Bailey Evans and Alyson SilkowskiInstitute for Children, Poverty, and Homelessness

National Association for Welfare Research and StatisticsAugust 21, 2013

Head Start and Housing (In)stability: Examining the School Readiness of Children

Experiencing Homelessness

✐ WELCOME

✐ BACKGROUND & EXISTING RESEARCH

✐ SCHOOL READINESS & HOUSING IN FACES

✐ IMPLICATIONS

✐ DISCUSSION

Today’s Conversation

OBJECTIVE:

Discuss the extent to which a school readiness gap exists between stably housed children and homeless or highly mobile children

KEY TAKEAWAYS:

1) Homeless or highly mobile children begin Head Start at age three with poorer socio-emotional, cognitive, and health outcomes on average than their low-income but stably housed peers.

2) After two years in Head Start, homeless or highly mobile children exhibit varying degrees of improvement, making the greatest progress relative to their peers on measures of socio-emotional development.

3) The gains homeless or highly mobile children make on average, however, do not increase their scores enough to eliminate the school readiness gap entirely.

✐ WELCOME

✐ BACKGROUND & EXISTING RESEARCH

✐ SCHOOL READINESS & HOUSING IN FACES

✐ IMPLICATIONS

✐ DISCUSSION

Child Outcomes:Homeless / Stably Housed Children

✐ Children from low-income families encounter more barriers to achieving success in school

● Face risks associated with poverty: limited parental education, constrained financial resources, poor access to health care and good nutrition, exposure to family and community violence

✐ Homeless children are at an even greater disadvantage

● Experience additional risks for developmental delays and health problems: discontinuity in schooling, stressful housing situations, and disruptions in access to services✐ Studies comparing homeless and low-income, stably

housed children find evidence of ‘risk gradient’● Studies have found differences (ranging from slight to substantial) between

children based on housing status; however, these differences tend to be smaller than the gap between low-income children and the general population

Child Outcomes:Homeless / Stably Housed Children

HOMELESS

CHILDREN

LOW-INCOME, HOUSED CHILDREN

GENERAL POPULATIO

N≥ >ADVERSE OUTCOMES:

✐ Children from low-income families encounter more barriers to achieving success in school

● Face risks associated with poverty: limited parental education, constrained financial resources, poor access to health care and good nutrition, exposure to family and community violence

✐ Homeless children are at an even greater disadvantage

● Experience additional risks for developmental delays and health problems: discontinuity in schooling, stressful housing situations, and disruptions in access to services✐ Studies comparing homeless and low-income, stably

housed children find evidence of ‘risk gradient’● Studies have found differences (ranging from slight to substantial) between

children based on housing status; however, these differences tend to be smaller than the gap between low-income children and the general population

(Buckner 2007)

✐ WELCOME

✐ BACKGROUND & EXISTING RESEARCH

✐ SCHOOL READINESS & HOUSING IN FACES

✐ IMPLICATIONS

✐ DISCUSSION

FACES 2006 Data: BackgroundCohort Longitudinal Dataset❧ Families initially surveyed when child entered Head Start (age 3 or age 4)

– Four waves: Fall 2006 (HS), Spring 2007 (HS), Spring 2008 (HS or K), Spring 2009 (K)

❧ Includes children born between 2001-2003, n = 3315❧ Surveys collected from parents, teachers, center & program directors❧ Classroom observations and direct child assessments

Three year-old cohort❧ 2020 children were in the three year-old cohort entering Head Start in the Fall of

2006❧ Of these, only 961 had complete parent, teacher, and English-language assessment

survey data for Fall 2006 & Spring 2008.❧ Of these, 273 children were from families experiencing homelessness or high

mobility and 688 children from always stably housed families.

Housing Categories in FACES 2006❧ 28% Homeless or Highly Mobile (HHM):

– Ever lived in transitional housing or homeless shelter, doubled up with another family, or moved two or more times in the past year

❧ 72% Always Stably Housed:– Always lived in house, apartment, or trailer with own family (including public &

Subsidized housing) and have not moved more than once in last year

FACES: Weighted Descriptive Characteristics

Family CharacteristicsEntire

Sample n = 961

Always Stably Housedn = 688

Homeless or Highly Mobilen = 273

Parent moderately or severely depressed** 18% 15% 24%

Below poverty threshold (Fall 2006)** 58% 55% 67%

Multiple public assistance programs (Fall 2006)*� 57% 54% 63%

Mother:      Average age (Fall 2006)***� 29 29 27White 27% 26% 28%Black** 35% 37% 31%Hispanic 31% 31% 31%Single (Fall 2006)*** 42% 39% 53%Employed (Fall 2006) 52% 54% 48%Less than high school education** 18% 36% 42%

Child:      

Female 49% 50% 48%

Male 51% 50% 52%

Attended Early Head Start� 14% 14% 15%

*Differences between HHM and stably housed families are statistically significant *p<0.10, **p<0.05, ***p<0.01.�Slightly smaller sample size based on mothers' response rate. Source: ICPH analysis of FACES 2006 data. N=961. Excluded are children who were not in the three year-old cohort and children with incomplete Fall 2006 and Spring 2008 assessments.

Socio-Emotional Outcomes

Child assessmentStably housed(n=688)

Homeless or highly mobile

(n=273)

School readiness gap

Fall 2006

Spring 2008

Preschool Learning Behavior Scale (PLBS) Score + + ✔** ✔*

PLBS Attitude Toward Learning Score + + ✔*  PLBS Competence/Motivation Score + + ✔** ✔**PLBS Attention/Persistence Score + + ✔* ✔**

Reduction in Total Behavior Problems + + ✔** ✔*Improved Disruptive/Aggressive Score + + ✔**  Improved Hyperactive Score + + ✔* ✔*Improved Withdrawn Score + + ✔**  

Social Skills + +    

Cognitive Outcomes

Child assessmentStably housed(n=688)

Homeless or highly mobile

(n=273)

School readiness gap

Fall 2006

Spring 2008

Math assessments        WJ–Applied Problems Raw Score� + +   ✔**ECLS-B Math Highest Number Counted� + + ✔***  IRT Subtest Score, ECLSB Math Items Only� + +   ✔**Proficiency Probability, ECLS-B Math Number & Shape� + +   ✔***

Language and literacy assessments        Literacy Behaviors + +   ✔*Child Can Recognize Letters (Parent) + +   ✔***Child Can Recognize Letters (Teacher) + +   ✔**WJ–Letter Word Raw Score� + + ✔*** ✔***WJ–Spelling Raw Score� + +   ✔***Identify Primary Colors by Name (Parent) + + ✔*** ✔**Identify Primary Colors by Name (Teacher) + + ✔** ✔***Story/Print Concepts IRT Scale Score� + +    Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-4 Raw Score� + + ✔**  Child Pretends to Read + +   ✔*

Health-Related Outcomes

Child assessmentStably housed(n=688)

Homeless or

highly mobile

(n=273)

School readiness gap

Fall 2006

Spring 2008

Overall Health Status�     ✔* ✔**Good Health Status (Excellent, Very Good & Good)� + –   ✔**

BMI – Underweight         BMI – Normal Weight –       BMI – Overweight or Obese� + +     Child Has Health Insurance�         Doctor Visit in Last Year�         Dentist Visit in Last Year� + +    

What Can We Make of these Findings?

❧ HHM children are making the most progress on measures of socio-emotional development

❧ HHM children make positive gains on cognitive measures yet fall further behind their stably housed peers

❧ HHM children exhibit least progress on health-related outcomes

❧ There is evidence of resiliency within the HHM group across all indicators of school readiness

✐ WELCOME

✐ BACKGROUND & EXISTING RESEARCH

✐ SCHOOL READINESS & HOUSING IN FACES

✐ IMPLICATIONS

✐ DISCUSSION

Implications & Next Steps...

…for providers and policymakers– Identification of HHM children in the classroom

– Individualized services and curricula development?

– Outreach to and enrollment of homeless families

– Implementation—and reauthorization—of the Improving Head Start for School Readiness Act of 2007

– Collaboration between (as applicable) Head Start State Collaboration Offices, State Advisory Councils on Early Childhood Education and Care, and interagency councils to end homelessness

…for researchers– FACES 2006 goes to kindergarten; FACES 2009

– Early Head Start and the promise of Baby FACES 2009

– HHM children who are not enrolled in Head Start

– HHM children who are resilient, and understanding what works

✐ WELCOME

✐ BACKGROUND & EXISTING RESEARCH

✐ SCHOOL READINESS & HOUSING IN FACES

✐ IMPLICATIONS

✐ DISCUSSION

Contact Information

❧ Bailey Evans: bevans@icphusa.org

❧ Alyson Silkowski: asilkowski@icphusa.org

Data Source❧ FACES:

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/research/project/head-start-family-and-child-experiences-survey-faces-1997-2013

ICPH: www.icphusa.org

Percent Change of Homeless Families Served by Head Start (2008–12)

Homeless Children Served by Head Start Programs

(by percent of population and year)

Note: The number of homeless children aged zero to five years is estimated based on research indicating that school-aged homeless students account for 58% of the total number of homeless children. Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Head Start Program Information Report, Survey Summary Report—National Level, 2007–12; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Head Start Program Information Report, Family Information Report—National Level, 2007–12; National Center for Homeless Education, Education for Homeless Children and Youth Program Data Collection Summary, 2011–12; National Center on Family Homelessness, America’s Youngest Outcasts 2010.

2.5% 2.8% 3.4%

3.9% 4.4% 4.7%

5.3% 5.1% 5.2%

6.3% 6.4%

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Homeless Children Served by Head Start Programs (by percent of population and year)

Children in Head Start who are homeless All homeless children served by Head Start

Extra Slides

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ecd/news/expanding-ece-for-homeless-children

Questions?

Today’s Presentation

LEARNING OBJECTIVE:

Discuss the school readiness outcomes of stably housed and homeless or highly mobile children in Head Start

KEY TAKEAWAYS:

1) Homeless or highly mobile children begin Head Start at age three with poorer socio-emotional, cognitive, and health outcomes on average than low-income but stably housed peers.

2) After two years in Head Start, homeless or highly mobile children exhibit varying degrees of improvement, making the greatest progress relative to their peers on measures of socio-emotional development.

3) However, even the greatest gains homeless or highly mobile children make on average are not enough to close the school readiness gap entirely.

Pre-Kindergarten: Risk and Readiness

✐ Early years in school are highly predictive of future achievement

– Early proficiency makes later learning more efficient– Early underperformance associated with later

underperformance

✐ Achievement gaps often persist—or worsen—in later grades

✐ Greatest potential for achievement growth is in early childhood

Pre-Kindergarten: Risk and Readiness

✐ Critical that homeless children enter kindergarten ‘school-ready’

✐ High-quality early childhood education and care fosters school readiness and can help mitigate risk

❧ HHM children begin Head Start behind their stably housed peers – a school readiness gap existed for almost all measures in Fall 2006

❧ HHM children improve on all measures and make greater gains on most assessments than stably housed children

❧ At the end of Head Start, HHM children have overcome the school readiness gap between them and their stably housed peers on three measures

Socio-Emotional Assessment Summary

❧ While in Head Start, HHM children improve on all cognitive measures

❧ In this case, however, stably housed children show greater gains during the two-year enrollment period

❧ Despite the progress HHM children make, this leads to the development of a school readiness gap by the end of Head Start on numerous measures

Cognitive Assessment Summary

❧ Both HHM children and stably housed children show less improvement on health indicators than the other measures of school readiness while in Head Start

❧ HHM children report slightly poorer health on average and become less healthy and more overweight than their stably housed peers by the end of Head Start

❧ A gap develops between HHM and stably housed children in regularity of dental visits and insurance status

Health-Related Assessment Summary

Implications & Next Steps...

…for providers and policymakers– Identification of HHM children in the classroom

– Individualized services and curricula development

– Outreach to and enrollment of homeless families

– Implementation—and reauthorization—of the Improving Head Start for School Readiness Act of 2007

– Collaboration between (as applicable) Head Start State Collaboration Offices, State Advisory Councils on Early Childhood Education and Care, and interagency councils to end homelessness

– Race to the Top–Early Learning Challenge Fund and Elementary and Secondary Education Act reauthorization

Implications & Next Steps...

…for researchers– FACES 2006 goes to kindergarten

– FACES 2009

– Early Head Start and the promise of Baby FACES 2009

– HHM children who are not enrolled in Head Start

– HHM children who are resilient, and understanding what works

Totaln=961

TeacherReported FAll2006 Spring2008CumulativeGain/Loss

Fall2006 Spring2008CumulativeGain/Loss

PLBS(PreschoolLearningBehaviorScale)*(Mean:30, SD:10)

49.7 53.5 3.8 47.7 51.9 4.2

PLBS-AttitudeTowardLearning* 49.8 52.4 2.5 48.3 51.3 3.1PLBS-CompetenceMotivation* 49.6 53.3 3.7 48.0 52.1 4.1PLBS-Attention/Persistence* 49.6 53.8 4.3 47.7 51.9 4.3

TotalBehaviorProblemsIndex (0 - 36) 7.3 5.0 2.3 8.6 6.0 2.6Disruptive/Aggressive (0 - 8) 1.6 1.3 0.3 2.0 1.5 0.5Hyperactive (0 - 12) 3.3 2.1 1.2 3.8 2.5 1.3Withdrawn (0 - 12) 1.5 1.2 0.3 1.7 1.3 0.4

SocialSkills(0 - 24) 15.0 18.6 3.7 14.5 17.8 3.3Shaded box indicates group with the most improvement from Fall 2006 to Spring 2008

*Slightly smaller sample size based on mother's response

AlwaysStablyHoused,n=688 EverHomelessorHighlyMobile,n=723

Socio-emotionalOutcomes

Source: FACES 2006 Data. Institute for Children, Poverty, and Homelessness 2013

Totaln=961

Fall2006 Spring2008CumulativeGain/Loss

Fall2006 Spring2008CumulativeGain/Loss

WJ-LetterWorldRawScore(0-76) 2.7 8.8 6.1 2.1 7.9 5.8WJ-SpellingRawScore (0-59) 3.2 8.3 5.1 3.1 7.8 4.8WJ-AppliedProblemsRawScore (0-63) 3.7 10.6 6.9 3.4 9.9 6.5Story/PrintConceptsIRTScaleScore* (0-14) 2.9 6.0 3.1 2.7 5.7 3.0IRTScore,WJ–AppliedProblems&ECLS-BMath*

11.2 24.0 12.8 10.6 22.7 12.2

IRTSubtestScore,ECLSBItemsOnly* (0-44) 6.2 12.2 6.0 5.9 11.6 5.7IdentifyPrimaryColorsbyName-Parent(1=all, 2=some, 3=none)

1.6 1.1 0.4 1.7 1.2 0.5

IdentifyPrimaryColorsbyName-Teacher(1=all, 2=some, 3=none)

1.8 1.1 0.7 1.9 1.2 0.7

ChildCanRecognizeLetters-Parent(1=all, 2=most, 3=some, 4=none)

2.8 1.9 0.9 2.9 2.0 0.9

ChildCanRecognizeLetters-Teacher(1=all, 2=most, 3=some, 4=none)

3.4 2.0 1.4 3.5 2.1 1.4

ProficiencyProbability,1-ECLS-BMathNumber&Shape*

15.0% 67.7% 52.7% 13.2% 61.3% 48.1%

ChildPretendstoRead 87.6% 96.5% 8.9% 86.6% 92.8% 6.2%ChildLiteracyBehaviors(0 - 7) 2.2 5.7 3.5 1.9 5.5 3.6PPVT-4RawScore* (0-228) 32.2 66.1 33.8 29.9 64.3 34.4ECLS-BMathHighNumberCount* (1-20) 6.8 13.0 6.2 6.1 12.6 6.5Shaded box indicates group with the most improvement from fall 2006 to spring 2008

*Slightly smaller sample size based on mothers' response rate

Source: FACES 2006 Data. Institute for Children, Poverty, and Homelessness 2013

CognitiveOutcomesAlwaysStablyHoused,n=688 EverHomelessorHighlyMobile,n=723

Totaln=961

FAll2006 Spring2008CumulativeGain/Loss

Fall2006 Spring2008CumulativeGain/Loss

Overallhealthstatus(1=excellent/very good, 2=good/fair, 3=poor)

1.2 1.2 0.0 1.3 1.3 0.0

GoodHealthStatus(Excellent,VeryGood,Good)

94.7% 95.5% 0.8% 93% 92% -2%

BMI-NormalWeight 61.3% 58.4% -2.9% 61.2% 55.2% -6.1%BMI-Overweight/Obese* 32.5% 36.4% 3.9% 31.4% 38.3% 6.9%BMI-Underweight 3.0% 2.5% -0.5% 1.9% 2.9% 1.1%DentistVisitinLastYear 87.8% 96.4% 8.5% 83.8% 93.2% 9.4%DoctorVisitinLastYear 99.5% 99.1% -0.3% 99.4% 98.4% -1.0%ChildHasHealthInsurance 95.3% 96.3% 1.0% 96.2% 94.2% -2.0%Shaded box indicates group with the most improvement from fall 2006 to spring 2008*Slightly smaller sample size based on mothers' response rate

AlwaysStablyHoused,n=688 EverHomelessorHighlyMobile,n=723

Health-relatedOutcomes

Source: FACES 2006 Data. Institute for Children, Poverty, and Homelessness 2013

“Profiles of Risk” - Project Overview

Objective:Investigate characteristics of homeless families with young children to understand how they differ from similar poor families who are stably housed in order to better target policy efforts.

39%43%

18%

Homelessness in the Fragile Families and Child Well-being Survey(n = 1,836)

Analysis N

2,260

1,954

1,893

1,836

Wave

Baseline

Year 1

Year 3

Year 5

Year

1998-2000

1999-2002

2001-2003

2003-2006

Child Age

Birth

Age 1

Age 3

Age 5

Original N

4,898

4,364

4,213

4,139

Fragile Families: Sample Size

Exclusions:

• Average lifetime income to poverty ratio > 1.25• Child does not live with mom at least 50% of the

time• No valid sample weights

Primary type of child care used at age 3(unmarried and employed mothers using child care at year 3

by housing status years 1-5)

24%

55%45%

46%36%

22%

27%7%

27%

3% 2% 6%

Head Start Non-relative home-based care Relative care

Center-based care