The Role of State Prekindergarten Policies in Supporting Maternal Employment

• In Event: Childcare, Work, and Wellbeing: Novel Evidence on Early Investments and Economic Mobility

Abstract

Background: 

Despite being vital for maternal employment, childcare is increasingly inaccessible and unaffordable1. The federal government funds childcare subsidies, but only a fraction of income-eligible families actually receive subsidies due to underfunding2. However, most states have some form of publicly-funded preschool program3. Much scholarly attention has been paid to potential academic and social benefits of preschool for children4,5, but less attention has been paid to potential benefits for parents, including the potential 100% childcare price subsidy inherent to some programs6. 

Purpose/RQs:

State-funded preschool has the potential to support maternal employment, but studies find mixed evidence of this benefit7,8,9,10, which may be due to differences in program policies such as income restrictions and schedules (i.e. half-day programs are less conducive to employment than full-day). Therefore, I ask:

1. 
   

   How does state preschool expansion impact maternal employment?

   
   


2. 
   

   How does the relationship between state pre-K expansion and maternal employment differ by state pre-K program policies, including income eligibility requirements and program schedules?

   
   

Methods: 

I combine American Community Survey data from 2001-2019 with state preschool data from the National Institute for Early Education Research [NIEER]. I use NIEER data to identify preschool expansion events and program policies. I focus on program expansions, as most states had some form of publicly-funded preschool program by 2001, but few served >20% of 4-year-olds11. Treatment was defined as a clear expansion event (e.g. legislation) between 2004-2016 (pre/post-treatment data required) that increased enrollment by 50+%. States that served >20% of 4-year-olds in 2001 but did not expand between 2004-2016 were excluded as always-treated; states that never served >20% of 4-year-olds were coded never-treated. I restrict my ACS sample to mothers of age-eligible children (4-5) not yet in kindergarten (n=495,914).

I compare employment outcomes (binary employment and labor-force participation, hours worked, wages) of mothers of age-eligible children in treated states to mothers of same-aged children in never-treated states, before and after expansion. I use a synthetic difference-in-differences approach due to likely parallel trends (PT) violations; SDID is not reliant on PT given it reweights control units and pre-treatment periods to approximate treated units12. I explore heterogeneity by maternal characteristics, and by eligibility requirements and schedules. I will check the sensitivity of my findings using a similar model with mothers of age-ineligible children to ensure preschool expansions are driving employment changes. I will check robustness to a more conservative SDID inference approach12 and to an alternate estimator, a series of synthetic control models for each treatment group.

Findings/Implications:

Preliminary SDID results suggest that preschool expansions only impact the employment outcomes (hours worked, wages) of married mothers without younger children, aligning with some previous findings7,10. I will explore heterogeneity by income eligibility requirements and program schedules, and run the sensitivity and robustness checks described above. My findings will inform the development of public preschool program policies that can support not only children, but also their parents, in a context of inaccessible and unaffordable childcare and inadequate subsidies.

Author

• Rachel Fidel, University of Delaware
  Presenting Author