun ta ry , and lo- cally control led. Closely l inked with parents, family day care providers are an extens ion of the family w h o can and of ten do provide qual- i ty care. Their needs for recogni t ion and coord ina ted ef for ts m a y be met as rural communi t i e s recognize the valuable service rendered by their child care providers.

References

Adams, Diane. Rural needs assessment. 4-C in Dane County, December 1974. Bedger, J. E., et al. Day care evaluation manual. Chicago, Ill.: Council for Com-

munity Services, 1975. Guidelines for establishing a family day care system. 4-C in Dane County, 1973. Ruopp, R., O'Farrell, B., Warner, D., Rowe, M., & Freedman, R. A day care

guide for administrators, teachers and parents. Cambridge, Mass. : MIT Press, 1973. (Based on the Abt Study, 1970-1971.)

Sale, J. Final report: Community family day care project. Pasadena, Calif.: Paci- fic Oaks College, February 1973.

Seefeldt, C., & Dittman, L. L. (Eds.). Family day care. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office of Child Development, 1973.

Southeastern Day Care Project. Southeastern day care bulletin, 1972, 1. Urich, H. A family day care study. Day Care and Child Development Council of

America, September 1972.

rural family day care

Documents