Differences in the early care and education needs of young children involved in child protection
Introduction
With the continued expansion of the early care and education (ECE) system nationally, combined with growing attention to the ECE needs of children in the child protection system (see the CAPTA Reauthorization Act of 2010)1, greater numbers of young children receiving child protective services are also receiving ECE in their communities. In fact, there is a significant overlap in the proportion of children who are involved in the child protection and ECE systems; recent estimates indicate that just over half of all children in the child protection system attend some type of ECE setting (Ward et al., 2009). The recommendations for increasing access to high quality ECE for children involved in child protection are frequently based on evidence that children experiencing poverty benefit from high quality and often model comprehensive ECE programs (Reynolds, Magnuson, & Oh, 2010), as there are few data specific to children involved in child protection (for exceptions, see Lipscomb, Pratt, Schmitt, Pears, & Kim, 2013; and Dinehart, Manfra, Katz, & Hartman, 2012). However, there is reason to think that children with the additional risk of child protection involvement may have even greater developmental challenges and needs than children living in poverty alone (National Scientific Council on the Developing Child, 2012). Specifically, the types of challenges and needs demonstrated by children in the child protection system, who are likely to have experienced trauma, may require very particular strategies and programming components (such as a therapeutic environment) that are not found in a comprehensive ECE program or a typical ECE program.
There is notable diversity in the type and quality of ECE programs available (Adams et al., 2007, Early et al., 2005, Moiduddin et al., 2012), and thus few opportunities for children involved with child protection to access comprehensive model ECE programs. More research is needed to understand whether children with additional risks beyond poverty, such as those who have been involved with the child protection system, can benefit from typically available ECE programs in their community. In this study, we examined the development of children involved in the child protection system who are enrolled in typically available ECE programs the year prior to kindergarten entry to ascertain the extent to which ECE settings could support developmental progress, above and beyond the impact of poverty.
In the last decade, the science of early childhood has reached new levels of understanding, rich with knowledge about how children's earliest experiences, good and bad, are carried forward into adulthood by influencing the very architecture of their brains (Gunnar and Loman, 2011, Shonkoff, 2011). Children who experience significant adversity in the first few years of life are at greater risk for a range of poor outcomes across the lifespan (Duncan et al., 2010, Felitti et al., 1998, Melchior et al., 2007, Miller and Chen, 2013, Shonkoff et al., 2009). Poverty is one of the most significant threats to child development (Duncan & Brooks-Gunn, 2000), and there is evidence that positive adaptation in adulthood is compromised by the experience of poverty in childhood (Conroy et al., 2010, Duncan et al., 2010, Hertzman and Boyce, 2010, Melchior et al., 2007, Miller and Chen, 2013). Specifically, the differences in children's social–emotional functioning and cognitive performance due to poverty are visible by age two and persist at school entry and throughout the school years (Bradley and Corwyn, 2002, Brooks-Gunn and Duncan, 1997, Fernald et al., 2013). Children who experienced poverty early are more likely to be retained a grade, not graduate from high school, and be diagnosed with a learning disability. Furthermore, there is evidence that the negative effects of poverty are especially strong when poverty is experienced in the first years of life (Brooks-Gunn and Duncan, 1997, Duncan et al., 2010).
As is the case for young children experiencing poverty, young children who experience the trauma of abuse and/or neglect and enter the child protection system suffer from similar adverse developmental outcomes. Young victims of maltreatment and neglect tend to perform poorly across all domains of development, from cognition, neurological development, and language (Aber et al., 1989, Culp et al., 1991, Pears and Fisher, 2005a, Vondra et al., 1990) to the development of core social–emotional processes, such as attachment, emotional understanding, and theory of mind (Cicchetti and Toth, 1995, Dozier et al., 2001, Pears and Fisher, 2005b) to internalizing and externalizing behavior problems (Aber et al., 1989, Dubowitz et al., 2002, Erickson et al., 1989, Fantuzzo et al., 1998, Herrenkohl et al., 1991, Rieder and Cicchetti, 1989, White et al., 1988, Wiggins et al., 2007). With respect to academic achievement, children in the foster care system are more likely than their peers to have lower grades, be held back a grade, receive special education services and fail to graduate from high school (Eckenrode et al., 2001, Emerson and Lovitt, 2003, Piescher et al., 2012, Urquiza et al., 1994). These negative effects on academic performance in high school remain even when the involvement with the child protection system occurred in early childhood (Trout, Hagaman, Casey, Reid, & Epstein, 2008).
Data show that children who have been involved with the child protection system are also likely to have experienced poverty with their biological families at much higher rates than children in the general population (Barth et al., 2006, Pinderhughes et al., 2007). One of the primary mediators of the relationship between poverty and poor child outcomes is a supportive primary caregiver (Sroufe, Egeland, Carlson, & Collins, 2005); thus, children who have experienced both poor quality caregiving, such as that experienced by children involved with child protection, and poverty are likely to have worse developmental outcomes than children with either of those risk factors alone (National Scientific Council on the Developing Child, 2012). The extent to which young children in the child protection system can receive consistent, supportive caregiving, not only at their home or place of residence but also in their ECE settings, is likely to be the key to a successful ECE experience and to positive developmental outcomes.
Evidence from the ECE literature demonstrates the significant role that comprehensive, high quality ECE can play in the lives of children at risk for poor school outcomes, particularly for children experiencing poverty (Campbell et al., 2001, Reynolds et al., 2003, U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2010). Characterized by low teacher/child ratios; small group sizes; and services for parents; consistent, warm, and supportive teacher–child relationships; and appropriately stimulating learning/curricular opportunities, these types of comprehensive, high quality programs have demonstrated long-term impact on the academic achievement of children experiencing poverty (Campbell, Ramey, Pungello, Sparling, & Miller-Johnson, 2002). However, the extent to which these benefits also hold true for young children involved in the child protection system is unclear, as many children in the child protection system are not necessarily enrolled in comprehensive, high quality ECE settings or settings that provide specialized services to support the unique needs of children who have experienced trauma (e.g. continuity of care providers, low ratios, and comprehensive services for children and parents).
Currently, the program that best approximates comprehensive services (although not necessarily specialized trauma-informed care services) and is most available to poor children is Head Start. Young children in foster care are categorically eligible for Head Start services, and the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) encourages local sites to give priority status to not only children in foster care but any child who has an open child protection case for the available Early Head Start and Head Start spaces (U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Head Start [OHS], 2010). Though there are no data currently published specific to children involved in child protection, a recent study examined the impact of Head Start for children experiencing non-parental care (not necessarily due to foster care or loss of parental rights through the child protection system) and found that these children demonstrated modestly improved school readiness from the services provided over the course of their preschool year (Lipscomb et al., 2013).
Regardless of this hopeful evidence that Head Start may benefit children involved in child protection, these children are not universally accessing Head Start services. In fact, data from an examination of ECE use by preschool children in the child protection system in Oregon show that over 40% of the children in the sample attended either a non-Head Start ECE program or some combination of Head Start and non-Head Start ECE program (Lipscomb & Pears, 2011). In Colorado, about 50% of 3- to 5-year-old children in the child protection system were enrolled in some kind of ECE program and less than 20% of them were enrolled in Head Start (Ward et al., 2009). Given the already long waitlists for limited spots in Head Start and the substantial use of other ECE programming, the question of whether typically available ECE programs (which include licensed private, non-profit/for-profit, and accredited/non-accredited child care centers; preschools; public pre-kindergarten; and family child care homes) can effectively meet the specific needs of young children in the child protection system is a critical one.
There is reason to hypothesize that typically available ECE programming might be beneficial for children in the child protection system. First, quality ECE settings may provide one of the most consistent caregiving experiences that children involved in the child protection system receive during the first few years of life, particularly when they offer developmentally appropriate and cognitively stimulating environments with the presence of stable and sensitive caregiver–child relationships. Thus, quality ECE settings can potentially provide a direct benefit to children's developmental outcomes. Furthermore, ECE teachers and caregivers can help identify special learning or behavioral needs and aid in the provision of early childhood special education or early intervention services if necessary.
It is important to note that this is a potential opportunity for collaboration with the child protection system as well. The CAPTA Reauthorization Act of 2010 began to address the ECE needs of children by supporting prevention and assessment activities that occur within the child protection system. In particular, the reauthorization requires referral of children under the age of three who are involved in a substantiated case of child maltreatment to early intervention services funded under Part C of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. In addition, ECE settings can also provide an indirect benefit to children through the provision of respite and parenting education and support to both the biological and foster care parents (Dinehart et al., 2013, Lipscomb and Pears, 2011, Meloy and Phillips, 2012).
However, there is also reason to hypothesize that the range of typically available ECE settings may not bring all the hoped-for benefits for young children in the child protection system. Unfortunately, ratings of ECE quality fall into the mediocre to average range (Bryant et al., 2009, Fuller et al., 2004, Guzman et al., 2009), and data reveal that young children in the child protection system are cared for in lower quality settings (Dinehart et al., 2013). Additionally, there are disturbingly high rates of suspension and expulsion of preschool-aged children in ECE settings (Gilliam & Shahar, 2006), and young children in the child protection system are likely to present with some of the most challenging behavioral and/or socioemotional problems, such as attachment disorders (Meloy and Phillips, 2012, Wiggins et al., 2007). Among young children in the child protection system, 32% had an identified mental health need, yet less than 7% of those children received services to address those needs (Cooper, Banghart, & Aratani, 2010).
Furthermore, while ECE may provide a consistent interpersonal experience in a developmentally supportive environment, even programs rated high quality through national accreditation, quality rating systems, or other program quality ratings that indicate a baseline level of quality higher than licensing are unlikely to employ staff who possess the training and skills to effectively care for children with mental health challenges (Cooper et al., 2010). Nor do they require or provide the supports for early care providers to access and utilize the kinds of specialized training, such as trauma-informed care, that may be needed to provide high quality care and education for these children (Cooper et al., 2010, Dinehart et al., 2013). In addition, annual turnover rates of ECE staff are estimated between 25 and 40% (National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies, 2012); this is a significant problem, especially for young children in the child protection system for whom consistency in caregiver–child relationships is a particularly critical need.
Data on the development of young children in the child protection system in the context of their ECE experiences are limited. A few studies have examined the effect of nationally accredited ECE settings, a widely accepted proxy for high quality care (Dinehart et al., 2012, Meloy and Phillips, 2012), or Head Start (Lipscomb et al., 2013) on the developmental outcomes of children involved in the child protection system. These studies found some improvements in children's developmental outcomes as a result of their ECE experience. Children who attended accredited ECE were performing better at the end of preschool on measures of language, cognition, and fine motor skills than children who were in ECE sites that were not accredited (Dinehart et al., 2012, Meloy and Phillips, 2012). However, regardless of the accreditation of the ECE setting, the additional risk of child protection involvement for children experiencing poverty was related to poorer developmental outcomes (Dinehart et al., 2012). Children participating in Head Start showed modest improvements in pre-academic skills and marginal improvements in behavior problems (Lipscomb et al., 2013). While these data suggest that young children in the child protection system can show improvements in pre-academic skills when attending quality ECE settings, they also indicate that their pre-academic and social–emotional skills still lag behind those of their non-child protection counterparts. These are important studies laying the foundation for further research in this arena: They reveal the great need to build a solid evidence base that documents how the language, cognitive, and social–emotional outcomes of these children may be linked to their participation in ECE programs.
The purpose of this study was to contribute to the knowledge base by investigating both the academic and social–emotional development of young children who were involved in the child protection system. This investigation focused on children who had accepted reports in the child protection systems for reasons of alleged child maltreatment and who were mostly living with families in poverty. Our investigation compared the development of these children to the development of children from an ethnically and poverty matched comparison sample of children who were receiving ECE programming in similar settings. The following question was addressed: Under the context of high quality ECE services as measured by a statewide quality rating and improvement system, are children with child protection involvement making progress in the development of their language, mathematical, and social skills similar to their (matched) peers in the year prior to kindergarten?
Section snippets
Data sources
The study relied on secondary data from two sources: the Minnesota Linking Information for Kids (Minn-LInK) project and the Minnesota Early Learning Foundation (MELF) Evaluation. The Minn-LInK project utilizes statewide administrative data from the Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) and Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS) Social Service Information System (SSIS) to answer questions about the impact of policies, programs, and practice on well-being of children in Minnesota. For the
Repeated measures ANOVA
Repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to assess whether there were significant differences in pre- and post-test scores across the five measures and whether the scores between the two groups (with history of child protection involvement and without child protection involvement) differed significantly from each other. Assumptions of homogeneity of variance were tested (using Levene's Test) and met. The mean and standard deviations for all five measures at different time points and between two
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to document the developmental outcomes of young children who were involved in the child protection system as compared to the outcomes of ethnically and socioeconomically similar peers who did not have involvement in the child protection system, in the context of receiving ECE services in programs rated highly by the state's quality rating and improvement system. Young children in the child protection system face significant challenges that threaten their healthy
References (69)
- et al.
Preschool behavior problems in classroom learning situations and literacy outcomes in kindergarten and first grade
Early Childhood Research Quarterly
(2011) - et al.
Developmental psychopathology perspective on child abuse and neglect
Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
(1995) - et al.
Associations between center-based care accreditation status and the early educational outcomes of children in the child welfare system
Children and Youth Services Review
(2012) - et al.
A contextually relevant assessment of the impact of child maltreatment on the social competencies of low-income urban children
Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
(1998) - et al.
Relationship of childhood abuse and household dysfunction to many of the leading causes of death in adults: The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Study
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
(1998) - et al.
Child care quality: Centers and home settings that serve poor families
Early Childhood Research Quarterly
(2004) - et al.
School readiness in children living in non-parental care: Impacts of Head Start
Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology
(2013) - et al.
Rethinking the role of early care and education in foster care
Children and Youth Services Review
(2012) - et al.
Preschool-to-third grade programs and practices: A review of research
Children and Youth Services Review
(2010) - et al.
Self concept, motivation, and competence among preschoolers from maltreating and comparison families
Child Abuse and Neglect
(1990)
The effects of maltreatment on development during early childhood: Recent studies and their theoretical, clinical, and policy implications
Early care and education for children in low-income families: Patterns of use, quality, and potential policy implications
Placement into foster care and the interplay of urbanicity, child behavior problems, and poverty
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry
Socioeconomic status and child development
Annual Review of Psychology
The effects of poverty on children and youth
The Future of Children
The QUINCE-PFI Study: An evaluation of a promising model for child care provider training: Final report
The development of cognitive and academic abilities: Growth curves from an early childhood educational experiment
Developmental Psychology
Early childhood education: Young adult outcomes from the Abecedarian Project
Applied Developmental Science
Developmental needs and individualized family service plans among infants and toddlers in the child welfare system
Child Maltreatment
Evaluation of parent aware: Minnesota's quality rating and improvement system
Poverty grown up: How childhood socioeconomic status impacts adult health
Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics
Addressing the mental health needs of young children in the child welfare system: What every policymaker should know
Maltreated children's language and speech development: Abused, neglected and abused and neglected
First Language
Providing quality early care and education to young children who experience maltreatment: A review of the literature
Journal of Early Childhood Education
Attachment for infants in foster care: The role of caregiver state of mind
Child Development
Child neglect: Outcomes in high-risk urban preschoolers
Pediatrics
Family poverty, welfare reform, and child development
Child Development
Early-childhood poverty and adult attainment, behavior, and health
Child Development
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test
Pre-kindergarten in eleven states: NCEDL's multi-state study of pre-kindergarten and study of state-wide early education programs
Child maltreatment and the early onset of problem behaviours: Can a program of nurse home visitation break the link?
Development and Psychopathology
Encouraging news for college-bound foster youth
Focus
The effects of maltreatment on the development of young children
SES differences in language processing skill and vocabulary are evident at 18 months
Developmental Science
Cited by (25)
Numeracy and literacy attainment of children exposed to maternal incarceration and other adversities: A linked data study
2023, Journal of School PsychologyHomelessness and child protection involvement: Temporal links and risks to student attendance and school mobility
2023, Child Abuse and NeglectEarly school suspensions for children with adverse childhood experiences (ACEs)
2021, Journal of Applied Developmental PsychologyCitation Excerpt :Although we did not have information in our data on the reasons why children were suspended, reported statistics indicate that the majority of suspensions in WA government schools are for externalising behaviours such as physical and/or verbal assault (Office of the Auditor General, 2014). Inferring from evidence that child maltreatment, severe parent mental illness, and parent criminal offending are all associated with poor social and emotional development in children (Bell et al., 2018a, 2018b, 2019; Green et al., 2018; Kingston & Tough, 2014; Kovan et al., 2014; Whitten et al., 2019), we propose that ACEs can be directly related to children enacting such problem behaviours and consequently being suspended from school. In this study, ACEs that occurred even before children commenced school were significantly associated with increased odds of suspension.
Mediating effects of early childhood programs and high quality home environments on the cognitive development of poor children involved in the child welfare system
2021, Children and Youth Services ReviewCitation Excerpt :This in turn improves parents’ understanding of child behavior across developmental stages and indirectly reduces the likelihood of child maltreatment (Klein, 2016). Moreover, research confirms that ECE attendance improves the cognitive development and academic outcomes of children in the CWS (Dinehart et al., 2012; Kovan et al., 2014). The role of ECE has been found to be important for maltreated children’s language acquisition and development.