Default Style Register
Daycare.com Forum
Daycare Center and Family Home Forum>If Daycare Is So Expensive Why Are Provider's Having to Struggle?
Blackcat31 09:50 AM 07-12-2016
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...rty/?tid=sm_fb
Reply
daycarediva 10:03 AM 07-12-2016
Centers in our area are in the mid-low quality range. The bare minimum profit goes back into the center, the wages are advertised as under $10/hr, with experience or education-CDA/experience combo- UP TO $12/hr

I could work at McDonalds, Lowes, etc and make more. IME the only people who stay long term are those with financial support elsewhere (spouse), those who really love the work, or those with no other viable options- eg centers offer deep discounts for employee children, it's a M-F job, etc.
Reply
mommyneedsadayoff 10:25 AM 07-12-2016
I am glad someone finally put it in an article. Gets tiring seeing all the "daycare is too expensive" articles. I do, however, disagree with the summation, that states should pour more money into childcare. I don't think that will work.

The article said that regulations are there to protect children, but can be costly tot he daycare. But are they all really there to protect kids? If so, wouldn't they be the same state to state? In some states, you can't even watch one child not related to you without asking the state for a license, but in others, you can have 6+. I am not an advocate for more government, so take this with a grain of salt, but I think the market could adjust itself with less or at least more consistent regulations. For example, I am most experienced with infant care. In my state, I can only watch 4 kids under 24 months. If I was able to watch 5, which is my comfort zone, I would make almost $10k more per year. (Five is the most I can carry if there were a fire...amazing how many kids you can tuck under an arm if needed). It literally is the difference between qualifying for assistance and not qualifying when it comes to my income. Of course, that is just a small example, but I feel like if they put more importance on our jobs, parents would feed off that and not just the high cost of daycare. I am not sure how state funds get doled out, but I just look at schools. Teachers are underpaid, schools have been given billions in federal/state money, and teachers are still underpaid and quality of education has not improved. I just see the same happening for daycares. The money will be sparingly passed down, but a large part of it would probably be wasted and go to the salaries of the people they hire to oversee it.
Reply
Cat Herder 10:27 AM 07-12-2016
Because personal responsibility died?

Childcare used to be a luxury. Something considered and budgeted for before having kids. Now it is a right?

IDK. Erma Bombeck wrote about it 30 years ago. Laughed until I cried. Now it just makes me sad.
Reply
Leigh 10:33 AM 07-12-2016
The problem is wages. They haven't went up in 20 years. Starting wages in my town are the SAME as they were in 1999. At the last place I worked, I went back after being gone for 10 years. I started at $3/hr LESS than I made when I left. There are MANY people in my town bringing home $200-$250 a week from a full-time job after deductions. Anyone who thinks corporations can't afford to pay their workers more is dead wrong. Profits are huge for these businesses, they just aren't trickling down to employees. Free trade agreements have ruined our economy-this wasn't a problem before it became so easy to ship American jobs overseas. If we protect American jobs, people can afford to pay for childcare.
Reply
Pepperth 10:46 AM 07-12-2016
Originally Posted by Cat Herder:
Because personal responsibility died?

Childcare used to be a luxury. Something considered and budgeted for before having kids. Now it is a right?

IDK. Erma Bombeck wrote about it 30 years ago. Laughed until I cried. Now it just makes me sad.
What did she say about it? Is it in one of her books? I'm a huge Erma Bombeck fan.
Reply
daycarediva 10:47 AM 07-12-2016
Originally Posted by Cat Herder:
Because personal responsibility died?

Childcare used to be a luxury. Something considered and budgeted for before having kids. Now it is a right?

IDK. Erma Bombeck wrote about it 30 years ago. Laughed until I cried. Now it just makes me sad.
Where is the like button? so many people having children that they cannot afford. I busted my butt at 16 to stay OFF the system and pay my way (and my child's). Where is the personal responsibility? The pride?
Reply
Cat Herder 10:49 AM 07-12-2016
Originally Posted by Leigh:
The problem is wages. They haven't went up in 20 years.
I disagree. Not particularly with you but with this often brought up argument. You kind of rock, IMHO.

My starting rates were $35 a week in 1989. I am at $125 now. I have had pretty good increases.

Minimum wage went form $3.35 to $7.25.

If "they" keep raising wages everyone else just raises their rates.

The only sustainable solution is personal accountability.
Reply
Cat Herder 10:53 AM 07-12-2016
Originally Posted by Pepperth:
What did she say about it? Is it in one of her books? I'm a huge Erma Bombeck fan.
She was jealous of her neighbor who got to go out to work.

Considered doing it so she could have lunch breaks, wear clean clothing and have adult conversations. Daydreamed of the peacefulness of it all from her perspective of a "frumpy housewife".

The reality that she saw was that this neighbor had to give her entire paycheck, plus fifty, to her other neighbor for that privilege.

Erma's husband did not earn enough for her to go to work.

The punchline was that the neighbor worked in a daycare, taking care of other peoples kids, to pay someone to take care of hers.
Reply
Leigh 12:16 PM 07-12-2016
Originally Posted by Cat Herder:
I disagree. Not particularly with you but with this often brought up argument. You kind of rock, IMHO.

My starting rates were $35 a week in 1989. I am at $125 now. I have had pretty good increases.

Minimum wage went form $3.35 to $7.25.

If "they" keep raising wages everyone else just raises their rates.


The only sustainable solution is personal accountability.
In 1990, my sister paid $2.25 per hour, per child in a small town in Minnesota for childcare. She was shocked when she heard this weekend (from me) that our county's average rate is $2.45. It may be different elsewhere, but around here, wages have been mostly stagnant for around 20 years. Starting wages still average $10.50 per hour for skilled jobs, minimum wage for unskilled. I do not know how some of my parents manage to pay me, honestly.
Reply
Blackcat31 12:37 PM 07-12-2016
Originally Posted by Leigh:
In 1990, my sister paid $2.25 per hour, per child in a small town in Minnesota for childcare. She was shocked when she heard this weekend (from me) that our county's average rate is $2.45. It may be different elsewhere, but around here, wages have been mostly stagnant for around 20 years. Starting wages still average $10.50 per hour for skilled jobs, minimum wage for unskilled. I do not know how some of my parents manage to pay me, honestly.
Holy cow! She must have found a weird pocket of expensive providers..... I've lived in MN my whole life and there are many counties in the state today that don't charge that much today.

When I first got licensed (20+ yrs ago) the standard hourly rate for licensed providers was about .85 to $1.00 an hour. The state assistance program reimbursed approximately .60 an hour.

Today, the state assistance program reimburses something like $2.37 an hour.

Min. wage around here has stayed around $5.25 to $5.75 until 2011 when the first increase in over a decade happened and they raised the min wage to $6.15

We are expected to be at $9.50 by the first of August.
Daycare costs on a similar scale have NOT increased at all.
Reply
mommyneedsadayoff 01:03 PM 07-12-2016
I won't go too much into it, as I am long winded, but wages have increased, just not as much in comparison to the cost of living. My mom charged under a $1 an hour for kids in her daycare in the 80s. Now, that same town, it is closer to $2.50 an hour. Gas at that time was about $.80 a gallon and is now staying steady at about $2.50 a gallon. Food costs have gone up so much, that people drive 30 minutes just to go to a walmart and get them a little cheaper.

It is all relative. Wages go up, but the cost to do business goes up even more. After the second child, you have to determine if going to work is even worth while. For a lot of people, even making a third of their paycheck after taxes and daycare is necessary, sometimes just for insurance benefits.

On a side note, back in the day, having children almost always meant going down to a single income so one parent could stay home. It wasn't even talked about much, because it was just expected that one parent would raise the kids and the other would work. Daycare is now expected. Parents are interviewing while still in the process of conceiving. The idea of one parent staying home is almost becoming non existent. Not sure if it is a "keeping up with the Jones" kind of thing, but they want the fancy cars and big house and someone has to pay for it and according to this article and low quality daycares, the kid is the one who ultimately does.
Reply
mommyneedsadayoff 01:37 PM 07-12-2016
Just to add...is there a statistic on how many daycare families are on state aid, including childcare assistance? I would not be surprised if they were pretty high as well. Seems like being dependent on government aid is pretty common nowadays.
Reply
Blackcat31 01:47 PM 07-12-2016
Originally Posted by mommyneedsadayoff:
Just to add...is there a statistic on how many daycare families are on state aid, including childcare assistance? I would not be surprised if they were pretty high as well. Seems like being dependent on government aid is pretty common nowadays.
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/occ/...ment-fund-ccdf

Child care subsidies help low-income families with children under age 13 pay for child care so that parents can work or participate in training or education activities. Parents typically receive subsidies in the form of vouchers that they can use with a provider of their choice–whether a relative, neighbor, child care center, or after-school program. States have a great deal of flexibility to establish child care subsidy policies to meet their needs. Thus, national data on the characteristics of families served masks a large degree of variation across individual States.

Number served. Approximately 1.41 million children and 852,900 families per month received child care assistance in FY 2014.

Income level. Of the families served in FY 2014, 51 percent were below the Federal Poverty Level (FPL), or $19,790 for a family of three. Twenty-seven percent had incomes between 100 and 150 percent of the FPL, and 11 percent had incomes above 150 percent of FPL. The remaining families had invalid or unreported data (5%) or a child as head of household (5%).

TANF status. Nationally, the average monthly percent of families reporting income from TANF was approximately 14 percent in FY 2014. Most States give families currently receiving, at-risk of receiving, or transitioning off TANF, first priority for child care assistance.

Ages. Subsidies help pay for care for infants and toddlers, preschoolers, as well as school-aged children. For children receiving CCDF subsidies in FY 2014:
34 percent were school-aged (6 years & older)
11 percent were kindergarten-aged (age 5 years)
28 percent were preschoolers (3 & 4 years old)
28 percent were infants and toddlers (younger than 3 years old)

Settings – Type of Care. Because the subsidy program emphasizes parental choice, children are cared for in a wide variety of settings. Nationally, in FY 2014:
72 percent of children receiving subsidies were cared for in a child care center
18 percent were in family child care homes
3 percent were in the child’s own home
6 percent were in a group home
Less than 1 percent had invalid data or did not report any data

Settings – Regulation Status. Nationally, in FY 2014:
86 percent of children receiving subsidies were cared for in regulated settings,
13 percent were settings legally operating without regulation. Of those,
62 percent were served by relatives in child, family, and group homes; and
38 percent were served by non-relatives in child, family, and group homes

Family Copayments. Of those families with reported income in FY 2014, approximately 77 percent paid a copayment. Excluding families with no copayments, child care copayments averaged 7 percent of family income. More than one-third of all States and Territories (21 in FY 2014) served families where the average assessed family copayment was five percent or less of family income.

Reasons for Care. In FY 2014, 92 percent of families cited either employment or education and training as the reason for needing child care. Another 7 percent cited protective services as reasons for care.

Providers Receiving CCDF Funds. Nationally, in FY 2014, 369,606 child care providers served children receiving CCDF subsidies:
23 percent (86,574) of providers receiving CCDF funds were child care centers; and
77 percent (283,032) of providers receiving CCDF funds were home-based providers.
For 17 of the 56 State and Territory grantees, between 85 and 100 percent of providers were regulated; for another 22, between 50 and 84.9 percent of their providers were regulated. At the opposite end of the spectrum, only 5 grantees (3 states and 2 territories) reported that less than 25 percent of their providers were regulated.


Note: Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding.
Reply
Thriftylady 01:51 PM 07-12-2016
Well in my area, parents just won't pay for quality care. The quality doesn't seem to be a priority to them. I don't understand what that comes from.

When wages go up, so does the price on everything else. Take the grocery store for instance. Many of them use high school kids as much as possible and pay min. wage. That wage goes up, and so does the cost of everything in the store. Fuel prices were sky high for several years, so they raised the cost on everything to cover that stuff. Even trash collection got hit with "fuel surcharge" fees, and on my bills at least those fees haven't been lowered even when the price of gas is now cut in half. Prices on the goods we buy also went up for the cost of fuel, because shipping cost more. But those prices haven't gone down either. So for all those who are screaming to make the min. wage $15 an hour, well that isn't going to help the way I see it prices will just reflect it then, making expenses match up with the increase.

I also agree with the regulation part making prices higher. I simply can't afford to get licensed. Having to do the things the gal that licenses me wants, would cost far more than I make. So, for that reason I can take less kids and can't take state subsidy (not sure I would anyway with the info I have, not sure), but that takes me out of the mix to provide quality care to lower income people.

It is a problem. I couldn't afford to do this as a single income household, and I lost money last year. I couldn't even claim any of my T/S expenses, because I lost money before they were counted. Given the fact that it is so hard to earn a living on it, I see us having less and less childcare at all, much less quality care.
Reply
Unregistered 02:32 PM 07-12-2016
My fees go up, but it doesn't always translate into a "raise" for me personally. Many years my increase barely covers or doesn't even cover the higher food prices, water, electricity, gas, etc. not to mention that I have to buy my own health insurance and the increases on that are astronomical. There is no way to raise my fees enough to cover those increases.
My net income has gone up over the years, but not at the level that other things have or at the stated rates of inflation.
Reply
Leigh 02:49 PM 07-12-2016
Originally Posted by Blackcat31:
Holy cow! She must have found a weird pocket of expensive providers..... I've lived in MN my whole life and there are many counties in the state today that don't charge that much today.

When I first got licensed (20+ yrs ago) the standard hourly rate for licensed providers was about .85 to $1.00 an hour. The state assistance program reimbursed approximately .60 an hour.

Today, the state assistance program reimburses something like $2.37 an hour.

Min. wage around here has stayed around $5.25 to $5.75 until 2011 when the first increase in over a decade happened and they raised the min wage to $6.15

We are expected to be at $9.50 by the first of August.
Daycare costs on a similar scale have NOT increased at all.
She was in Fergus Falls at the time.
Reply
Leigh 02:53 PM 07-12-2016
We've had FIVE providers that I know of close down in the last 6 weeks. Because they couldn't make a living, but were afraid to raise their rates to a level that would allow them to support themselves. They all felt that their clients would flee. I've had calls from some of those parents who freak out when they hear my rate: "For ONE child?!". Yup. I have straight out told more than one of them that their provider shut down because she couldn't support herself, and that I am in this for the long haul. I MUST charge a rate that allows me to support my family, or I must find a different job that will, just like their providers had to.
Reply
Play Care 03:41 PM 07-12-2016
I am so glad this was finally addressed! All the "daycare is so expensive!" posts were driving me nuts. Especially when the cost of day care doesn't mean the WAGE is why the cost is so high.

That said, I don't think parents work because they want STUFF, mostly. All of my clients have at least a BA, but most have advanced degrees. Student loan debt is is a huge factor into why both parents work, at least here.
But truthfully, I would be unwilling to not work if it meant we'd have to scale back. I grew up with a SAHM. We were poor and it sucked. I want my kids to have music lessons and dance camp and braces and vacations. I also don't want to be completely screwed if something were to happen to DH.

Like someone once said "the good old days weren't always so good, and tomorrow's not as bad as it seems"
Reply
mommyneedsadayoff 03:42 PM 07-12-2016
Originally Posted by Blackcat31:
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/occ/...ment-fund-ccdf

Child care subsidies help low-income families with children under age 13 pay for child care so that parents can work or participate in training or education activities. Parents typically receive subsidies in the form of vouchers that they can use with a provider of their choice–whether a relative, neighbor, child care center, or after-school program. States have a great deal of flexibility to establish child care subsidy policies to meet their needs. Thus, national data on the characteristics of families served masks a large degree of variation across individual States.

Number served. Approximately 1.41 million children and 852,900 families per month received child care assistance in FY 2014.

Income level. Of the families served in FY 2014, 51 percent were below the Federal Poverty Level (FPL), or $19,790 for a family of three. Twenty-seven percent had incomes between 100 and 150 percent of the FPL, and 11 percent had incomes above 150 percent of FPL. The remaining families had invalid or unreported data (5%) or a child as head of household (5%).

TANF status. Nationally, the average monthly percent of families reporting income from TANF was approximately 14 percent in FY 2014. Most States give families currently receiving, at-risk of receiving, or transitioning off TANF, first priority for child care assistance.

Ages. Subsidies help pay for care for infants and toddlers, preschoolers, as well as school-aged children. For children receiving CCDF subsidies in FY 2014:
34 percent were school-aged (6 years & older)
11 percent were kindergarten-aged (age 5 years)
28 percent were preschoolers (3 & 4 years old)
28 percent were infants and toddlers (younger than 3 years old)

Settings – Type of Care. Because the subsidy program emphasizes parental choice, children are cared for in a wide variety of settings. Nationally, in FY 2014:
72 percent of children receiving subsidies were cared for in a child care center
18 percent were in family child care homes
3 percent were in the child’s own home
6 percent were in a group home
Less than 1 percent had invalid data or did not report any data

Settings – Regulation Status. Nationally, in FY 2014:
86 percent of children receiving subsidies were cared for in regulated settings,
13 percent were settings legally operating without regulation. Of those,
62 percent were served by relatives in child, family, and group homes; and
38 percent were served by non-relatives in child, family, and group homes

Family Copayments. Of those families with reported income in FY 2014, approximately 77 percent paid a copayment. Excluding families with no copayments, child care copayments averaged 7 percent of family income. More than one-third of all States and Territories (21 in FY 2014) served families where the average assessed family copayment was five percent or less of family income.

Reasons for Care. In FY 2014, 92 percent of families cited either employment or education and training as the reason for needing child care. Another 7 percent cited protective services as reasons for care.

Providers Receiving CCDF Funds. Nationally, in FY 2014, 369,606 child care providers served children receiving CCDF subsidies:
23 percent (86,574) of providers receiving CCDF funds were child care centers; and
77 percent (283,032) of providers receiving CCDF funds were home-based providers.
For 17 of the 56 State and Territory grantees, between 85 and 100 percent of providers were regulated; for another 22, between 50 and 84.9 percent of their providers were regulated. At the opposite end of the spectrum, only 5 grantees (3 states and 2 territories) reported that less than 25 percent of their providers were regulated.


Note: Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding.
Thank you for the stats! Looks like most people using childcare assistance go to centers. I would imagine they would receive the most federal or state funding if mney was poured into childcare. They also pay the lowest wages and have very high turnover. Hmmm
Reply
Thriftylady 03:47 PM 07-12-2016
Originally Posted by mommyneedsadayoff:
Thank you for the stats! Looks like most people using childcare assistance go to centers. I would imagine they would receive the most federal or state funding if mney was poured into childcare. They also pay the lowest wages and have very high turnover. Hmmm
Well I know in my county, we have no homes that take state subsidy because the gal that does licensing wants us to follow center regulations. Not the reg, but she is in charge so she does what she does. I wonder if that issue is common? Also I know that here and also when I was in KS, the state pays a higher rate to centers than they do to daycare homes. I am not sure why that is, because I am not convinced the care is any better many times. From what I know of some of the large national centers it really isn't.
Reply
mommyneedsadayoff 03:53 PM 07-12-2016
Originally Posted by Play Care:
I am so glad this was finally addressed! All the "daycare is so expensive!" posts were driving me nuts. Especially when the cost of day care doesn't mean the WAGE is why the cost is so high.

That said, I don't think parents work because they want STUFF, mostly. All of my clients have at least a BA, but most have advanced degrees. Student loan debt is is a huge factor into why both parents work, at least here.
But truthfully, I would be unwilling to not work if it meant we'd have to scale back. I grew up with a SAHM. We were poor and it sucked. I want my kids to have music lessons and dance camp and braces and vacations. I also don't want to be completely screwed if something were to happen to DH.

Like someone once said "the good old days weren't always so good, and tomorrow's not as bad as it seems"
Just curious and I hope I don't come off offensive, but it sounds like you and your spouse can offer those dance lessons, vacations, ect without being away from your children 50+hours a week.(?) If it came down to hardly seeing your kids just so they can go to music lessons and and go on vacations, would you still do it? My mom was a SAHM and a working mom (daycare center owner), so I was always with her and never had any lessons other than sports camps in the summer and we were definitely not rich, but I just remember that time with her and it is so special to me. I SO don't mean to belittle what you are saying at all, so I hope you know I am only coming from curiosity! I think I may be jaded from dealing with parents who will take any chance they get to be away from their child, but to me, when I reference the good ole days, it has more to do with having kids so you can be a PARENT. Not pay someone else to do it just so you can drive a newer car or use it as an excuse for why you are failing at life. KWIM? Being a parent is not a crutch to use when you need it. It is a privilege! (Again, not you Playcare, and I totally get what you are saying! Hope I didn't offend you!)
Reply
Blackcat31 04:04 PM 07-12-2016
Originally Posted by mommyneedsadayoff:
Thank you for the stats! Looks like most people using childcare assistance go to centers. I would imagine they would receive the most federal or state funding if mney was poured into childcare. They also pay the lowest wages and have very high turnover. Hmmm
I noticed that too...

In my state centers do get a higher reimbursement rate for the state assistance program but we also have two different sets of regulations too... we call family care Rule 2 and center care Rule 3. Rule 3 regulations are much stricter.

I also think that most centers charge more per hour/per day simply because the overhead and/or cost of operating is higher.

The centers in my area don't necessarily get any more money poured into them from the government or other area sources so that's one thing that is nice. We (FCC providers) have the same opportunities to apply for grants and funding and our QRIS program rates centers in pretty much the same way they do in-home providers.
Reply
spud912 04:04 PM 07-12-2016
Great article, BC!
Reply
Play Care 06:11 AM 07-13-2016
Originally Posted by mommyneedsadayoff:
Just curious and I hope I don't come off offensive, but it sounds like you and your spouse can offer those dance lessons, vacations, ect without being away from your children 50+hours a week.(?) If it came down to hardly seeing your kids just so they can go to music lessons and and go on vacations, would you still do it? My mom was a SAHM and a working mom (daycare center owner), so I was always with her and never had any lessons other than sports camps in the summer and we were definitely not rich, but I just remember that time with her and it is so special to me. I SO don't mean to belittle what you are saying at all, so I hope you know I am only coming from curiosity! I think I may be jaded from dealing with parents who will take any chance they get to be away from their child, but to me, when I reference the good ole days, it has more to do with having kids so you can be a PARENT. Not pay someone else to do it just so you can drive a newer car or use it as an excuse for why you are failing at life. KWIM? Being a parent is not a crutch to use when you need it. It is a privilege! (Again, not you Playcare, and I totally get what you are saying! Hope I didn't offend you!)
Not at all!

While we are able to do so, it's sheer good luck. I make a decent salary from day care, and have mostly teacher kids so more time off and shorter days than the average provider. I've said from the get go that if I couldn't make ends meet doing day care, then it would be time to move on. This might mean getting a job where I was away 50+ hours a week though I would try hard to avoid that. But for moms who have years of training, and thousands in student loans, they may not have the choice to leave a good paying job for pt or consulting, etc etc

But I definitely think the clientele you have forms your opinion. Mine are the kind who leave work and come get their kids, who keep kids home on days off, who try to minimize day care time. I think my shorter hours discourage the day care "dumpers."

Growing up, my mom was a SAHM of the "old school" train of thought. The "go play" type of SAHM. So while I do have some memories of fun times, mostly I remember a lot of boredom and being left to our own devices. While some bloggers suggest this was a "magical" 80's childhood, I disagree.
My mom will say that we did a lot, if it was free. but that depended on if she was in the mood, had the money for gas, etc etc When my sisters needed braces, we didn't have the money. Or the phone would get shut off have to contribute from our piggy banks.
Forget about dance or piano, etc.
I also recall when I was a tween/teen a lot of my parents friends started divorcing. Women who had been SAHM's were suddenly left penniless and unable to get decent jobs.

I don't think kids should have to sacrifice for mom the be able to stay home.
Reply
Cat Herder 06:28 AM 07-13-2016
Originally Posted by Thriftylady:
Well I know in my county, we have no homes that take state subsidy because the gal that does licensing wants us to follow center regulations. Not the reg, but she is in charge so she does what she does. I wonder if that issue is common?
I have the same problem.

The State keeps sending "satisfaction surveys" with yes or no options, but words the questions in such a way as to keep you from telling them the problem.

I just delete them now. They have taken up enough of my free time.
Reply
Thriftylady 06:44 AM 07-13-2016
Originally Posted by Cat Herder:
I have the same problem.

The State keeps sending "satisfaction surveys" with yes or no options, but words the questions in such a way as to keep you from telling them the problem.

I just delete them now. They have taken up enough of my free time.
Hmm sounds like they are required to do this, but don't really want to hear there are any problems.
Reply
Unregistered 06:59 PM 07-13-2016
Awesome response!!!
Originally Posted by mommyneedsadayoff:
I am glad someone finally put it in an article. Gets tiring seeing all the "daycare is too expensive" articles. I do, however, disagree with the summation, that states should pour more money into childcare. I don't think that will work.

The article said that regulations are there to protect children, but can be costly tot he daycare. But are they all really there to protect kids? If so, wouldn't they be the same state to state? In some states, you can't even watch one child not related to you without asking the state for a license, but in others, you can have 6+. I am not an advocate for more government, so take this with a grain of salt, but I think the market could adjust itself with less or at least more consistent regulations. For example, I am most experienced with infant care. In my state, I can only watch 4 kids under 24 months. If I was able to watch 5, which is my comfort zone, I would make almost $10k more per year. (Five is the most I can carry if there were a fire...amazing how many kids you can tuck under an arm if needed). It literally is the difference between qualifying for assistance and not qualifying when it comes to my income. Of course, that is just a small example, but I feel like if they put more importance on our jobs, parents would feed off that and not just the high cost of daycare. I am not sure how state funds get doled out, but I just look at schools. Teachers are underpaid, schools have been given billions in federal/state money, and teachers are still underpaid and quality of education has not improved. I just see the same happening for daycares. The money will be sparingly passed down, but a large part of it would probably be wasted and go to the salaries of the people they hire to oversee it.

Reply
Blackcat31 10:02 AM 07-25-2016
Very interesting info!

http://www.ed.gov/news/press-release...dhood-teachers
Reply
Pestle 10:33 AM 07-28-2016
It's so simple. I've been a parent who pays for care and now a care provider. This is a stupid question to ask.

Dear parents,
How much do you want to pay for day care per month?
How much money do you want to make per month?
Now imagine that you left your job and took mine.
And quit complaining.
Reply
TomCopeland 11:31 AM 07-28-2016
I wrote about this report on my website: http://tomcopelandblog.com/state-child-care-workforce

There is a real problem here. States and the federal government want to raise the standards on child care providers by requiring more training, etc. yet little is done to financially support the providers. Many parents can't afford the cost of child care and many providers earn low wages at the same time. Raising quality standards without making child care more affordable for parents and without increasing financial support for providers is doomed.
Reply
renodeb 01:34 PM 07-28-2016
I figured out my "hourly rate one day and it was $3.34 an hour. Not even close to minimum wage! Sickening huh? My rates are under the national average (on purpose). Luckily I fall under the having other source of income category.(spouse) All parents see is the money they pay each week. They don't seem to remember all of the over head expense.
Our economy is broken for sure in many ways.
I think wages (not fast food so much) need to come up, at least that would help. I can not believe how much dc centers are charging a week plus a yearly registration fee where I live. A lot of daycares in my area are going to having the parents pack lunch instead of offering it.
I worked at kinder kare in Pennsylvania and the raises there were a joke. Once I got a 10 cent raise I mean really?
I guess there is no easy fix but daycares need to raise the bar for sure!
Deb
Reply
Thriftylady 01:37 PM 07-28-2016
Originally Posted by TomCopeland:
I wrote about this report on my website: http://tomcopelandblog.com/state-child-care-workforce

There is a real problem here. States and the federal government want to raise the standards on child care providers by requiring more training, etc. yet little is done to financially support the providers. Many parents can't afford the cost of child care and many providers earn low wages at the same time. Raising quality standards without making child care more affordable for parents and without increasing financial support for providers is doomed.
This is exactly the issue! And it seems to me the more government involvement they get, the higher the prices get for parents, and the lower pay gets for providers.
Reply
e.j. 03:41 PM 07-28-2016
Originally Posted by Thriftylady:
This is exactly the issue! And it seems to me the more government involvement they get, the higher the prices get for parents, and the lower pay gets for providers.


Originally Posted by TomCopeland:
There is a real problem here. States and the federal government want to raise the standards on child care providers by requiring more training, etc. yet little is done to financially support the providers. Many parents can't afford the cost of child care and many providers earn low wages at the same time. Raising quality standards without making child care more affordable for parents and without increasing financial support for providers is doomed.
The more training and education the government requires of child care providers, the more money providers are going to want to be paid - and rightfully so. Stepping in and making child care more affordable for parents and increasing financial support for providers will bring higher taxes for all of us because someone has to pay for it. Paying higher taxes in order to receive increased financial support just seems pointless to me.
Reply
lblanke 07:19 PM 07-28-2016
I don't know what the teachers at my child's preschool make, but there is no way it is enough for all they do. We have been fortunate to have teachers with 12, 15 & 25 years experience (including over a decade each at our church preschool she attends). We give gift cards at Christmas, send in food gift cards & a handwritten note for teacher appreciation week but how could you ever adequately thank someone who cares for and takes care of your little one?
Reply
Tags:daycare environment, history, minimum wage, priorities, rates, values
Reply Up