Request for Non-Substantive Change - Memo

DATE: December 6, 2018

TO: Steph Tatham

Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)

Office of Management and Budget (OMB)

FROM: Ivelisse Martinez-Beck

Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE)

Administration for Children and Families (ACF)

SUBJECT: Request for Non-Substantive Change to the 2019 National Survey of Early Care and Education (OMB NO: 0970-0391)

The Administration for Children and Families submitted a package for the 2019 National Survey of Early Care and Education (NSECE) for review by the Office of Management and Budget on August 21, 2018, with clearance received on October 19, 2018. This memo documents non-substantive changes proposed for the NSECE questionnaires since the initial submission date. These changes come primarily from: 1) expert panel recommendations, 2) feedback from partner agencies regarding questionnaire content, 3) recent analyses of 2012 NSECE data, 4) new findings from recent research using other data sources, and 5) review of the sampling frame being built for 2019 NSECE administration.

Table 1 below summarizes the proposed non-substantive changes to the NSECE questionnaires, including the questionnaire construct, a summary of the revision, and the source of the revision. Page numbers refer to versions of questionnaires with ‘tracking changes’ in the filenames. Clean copies of the questionnaires are also provided.

Table 1

Page	Question	Construct	Summary of Proposed Revision	Source of Revision
Center-based Provider Screener and Questionnaire (Attachment 2)
2	Screener 1a	Determination of eligibility of center-based provider	Conversion of introductory text about hours of operation and before/after school care of young children into question items.	2019 NSECE sampling frame includes some types of programs that should be screened as ineligible for the main interview.
14	B1_5_M	Prices charged	Deletion of selected words in question text, and addition of clarifying definition	Expert Panel recommendation, recent analyses of 2012 data
20	C11	Languages spoken by staff	Items about languages other than English revised to better align across questionnaires	Expert recommendation: Revision of approach across questionnaires for high-priority topic
21	R1	Child-level blending of funding	Additional sentence defining terms	Expert recommendation
24	R5	Meeting multiple standards	Revision of wording to clarify question intent	Expert recommendation
25	R7	Additional fees paid by subsidy families	Additional clarifying phrase	Request from partner agency
35	E7	Background checks	Change wording from ‘your experiences’ to ‘your opinions’ to broaden question relevance	Request from partner agency to expand question administration
40	F18	Inspections	Refocus of items on monitoring and inspection visits from agencies to reasons for visits	Expert recommendation
42	H16	Director professional development	Decomposed original list of examples into separate sub-items	Expert recommendation: More detail on high-priority topic
Home-based Provider Screener and Questionnaire (Attachment 4a)
5	A_SCRN_4	Reason for no longer providing home-based care	Clarification of response category	Request from partner agency
10	B8C2_M	Child’s schedule with provider	Item inadvertently omitted from original OMB package	Correction of error
11	B13_M	Child home language	Change in question wording to drop ‘usually’	Expert recommendation: Revision of approach across questionnaires for high-priority topic
12	B13b_M	Language spoken	Change in question wording to include parents	Expert recommendation: Revision of approach across questionnaires for high-priority topic
24	C12C_2_M	Prices charged	Deletion of selected words in question text to simplify cognitive task, and addition of clarifying definition	Expert Panel recommendation, recent analyses of 2012 data
25	C_affordcare	Assistance to families to pay for care	Replace sub-item with ‘other’ category	Expert recommendation
26	C13_1	Children home language	Change in question wording to drop ‘usually’	Expert recommendation: Revision of approach across questionnaires for high-priority topic
27	C13B_1_M	Number needing interpretation	Change in question wording to refocus from family count to child count	Expert recommendation: Revision of approach across questionnaires for high-priority topic
27	C13D_M	Languages spoken with families	Change in question wording to include languages spoken with parents or children	Expert recommendation: Revision of approach across questionnaires for high-priority topic
27	C13E_M	Percent time speaking English	Change in question to capture percentage of time speaking English with children.	Expert recommendation: Revision of approach across questionnaires for high-priority topic
30	C_subfees	Additional fees paid by subsidy families	Additional clarifying phrase	Request from partner agency
41	F_BKGD	Background checks	Change wording from ‘your experiences’ to ‘your opinions’ so more respondents can be asked the questions	Request from partner agency to expand question administration
41	F_INSP	Inspections	Replacement of items on specific agency monitoring and inspection visits with question about reasons for visits	Expert recommendation
44	G_ACTIVITY_IT	Activities in the classroom	Capture activities involving singing/rhyming and reading	Expert recommendation
72	J12b	Types of child care provided	Expansion of sub-item to include an additional category of care	Request from partner agency
75	J21a_M	Languages spoken by workforce	Items about languages other than English revised to better align across questionnaires	Expert recommendation: Revision of approach across questionnaires for high-priority topic
77	J23b_M	Household income	Add introductory statement to avert non-response	New findings: Recent analysis of 2012 NSECE data
Classroom Staff (Workforce) (Attachment 6a)
15	G_ACTIVITY_IT	Activities in the classroom	Capture activities involving singing/rhyming and reading	Expert recommendation
19	CL9	Languages spoken by children	Items about languages other than English revised to better align across questionnaires	Expert recommendation: Revision of approach across questionnaires for high-priority topic based on feedback from researchers
19	CL10	Languages spoken by children	Items about languages other than English revised to better align across questionnaires	Expert recommendation: Revision of approach across questionnaires for high-priority topic based on feedback from researchers
19	CL11	Languages spoken by children	Items about languages other than English revised to better align across questionnaires	Expert recommendation: Revision of approach across questionnaires for high-priority topic
24	D_BKGD	Background checks	Change wording from ‘your experiences’ to ‘your opinions’ so more respondents can be asked the questions	Request from partner agency to expand question administration
26	E5	Languages spoken by workforce	Items about languages other than English revised to better align across questionnaires	Expert recommendation: Revision of approach across questionnaires for high-priority topic
26	E6	Languages spoken in classroom	Items about languages other than English revised to better align across questionnaires	Expert recommendation: Revision of approach across questionnaires for high-priority topic
Household Screener and Questionnaire (Attachment 15a)
60	J4_E3	Source of assistance for paying	Re-organized response categories	New findings: Analysis of 2012 NSECE data linked with administrative data suggested improvements for identifying child care subsidies
59	J3_E2_M	Receipt of child care payment assistance	Removed the word ‘voucher’ from example types of assistance	Partner agency guidance in light of recent subsidy practices
60	J9_E9	Receipt of child care payment assistance	Removed the word ‘voucher’ from example types of assistance	Partner agency guidance in light of recent subsidy practices
60	J9_E9a	Receipt of child care payment assistance	Removed the word ‘voucher’ from example types of assistance	Partner agency guidance in light of recent subsidy practices
61	J9_1	Receipt of child care payment assistance	Removed the word ‘voucher’ from example types of assistance	Partner agency guidance in light of recent subsidy practices
62	J7_E4_M	Co-pay	Additional clarifying phrase	Expert recommendation
62	J8A_E2A_M	Proof of employment-related activity	Revision to ask about employment-related activity documentation instead of work hours link to arrangement eligibility	Expert recommendation to reflect CCDF Final Rule
62	J8B_E2B_M	Use of relevant program in child care search	Revision of question to ask about state subsidy program rather than local resource and referral agency	Expert recommendation
63	J11	Payment information for ECE arrangement	Clarification of individual-type provider payment arrangement	New findings: Analysis of 2012 data indicates opportunity to reduce burden.
63	J11_SAME	Payment information on ECE arrangement	Combination of payment confirmation questions	New findings: Analysis of 2012 data indicates opportunity to reduce burden.
69	F7	Methods of child care search	Revised and re-ordered response options	New findings: Updated based on newly identified literature on child care search
80	G12B_M	Receipt of child care subsidies	Addition of a clarification sentence	Request from partner agency
80	G12D_M	Reason for end of child care subsidies	Two additional response categories, one category with clarification text	Expert recommendation

4