OMBSectionA_11-29v2
OMBSectionA_11-29v2.doc
Child Care Survey of Post secondary Institutions
OMB: 1875-0242
CONTENTS (continued)
Section Page
Request for OMB Clearance of Data Collection for the Child Care Access Means Parents in School (CCAMPIS) Program
Revision of Currently Approved Collection (OMB #1875-0242)
Section A
November 29, 2007
Submitted to:
U.S. Department of Education Policy and Program Studies Service 400 Maryland Ave. SW, Room 6W226 Washington, DC 20202
Project Officer: |
Submitted by:
Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. 600 Maryland Ave. S.W., Suite 550 Washington, DC 20024-2512 Telephone: (202) 484-9220 Facsimile: (202) 863-1763
Project Director: Survey Director Kirsten Barrett, Ph.D. |
CONTENTS
Section Page
A. JUSTIFICATION 1
1. Circumstances Necessitating Collection of Information 2
2. How, By Whom, and for What Purpose Information Is to Be Used 13
3. Use of Automated, Electronic, Mechanical, or Other Technological Collection Techniques 14
4. Efforts to Avoid Duplication of Effort 15
5. Sensitivity to Burden on Small Entities 15
6. Consequences to Federal Program or Policy Activities if the Collection Is Not Conducted or Is Conducted Less Frequently Than Proposed 16
7. Special Circumstances 16
8. Federal Register Announcement and Consultation 16
9. Payment or Gift to Respondents 17
10. Confidentiality of The Data 17
11. Additional Justification for Sensitive Questions 18
12. Estimates of Hour Burden 18
13. Estimate of Total Annual Cost Burden to Respondents or Record-Keepers 19
14. Estimates of Annualized Cost to the Federal Government 19
15. Reasons for Program Changes or Adjustments 20
16. Plan for Tabulation and Publication, and Schedule for Project 20
17. Approval Not to Display the Expiration Date for OMB Approval 23
18. Exception to the Certification Statement 24
APPENDIX A: detailed list of changes to the phase I survey a-1
APPENDIX B: CHILD CARE SURVEY OF POSTSECONDARY INSTITUTIONS b-1
appendix C: LEGISLATION SUPPORTING CCAMPIS STUDY C-1
APPENDIX D: SUMMARY TABLE OF SURVEY ITEMS AND QUESTION–BY-QUESTION JUSTIFICATIONS D-1
APPENDIX E: LETTERS TO RESPONDENTS E-1
APPENDIX F: CONFIDENTIALITY PLEDGE F-1
APPENDIX G: Phase I Memo G-1
APPENDIX H: REFERENCES H-1
TABLES
Table Page
A-1 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ADDRESSED BY STUDY COMPONENTS 7
A-2 SPECIFIC SURVEY TOPICS ADDRESSING RESEARCH QUESTIONS 8
A-3 ITEMS TO BE USED IN THE ANALYSIS LINKING CHILD CARE SURVEY
AND FINANCIAL AID DATA 12
A-4 BURDEN ESTIMATE 18
A-5 SCHEDULE OF ACTIVITIES 23
FIGURES
Figure Page
A-1 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 6
SUPPORTING JUSTIFICATION FOR OMB CLEARANCE OF DATA COLLECTION FOR
THE CHILD CARE ACCESS MEANS PARENTS IN SCHOOL
(CCAMPIS) PROGRAM
The U.S. Department of Education’s (ED) Program and Policy Studies Services (PPSS) requests OMB approval for Phase II of the Child Care Survey of Postsecondary Institutions (Child Care Survey) for the study of the Child Care Access Means Parents in School (CCAMPIS) program. This package has been revised to incorporate changes made to the Phase I Child Care Survey and to clarify issues related to whether the study can address questions about the persistence of low-income postsecondary students who use CCAMPIS-funded services. The events that led to the changes proposed in this submission are summarized in the Background section below.
Background
PPSS submitted the initial CCAMPIS clearance package in June 2006 (OMB Control Number 1875-0242). A survey pretest conducted during OMB’s review of the package indicated that it was difficult for postsecondary institutions to provide data on Pell Grant recipients who use their child care services. In reporting pretest results to OMB, PPSS noted this concern and proposed several survey changes to make it easier for the institutions to provide these data. PPSS also suggested testing the revised survey with a small proportion of the survey sample. Agreeing to this approach, OMB approved a Phase I data collection with 10 percent of the survey sample and asked PPSS to submit a second clearance package that presented both results of the Phase I data collection and plans for Phase II data collection with the remaining sample.
PPSS submitted that revised clearance package and Phase I results on June 8, 2007. The Phase I results revealed that institutions still had trouble reporting persistence and graduation data on Pell Grant recipients who use their child care services. Therefore, PPSS revised the survey further to eliminate or modify these items as well as other items with high nonresponse and/or high response burden (the survey changes are listed in Appendix A). The eliminated items requested data would have captured data on the characteristics of Pell Grant recipients, on off-campus centers, and on fees and subsidies. No items were added to the survey.
In its response to the revised package in early August, OMB expressed concern that the remaining questions on persistence and graduation rates of low-income postsecondary students, even if answered, would provide child care directors’ perspectives on, rather than objective indicators of, how child care services influenced the outcomes of low-income students who used them. Therefore, PPSS eliminated these questions. Section C in Appendix A provides a detailed list of the changes made to the persistence and graduation questions, and Appendix B presents the revised survey submitted in this package for OMB approval. Given the importance of the persistence and graduation information, in addition to revising the survey, PPSS also began an exploratory analysis to determine whether administrative financial aid records are a viable source of this information. At OMB’s request, this package includes a brief overview of this exploratory analysis and describes how data from this analysis will be linked to data from the Child Care Survey.
A. JUSTIFICATION
1. Circumstances Necessitating Collection of Information
This section reviews the literature supporting the need for child care services for low-income, post-secondary students; presents an overview of the CCAMPIS program; and describes the CCAMPIS study—both the Child Care Survey for which we are requesting OMB clearance the other study components that will supplement the survey data.
a. The Need for Child Care Services for Low-Income, Postsecondary Students
The importance of a postsecondary degree to success in the labor market is well documented. The difference in earnings between high school and college completers is great, even among young workers. For full-time workers ages 25 to 34, median earnings are 65 to 70 percent higher for those with a bachelor’s degree than for those with a high school diploma only. These differences increase with age, as earnings also rise more rapidly among college-educated individuals with work experience (Murphy and Welch 1992). In addition to the economic benefits of a college education, evidence suggests that individuals who complete college “add value” not only to their own lives, but also to the community. They are more likely to be more cognizant of their civic responsibility, including voting more often and assuming leadership roles in the community (Astin 1993; Bowen and Bok 1998).
Low-income individuals run a greater risk of failing to complete a college degree because they are less likely to enroll in college to begin with, particularly a four-year college. Moreover, those who do enroll are less likely to persist in college. Compared with high-income students, low-income students tend to exhibit more of the risk factors associated with dropping out of college, including (1) poor academic preparation and performance in high school, (2) full-time or part-time employment while in college, and (3) having dependent children (Adelman 1999; Horn and Premo 1995; Astin 1993). Only 62 percent of low-income students who enrolled in a four-year institution in 1995–1996 completed their degree or were still enrolled five years later, compared with 80 percent of high-income students.
Low-income students with children face additional obstacles in pursuing and reaching their educational goals. Despite numerous federal, state, and institution-based programs designed to help low-income students overcome the financial and academic barriers to completing a four-year degree, low-income parents face pressures associated with working to support their children and the extra expense of child care while they attend school. It is likely that low-income parents, particularly those who receive Pell Grants, qualify for subsidized child care through federal and state programs such as Head Start. However, these programs may not be accessible from the parents’ campuses, or they may not be available when needed, such as during evening classes or examination periods. In addition, some subsidized child care, such as Child Care Development Block Grants and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, is available only for working parents, not for parents enrolled in a postsecondary institution (CLASP 2003). Thus, the federal-, state-, and institution-based safety net designed to support low-income students may not offer the extra support needed by low-income parents.
b. The CCAMPIS Program
Recognizing that the obstacles to obtaining affordable, high-quality child care continue to prevent many low-income parents from attending and completing college, Congress established the CCAMPIS program in 1999. Authorized under Title IV, Part A, of the Higher Education Act (HEA) of 1965 (as amended), CCAMPIS “supports the participation of low-income parents in postsecondary education through the provision of campus-based child care services” (as stated in HEA, as amended). The idea is to remove child care as a barrier that typically forces low-income students to juggle the demands of family, school, and work. By providing access to affordable child care, the CCAMPIS program allows students to maximize their educational opportunities because they know that their children are safe and receiving high-quality care. As a result, students are likely to persist in college and graduate sooner than they otherwise might, find jobs, and set the stage for a promising future.
Postsecondary institutions are eligible for CCAMPIS grants in a fiscal year if the total amount of all federal Pell Grant funds awarded to students enrolled at the institution in the preceding fiscal year was at least $350,000. Institutions may apply CCAMPIS funds to a variety of activities, including supporting or establishing a campus-based child care program for its low-income students; establishing or expanding child care programs for infants and toddlers; offering before- and after-school services for older children; subsidizing the costs of child care services for low-income students; offering parent education programs; and investing in child care faculty, staff, programs, and curriculum.
The authorization to study the CCAMPIS program and collect data is granted by the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005 (P.L. 108-447), which provides funds specifically for data collection and evaluation activities for programs under HEA (see Appendix C for the relevant portion of the legislation). ED has contracted with Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. (MPR) to evaluate the CCAMPIS program.
c. The CCAMPIS Study
The CCAMPIS study was designed to provide a comprehensive picture of how postsecondary institutions have used their grants to help students gain access to affordable child care. The study will also explore the extent to which differences in child care services offered by institutions may be associated with differences in the persistence and graduation rates of low-income students with children.
The conceptual framework guiding the work illustrates how campus-based child care services may improve the educational outcomes of low-income students with children (Figure A-1). The framework takes into account the influences of students’ child care needs, institutional characteristics, and community resources; the services that CCAMPIS grants are used to fund; and both the short- and long-term outcomes that the CCAMPIS program aims to promote.
FIGURE A-1
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Child Care Needs
Institutional Characteristics
Community Child Care
Resources
CCAMPIS
Grant
New
Child Care Services
Spaces in Centers
Care during Flexible and
Nontraditional Hours
Subsidies
Sick Child Care
Improved
Attendance Better
Grades More
Credits Lower
Drop-Out Rates
Higher Rates of Degree
Completion
Research Questions and Study Components. Table A-1 lists the research questions that focused the study on specific elements in the conceptual framework. The table also identifies the study components through which each question is addressed: (1) the Child Care Survey for which we are seeking OMB clearance (the main component), (2) an analysis of secondary data sets, and (3) an analysis of financial aid administrative records. Although we will also design a child care survey of postsecondary students, it will not be implemented as part of the current study or the current contract.
TABLE A-1
Research Questions Addressed by Study Components
Research Question |
Study Component |
|
Child Care Survey (with institutional characteristics from IPEDS) |
|
Child Care Survey
|
|
Secondary data analysis |
|
Secondary data analysis |
|
Financial aid administrative records analysis |
*Originally this research question asked how child care providers at CCAMPIS grantee and comparison institutions perceive the effects of campus-based child care services on the persistence and graduation of the postsecondary students who use them. As institutions were unable to report this information—and recognizing the information’s importance—we will explore using financial aid administrative records to examine persistence and graduation rates.
The Child Care Survey. As revised, the Child Care Survey will address the first two research questions in Table A-1. That is, it will allow us to (1) describe and document the types and level of child care services provided by CCAMPIS institutions and (2) compare child care programs at institutions with CCAMPIS grants and at eligible institutions without CCAMPIS grants. The survey population is CCAMPIS-eligible institutions that offer child care services to postsecondary students. The survey focuses largely on the direct provision of on-campus child care centers (in response to research question one) and the child care services offered (in response to research question two). Specifically, the survey collects information on the topics presented in Table A-2.
TABLE A-2
Specific Survey
Topics Addressing Research Questions
Research Question |
Child Care Survey Section |
|
C. Operations and Accreditation |
|
|
|
A. Child Care Services and Funding B. Institutional Resources and Referrals C. Operations and Accreditation D. Access to Services |
|
E. Staff at On-Campus Centers |
|
F. Children of Postsecondary Students Using On-Campus Child Care Centers |
|
F. Children of Postsecondary Students Using On-Campus Child Care Centers |
|
G. Fees and Subsidies at On-Campus Centers |
The survey will provide detailed information on the types, patterns, and levels of child care services that postsecondary institutions offer to low-income students with children among CCAMPIS grantees and a matched group of non-grantees. It also will provide information on funding, fees and subsidies for services, and characteristics of the children who receive the services. OMB asked, at one point, whether this information could be obtained from CCAMPIS annual performance reports. While there are areas of overlap between the survey and annual performance reports, the survey provides broader coverage, more detail, and a standard reporting format that is more appropriate for quantitative analysis. OPE has attested to the importance of the survey information for program planning and monitoring.
In addition to its practical value, the survey also has considerable research value. It will provide rich descriptive information not only about grantee institutions, but also about a matched sample of non-grantee institutions. Without this information, there is no way to obtain comparable information about non-grantee institutions. The absence of comparable information would weaken any conclusions that might be drawn about the relationship of program funding or available child care services to the persistence rates calculated from the financial aid data. These comparisons are critical for meeting the goals of the financial aid study described below—we must first establish whether there are differences in the services provided by CCAMPIS and non-CCAMPIS institutions that offer child care to low-income students before we can reasonably attribute to the CCAMPIS program any differences we might find in the outcomes of students attending the two sets of institutions.
Appendix D provides a question-by-question justification for each item in the revised survey. Appendix E includes the following other materials that will be sent to sample members: two versions of an advance letter describing the study (one for CCAMPIS grantees and one for non-grantees); the initial email request with the sample member’s login identification and password; a follow-up email prompt; and frequently asked questions (FAQs).
Secondary Data Analyses. MPR will supplement its analysis of data from the Child Care Survey with an analysis of secondary data sets, including the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS),1 the National Postsecondary Education Student Aid Survey (NPSAS),2 and the Beginning Postsecondary Students (BPS) Longitudinal Study (BPS).3 Our descriptive analyses of the IPEDS data for 2001 and 2002 will both identify the proportion of Title IV postsecondary institutions that offered on-campus child care centers during those years and describe the characteristics of those institutions (in response to research question three). Analyses of IPEDS data in later years will indicate whether the number of postsecondary institutions with campus-based child care centers has changed over time (in response to research question four).
We will use NPSAS:2004 data to compute nationally representative counts and percentages of low-income students who might need child care (in response to research question three). That is, students whose youngest children are under 12 years old and students who reported having children in day care during the 2003-2004 school year will be identified as having a potential need for child care. Students who received a Pell Grant during the 2003-2004 school year will be identified as low-income.
We will use the BPS:96/01 data to measure the persistence and graduation outcomes of low-income students with children in 1995-1996 who were identified in NPSAS:96. We will use NPSAS:96 and BPS:96/01 to identify the characteristics of low-income students with children who do not persist in completing college (in response to research question three). We will also conduct descriptive analyses of the characteristics and circumstances of low-income students with children who do and do not persist and graduate from college, and we will conduct statistical tests to examine differences between the groups. We will use information about the characteristics of low-income students with children who do not persist and graduate in two ways: (1) to assess the extent to which the students using campus-based child care services in CCAMPIS and non-CCAMPIS institutions are at risk of not persisting and graduating, and (2) to help design the student survey.
Financial Aid Administrative Records Analysis. The objective of this exploratory study is to examine the relationship between persistence rates of low-income students with dependent children and the availability and types of child care provided by postsecondary institutions (in response to research question five). The study will track cohorts of students attending institutions in the Child Care Survey sample over a series of years to observe the extent to which applications for financial aid were made and Pell Grants were awarded from one year to the next, either at the starting institution or another institution. This information will indicate whether students continued in school—the CCAMPIS program’s primary goal. We also will examine the extent to which there are differences in retention and graduation rates between similar students with and without dependent children within the institutions in the sample. All data for the study will come from records provided by ED.
The exploratory analysis will determine whether we can draw conclusions about persistence and graduation rates from administrative data. To calculate persistence and graduation rates, we will assign students in the financial aid dataset to the institution for which they received a Pell Grant award in 2000-2001 or 2001-2002. These institutions correspond to those in the Child Care Survey sample: that is, they received a CCAMPIS grant in 2000-2001 or 2001-2002, or they were non-CCAMPIS institutions matched to a CCAMPIS grantee in those cohorts.
We will link persistence and retention rates for Pell Grant recipients with children (derived from the analyses of financial aid data) to data from the Child Care Survey by using a unique institutional identification number (the OPEID variable) contained within both data sets. This will allow us to examine whether there is a relationship between the various dimensions of child care services and persistence and retention rates. Key items from the Child Care Survey that will be used in descriptive and multivariate analysis in conjunction with the financial aid data are listed in Table A-3. The table also lists institution characteristics from IPEDS that will be used to conduct subgroup analyses.
TABLE A-3
items to be used in the analysis linking child care SURVEY and financial aid data
Data Source |
Variable |
Child Care Survey |
|
Institution resource and referral support |
B1 |
Relationships with off-campus centers and community and family child care providers |
B2, B5, B7 |
Availability of on-campus child care centers |
C1, F7 |
Child care services provided for postsecondary students |
A2, D2 |
Availability of subsidies for child care |
B10, G1-G3, G9-G11 |
FAFSA |
|
Institution’s average persistence rate (for low-income students with children) |
To be calculated |
Institution’s average graduation rate (for low-income students with children) |
To be calculated |
IPEDS |
|
Level (2-year or 4-year) |
ICLEVEL |
Control of institution (public, private for-profit, private not-for-profit) |
CONTROL |
Size of institution |
INSTSIZE |
Student Survey. The student survey design is being developed as an internal document for the Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE) to inform discussions about strategies for evaluating the performance of the CCAMPIS program. Results from the Child Care Survey and the two secondary analyses mentioned above will inform the student survey design.4 The sample will be drawn from students who attended the institutions selected for the Child Care Survey. This approach will allow us to link student-level data from this survey to institution-level data from Child Care Survey. The student survey will cover enrollment and academic performance, child care arrangments during class and while doing school-related work outside of class, child care cost, met and unmet child care needs, child care and school participation, employment, persistance and graduation, and demographic characteristics.
2. How, By Whom, and for What Purpose Information Is to Be Used
The Child Care Survey will give OPE the information it needs to monitor the CCAMPIS performance as ED strives to meet the HEA goals. By allowing us to thoroughly synthesize information on how CCAMPIS grantees use their funds and to compare child care services and assistance at grantee and nongrantee institutions, the survey will indicate whether and the extent to which grantees are better able than nongrantees to provide critical child care services to low-income students.
More broadly, the study findings will be useful for policymakers, postsecondary institutions, child care providers, and researchers. For policymakers, the findings can act both as input to decisions on funding child care services at postsecondary institutions and as a basis for supporting additional research on child care services. For postsecondary institutions, the findings could be the catalyst for the decision to offer more child care services for low-income students. For child care providers, the findings could inform program improvements. For others interested in improving persistence in and graduation from postsecondary institutions among low-income students with young children, the findings will support additional research on child care services. And for researchers and policymakers alike, the restricted-use data files—submitted to PPSS and disseminated accordingly—can be used for independent studies.
3. Use of Automated, Electronic, Mechanical, or Other Technological Collection Techniques
The Phase II data collection plan reflects sensitivity to issues of efficiency, accuracy, and respondent burden. Based on estimated completion times from Phase I respondents, highly burdensome questions were eliminated from the Phase II survey.
To conduct the survey, we will use a Web-based data collection method. The Web-based survey will be programmed to accept only valid responses and to check for logical consistency across answers. Respondents will thus be able to correct any errors as they complete the survey, minimizing the need for later contacts to obtain missing data or clarify inconsistent data. An added advantage of Web-based data collection is that respondents are able to complete the survey at their convenience. An initial email sent to sample members will contain a URL link to the Web survey, along with a unique user ID and password.
Individuals who choose not to respond to the survey via the Web will be able to request participation through two other modes: (1) standard mail and (2) telephone. It is crucial to offer these other modes of response in order to make the survey as convenient as possible, thus increasing the response rate. These two modes of survey data collection will also be used as follow-up methods to secure responses from those who do not complete the Web-based version of the survey. Users who have not completed the survey will receive periodic email reminders encouraging them to do so, and hard-to-reach cases will be sent to our calling department. For respondents with substantive or technical questions, the Web application will provide a link to FAQs and another link to an email address for submitting questions. In addition, the advance letter will contain MPR’s electronic mail address and toll-free telephone number as well as FAQs for respondents who may have questions. These procedures are all designed to minimize the burden on respondents and maximize participation.
4. Efforts to Avoid Duplication of Effort
The data collection effort will yield unique data for the CCAMPIS program. While CCAMPIS grantees submit performance reports to ED, the reports do not collect the detailed data requested in this study. For example, the performance report asks for the number of Pell Grant recipients using the institution’s child care services, but it does not request information about the nature of the child care services provided or the children using those services. Further, no such data have been collected from similar non-CCAMPIS institutions to allow for a comparison of characteristics of child care services and children using those services at the two types of institutions.
No other survey data collection effort has been conducted or planned to collect similar information. Moreover, the data collection plan reflects careful attention to potential sources of information, particularly with respect to the reliability of the information and the efficiency associated with gathering it. When possible, we will obtain information from secondary data sources. The data collection plan avoids unnecessary collection of information from multiple sources.
5. Sensitivity to Burden on Small Entities
The respondents for the study are postsecondary institutions with at least $350,000 in Pell Grant funds awarded to their students. Burden is minimized for all respondents by requesting only the minimum data required to meet the study objectives and carefully specifying information needs, restricting questions to generally available information, providing technical assistance to respondents, and deliberately designing the data collection strategy.
6. Consequences to Federal Program or Policy Activities if the Collection Is Not Conducted or Is Conducted Less Frequently Than Proposed
Absent a survey of CCAMPIS and eligible non–CCAMPIS institutions, policymakers will know little about whether the CCAMPIS program is an appropriate policy response for increasing the availability of child care services for low-income students. Without the study, federal resources would be allocated and program decisions made without the benefit of data describing program implementation and documenting differences in the child care services provided for low-income parents by CCAMPIS and non–CCAMPIS grantees. In addition, if the data are not collected, policymakers, higher education leaders, and college administrators will be unable to determine whether the safety net provided by the CCAMPIS program should be cast more broadly across the postsecondary sector.
Data collection for the study will use a point-in-time survey whereby information on CCAMPIS and non–CCAMPIS institutions nationwide will be collected only once.
7. Special Circumstances
There are no special circumstances.
8. Federal Register Announcement and Consultation
a. Federal Register Announcement
The 30-day comment period notice for the Phase II collection was published on June 8, 2007. No public comments were received during the comment periods for the Phase I data collection. The Regulatory Information Management Services (RIMS) has not received any comments to date.
b. Consultations Outside the Agency
None.
c. Unresolved Issues
None.
9. Payment or Gift to Respondents
Respondents are directors of child care programs at postsecondary institutions selected for participation in the study. They will not be offered any financial incentives or gifts.
10. Confidentiality of The Data
The data collection efforts that are the focus of this clearance package will be conducted in accordance with all relevant federal regulations and requirements, including the federal common rule or Department final regulations on protection of human research subjects. The questions in the survey focus on the characteristics of child care programs and children using child care services—both at CCAMPIS and non–CCAMPIS institutions. Privacy Act-protected data will not be collected as part of this submission.
Mathematica Policy Research, the contractor conducting the survey, will take appropriate measures, including those specific to Web-based materials, such as establishing firewalls and passwords, to ensure complete confidentiality. Data will be presented in aggregate statistical form only, and the following statement will be included in the advance letters sent to respondents:
Responses to this data collection will be used only for statistical purposes. The reports prepared for this study will summarize findings across the sample and will not associate responses with a specific institution or individual. We will not provide information that identifies you or your institution to anyone outside the study team, except as required by law.
Upon hiring, all MPR employees are required to sign a confidentiality pledge stating that they will protect the privacy rights of survey respondents (Appendix F). Moreover, access to identifying information is limited to those whose project roles demand it and only for the period of time in which they need it. In addition, MPR will employ physical safeguards, such as use of locked files and cabinets and shredders for discarded materials, to protect the data and prevent unauthorized access.
11. Additional Justification for Sensitive Questions
The questionnaire will include no questions of a highly sensitive nature. The questions focus on information about types of campus-based child care programs offered, the numbers of children of postsecondary students using child care services, characteristics of the children in child care (age, special needs), the types of programs available (before- or after-school programs, hours of operation, age ranges of children served), and fees paid and subsidies provided.
12. Estimates of Hour Burden
The total reporting burden associated with completing the survey for the Phase II data collection is about 322 hours (see Table A-4). This is based on 80 percent of the 604 Phase II sample members completing the survey, giving us 483 Phase II respondents. We are estimating an 80-percent Phase II response rate, as we obtained an 79-percent response rate in Phase I with a more burdensome survey (57 of 72 Phase I sample members completed the Phase I survey). Thus, we are projecting a total of 540 respondents: an estimated 483 completes from Phase II and 57 actual completes from Phase I, for an overall response rate of 80 percent.
|
Phase I (Actual) |
Phase II (Estimated) |
Total |
Sample Size* |
72 |
604 |
676 |
Response Rate |
79% |
80% |
80% |
Respondents |
57 |
483 |
540 |
Avg. Survey Length |
120 |
40 |
48 |
Burden |
114 |
322 |
436 |
*Some non-CCAMPIS institutions were matched with more than one of the 352 CCAMPIS institutions. The burden estimate counts each of these institutions only once.
The burden estimate of 322 hours for Phase II is also based on an average of 40 minutes per complete. This estimate is derived from the completion times reported by Phase I respondents who did not answer Pell Grant data questions. (Those questions were very time-consuming and have been removed from the Phase II survey.) It also takes into account the deletion of some questions on off-campus centers and fees and subsidies, as well as the deletion of persistence and graduation questions, per the August 2007 discussions with OMB. (The Appendix G memo summarizing the results of Phase I provides detailed information on respondent burden.) Individual institutions’ burden will vary depending on whether an institution has on-campus centers. Burden will be slightly greater for CCAMPIS grantees, as a small number of survey questions are asked only of CCAMPIS institutions.
13. Estimate of Total Annual Cost Burden to Respondents or Record-Keepers
None.
14. Estimates of Annualized Cost to the Federal Government
The estimated cost to the federal government for both Phase I and Phase II of the CCAMPIS study is $827,091 over a three-year period. Thus, the average annual cost of the institutional survey and analysis is $275,697. Costs include a comprehensive literature review, the analysis of grantees’ performance report data, the analysis of secondary data sets, two phases of data collection, and the study design and instrument development for a survey of low-income postsecondary students with children. The student survey, which will not be implemented as part of the current study, will collect information from students about their child care needs, their levels and patterns of child care use, and their educational outcomes.
15. Reasons for Program Changes or Adjustments
This revised submission includes an increase in the number of respondents from 57 (79 percent of the Phase I sample of 72) to 483 (80 percent of the Phase II sample of 604), for a total of 540 respondents. The revised submission also includes a decrease in the average reporting burden from 2 hours to 40 minutes. The decreased burden estimate is based on actual completion times from Phase I and the elimination of several survey questions. With these changes, we estimate that the total reporting burden will increase from 114 to 436 hours.
This revised submission also includes an increase in the estimated annualized cost to the federal government from $214,768 to $275,697. The higher cost reflects the addition of a comprehensive literature review and the two-phase approach to data collection. To accommodate the additional work, the study timeline has increased by one year.
16. Plan for Tabulation and Publication, and Schedule for Project
The analysis of survey data will be guided by a conceptual framework (Figure A-1) that illustrates how campus-based child care services may improve the educational outcomes of low-income students with children. The analysis, based largely on descriptive and quantitative analyses of data obtained through the survey of child care program directors, will be supplemented by analyses of IPEDS, NPSAS, and other secondary data sources. The analyses of Child Care Survey data will investigate the prevalence of on-campus centers, the types and arrangements of services provided, characteristics of child care providers and of the children who use services, patterns and levels of use, fees paid and subsidies provided for child care services, and other child care program characteristics at CCAMPIS and non–CCAMPIS institutions. The secondary data analyses will examine the prevalence and characteristics of postsecondary institutions that offer campus-based child care services, and the change in the prevalence and characteristics over time. Last, the analysis will explore what can be learned from financial aid administrative records about the persistence and graduation rates of low-income students with children of child care age.
Through analyses of the survey data, we will determine whether the CCAMPIS grants appear to allow institutions to provide more comprehensive child care support tailored to the specific needs of low-income parents. The data, when combined with the secondary analysis, will allow detailed subgroup analyses to determine how the provision of child care services varies across different types of institutions by, for example, size, urbanicity, and percentage of low-income parents enrolled. Also, by linking institutions’ persistence and retention rates derived from the analyses of financial aid data, with data collected through the Child Care Survey, we will be able to examine whether relationships exist between various patterns and levels of child care services and institutions’ persistence and retention rates. Analysis plans are described more fully below.
a. Tabulation Plans
Descriptive Analyses and Comparisons. Descriptive analyses will address the research questions on the characteristics of postsecondary institutions offering child care services to low-income students, the characteristics of child care programs at those institutions, and the types of child care services offered. The analyses will also respond to research questions on the prevalence over time of child care centers. Weighted means and distributions will be estimated for individual variables as appropriate.
Group Comparisons. To assess whether CCAMPIS grants are enhancing access to and the availability of campus-based child care services, we will compare the prevalence of on-campus centers and the types of services offered at CCAMPIS and matched non–CCAMPIS institutions. Some of the differences in other factors will be minimized through the Propensity Score Matching conducted in selecting the sample of non–CCAMPIS institutions. Multivariate analyses that control for other differences among the institutions and their students that may influence services and outcomes also will be estimated to isolate, to the extent possible, the role of CCAMPIS. Similarly, multivariate regression analyses will be done to examine the relationship between institutions’ persistence rates and type of institution (CCAMPIS versus non-CCAMPIS) and child care services, while controlling for other differences among the institutions and their students that may impact the variables of interest. The group comparisons will focus on weighted comparisons between CCAMPIS grantee and similar nongrantee institutions. (An example of a comparison item is the general availability of child care for students on campus.)
We will make statistical comparisons between CCAMPIS and matched non–CCAMPIS institutions, services, and children by using t-tests when comparing means of specific characteristics and by using chi-squared tests when comparing differences in the distribution of characteristics. Finally, we will use the linked file containing financial aid data and survey data to compare average persistence rates between CCAMPIS and non-CCAMPIS institutions and by responses to the survey item questions indicated in Table A-3.
Subgroup Analyses. We will conduct descriptive analyses to examine the characteristics of key subgroups of CCAMPIS and similar non–CCAMPIS institutions offering campus-based child care services. We will compare data from the subgroups to explore whether CCAMPIS grants appear to be more effective with certain types of institutions. We will examine subgroups with the following characteristics, among others:
Institutional location (rural, suburban, or urban location; geographic region)
Type of institution (less than two-year, two-year, and four-year institutions)
Institutional control (public, private)
Institution size (number of students enrolled, annual number of graduates, or number of faculty members)
Levels of expenditure (educational and general expenditures per student)
b. Publication Plans
The final report is scheduled to be completed in August 2008, following the completion of data collection and analysis. The report will describe the extent and nature of child care services offered by Title IV institutions (both CCAMPIS and non–CCAMPIS grantees) and will present the study findings. Findings will include a description of the prevalence of on-campus centers and the types of child care services offered at CCAMPIS and comparable non–CCAMPIS institutions.
c. Schedule
Table A-5 shows the current study schedule as well as a proposed schedule for completing Phase II data collection, data analysis, and development of the study report, based on receiving OMB clearance by the end of 2007.
TABLE A-5
Schedule of Activities
Activity |
Schedule – Current Contract |
Proposed Completion Schedule |
Study design |
October 2005–January 2006 |
|
Sample selection |
February 2006–October 2006 |
|
Preparation of Web-based application |
February 2006–September 2006 |
|
Phase I data collection |
January 2007–March 2007 |
|
Phase II (full implementation) data collection |
September 2007 – November 2007 |
January 2008–March 2008 |
Data analysis |
December 2007–February 2008 |
April 2008–June 2008 |
Report |
March 2008–August 2008 |
July 2008–December 2008 |
17. Approval Not to Display the Expiration Date for OMB Approval
Approval not to display the expiration date for OMB approval is not requested.
18. Exception to the Certification Statement
No exceptions to the certification statement are being sought.
1 IPEDS is a single, comprehensive database designed to encompass all institutions and educational organizations whose primary purpose is to provide postsecondary education. It contains institution-level data in areas such as enrollment, program completions, faculty, staff, and finances.
2 NPSAS provides data on the costs of postsecondary education, the distribution of financial aid, the characteristics of aided and non-aided students and their families, and the number and ages of students’ dependent children.
3 BPS collects data longitudinally on cohorts of students first interviewed in NPSAS to find out about undergraduate experiences, persistence in school, degree completion, and employment following enrollment.
4 As noted previously, we are not requesting OMB clearance for the student survey design. If OPE elects to fund it, the study will be conducted under a separate contract
| File Type | application/msword |
| File Title | MEMORANDUM |
| Author | Donna Smith |
| Last Modified By | Sheila.Carey |
| File Modified | 2007-12-19 |
| File Created | 2007-12-19 |
© 2024 OMB.report | Privacy Policy