Mealtime with Toddlers in CACFP OMB Memo Final

Memorandum

Date: July 15, 2019

To: James Crowe, OMB Desk Officer, Food and Nutrition Service

Through: Christina Sandberg, Food and Nutrition Service, Information Collection Clearance Officer, Planning & Regulatory Affairs; C.S.

Ruth Brown, United States Department of Agriculture, Office of Chief Information Office, Department Clearance Officer

From: Alicia White, Chief, Nutrition Education and Promotion Branch, NETTA, Child Nutrition Programs, USDA – Food and Nutrition Service

Re: Under Approved Generic OMB Clearance No. 0584-0524 Request for Approval to Perform Formative Research to Develop Feeding Toddlers Resource Development

The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is requesting approval for formative research under approved Generic OMB Clearance No. 0584-0524 Generic Clearance to Conduct Formative Research.

This request is to acquire clearance to conduct formative research in Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) sites with child care providers and child care directors to inform the development of training materials. This research will collect feedback from the target audience to understand critical perceptions, attitudes, and preferences to inform the development of these materials. Participation in this research activity is voluntary.

The following information is provided for your review:

1. Title of the Project: Mealtimes with Toddlers in the Child and Adult Care Food Program

2. Control Number: 0584-0524, Expires 09/30/2019

3. Public Affected by this Project:

State and Local/Tribal Employees

• Directors at CACFP child care centers (child care center directors)

• Classroom providers at CACFP child care centers (child care center providers)

• Staff at family day care homes participating in CACFP (family day care home staff)

See section 7, Project Purpose, Methodology & Formative Research Design, for a description of the number of participants for each audience by research methodology.

4. Number of Respondents:

Table 4.1 - Recruitment communication, eligibility, and consent
	Total # of participants*	# of Responders	# of Non-Responders
Initial recruitment communications
Child Care Center Directors	240	120	120
Child Care Center Providers	320	160	160
Family Day Care Home Staff	160	80	80
Screener for research participation
Child Care Center Directors	240	120	120
Child Care Center Providers	320	160	160
Family Day Care Home Staff	160	80	80
Follow up recruitment communications
Child Care Center Directors	120	36	84
Child Care Center Providers	160	48	112
Family Day Care Home Staff	80	24	56
Scheduling communications
Child Care Center Directors	36	18	18
Child Care Center Providers	48	24	24
Family Day Care Home Staff	24	12	12
Consent forms for research participation
Child Care Center Directors	18	12	6
Child Care Center Providers	24	16	8
Family Day Care Home Staff	12	8	4
Totals	720	360	360
*The total number of participants and respondents shown are the total unique participants and respondents for the collection.

Table 4.2 - Research activities
	Total # of participants*	# of Responders	# of Non-Responders
Review research stimulus
Child Care Center Directors	18	12	6
Child Care Center Providers	24	16	8
Family Day Care Home Staff	12	8	4
In-depth interview
Child Care Center Directors	18	12	6
Child Care Center Providers	24	16	8
Family Day Care Home Staff	12	8	4
Totals	54	36	18
*The total number of participants and respondents shown are the total unique participants and respondents for the collection.

5. Time Needed Per Response:

Table 5.1 - Time Needed per recruitment & consent by audience*
Target Audience	Activity	Time (minutes)	Time (hours)
Child Care Center Directors	Director recruitment communications (Attachments A, C, D, & E)	9	0.15
Child Care Center Providers	Provider recruitment communications (Attachments B, C, & E)	7	0.12
Family Day Care Home (FDCH) Staff	FDCH recruitment communications (Attachments A, C, D, & E)	9	0.15
All Participants (Directors, Providers, FDCH Staff)	Participant screener (Attachment L)	3	0.05
	Follow up communications (Attachment F)	4	0.07
	Provider scheduling communications (Attachments G, H, I, & J)	8	0.13
	Participant consent form (Attachment K)	5	0.08
*Time needed is reported by audience separately for the recruitment communications as these strategies will differ by audience, but in aggregate for scheduling communications, screeners, and consent forms as these will not differ by audience.

Table 5.2 – Time Needed for Research Activities

Target Audience	Research Activity	Time (minutes)	Time (hours)
All Participants (Directors, Providers, FDCH Staff)	Review Research Stimulus & Research Introduction (Attachments M, Q, & R)	17	0.28
	In-depth Interview (Attachments N , O, Q, R, S & T)	30	0.50

6. Total Burden Hours on Public: 167 hours and 2,070 total responses. FNS expects that approximately 95% of the child care centers and FDCHs will be considered small entities. Out of the total 720 respondents, FNS estimates that 342 (48%) will be small entities.

   Table 6.1 - Estimated burden by activity and respondent type for both respondents and non-respondents
   						Respondents						Non-Respondents
   Affected Public	Respondent Type	Activities	Appendices		# Participants^	# Respondents^	Frequency of Response	Est. Total Annual Responses per Respondent		Hours per Response3	Total Burden Hours	# Non-respondents	Frequency of non-response	Est. Total Annual Responses per Non-Respondent	Hours per Response3	Total Burden Hours	Total
   State, Local/Tribal Employees	Child Care Center Directors	Initial recruitment communications	A, C, D, & E		240^	120^	1	120		0.15	18.00	120^	1	120	0.05	6.00	24.00
   		Screener	L		240	120	1	120		0.05	6.00	120	1	120	0.05	6.00	12.00
   		Follow up recruitment communication	F		120	36	1	36		0.07	2.52	84	1	84	0.05	4.20	6.72
   		Scheduling Communications	G, H, I, & J		36	18	1	18		0.13	2.34	18	1	18	0.05	0.90	3.24
   		Consent Form	K		18	12	1	12		0.08	0.96	6	1	6	0.05	0.30	1.26
   		Review Research Stimuli1	M, Q, & R		18	12	1	12		0.28	3.36	6	1	6	0.05	0.30	3.66
   		In-Depth Interview2	N, O, Q, R, S, & T		18	12	1	12		0.50	6.00	6	1	6	0.05	0.30	6.30
   	Child Care Center Providers	Recruitment Communications	B, C, & E		320^	160^	1	160		0.12	19.20	160^	1	160	0.05	8.00	27.20
   		Screener	L		320	160	1	160		0.05	8.00	160	1	160	0.05	8.00	16.00
   		Follow up recruitment communication	F		160	48	1	48		0.07	3.36	112	1	112	0.05	5.60	8.96
   		Scheduling Communications	G, H, I, & J		48	24	1	24		0.13	3.12	24	1	24	0.05	1.20	4.32
   		Consent Form	K		24	16	1	16		0.08	1.28	8	1	8	0.05	0.40	1.68
   		Review Research Stimuli1	M, Q, & R		24	16	1	16		0.28	4.48	8	1	8	0.05	0.40	4.88
   		In-Depth Interview2	N, O, Q, R, S, & T		24	16	1	16		0.50	8.00	8	1	8	0.05	0.40	8.40
   	Family Day Care Home Staff	Initial recruitment communications	A, C, D, & E		160^	80^	1	80		0.15	12.00	80^	1	80	0.05	4.00	16.00
   		Screener	L		160	80	1	80		0.05	4.00	80	1	80	0.05	4.00	8.00
   		Follow up recruitment communication	F		80	24	1	24		0.07	1.68	56	1	56	0.05	2.80	4.48
   		Scheduling Communications	G, H, I, & J		24	12	1	12		0.13	1.56	12	1	12	0.05	0.60	2.16
   		Consent Form	K		12	8	1	8		0.08	0.64	4	1	4	0.05	0.20	0.84
   		Review Research Stimuli1	M, Q, & R		12	8	1	8		0.28	2.24	4	1	4	0.05	0.20	2.44
   		In-Depth Interview2	N, O, Q, R, S, & T		12	8	1	8		0.50	4.00	4	1	4	0.05	0.20	4.20
   Total	Total State, local/tribal employee burden			720		360			990		112.74	360		1,080		54.00	166.74
   ^=Unique participants respondents affected by this data collection. All other numbers provided for tasks in these columns represent duplicate respondents.
   1=The total burden of 17 min. includes 2 minutes to read the Research introduction (Attachment M) and 15 min. to read the handout (Attachments Q & R)
   2=The 30 min. burden for Guideline for in-depth interview (Attachments N & O) includes burden listed for Attachments Q, R, S & T
   3=Burden time for non-responders on all recruitment, consent, and research activities is estimated at 3 min.

7. Project Purpose, Methodology, and Formative Research Design

Background

The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) administers the nutrition assistance programs of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). The mission of FNS is to work with partners to provide food and nutrition education to people in need in a way that inspires public confidence and supports American agriculture. Among these programs is the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP), which provides aid to child and adult care institutions and family or group day care homes for the provision of nutritious foods that contribute to the wellness, growth, and development of young children, and the health and wellness of older adults and chronically impaired disabled persons. Through CACFP, more than 4.4 million children and 131,000 adults receive nutritious meals and snacks each day.

The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 (HHFKA) mandated updates to the requirement of meals and snacks served in the CACFP in order to reflect the science behind the nutritional needs of CACFP’s diverse participants. The updated meal standards for CACFP were published in the Federal Register on April 2016 as 7 CFR parts 210, 215, 220, et al Child and Adult Care Food Program: Meal Pattern Revisions Related to the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010; Final Rule, and hereby known as the “Final Rule.” The Final Rule includes updates to the CACFP meal pattern requirements.

Team Nutrition is a FNS initiative that supports the Child Nutrition Programs through training and technical assistance for foodservice, nutrition education for children and their caregivers, and school and community support for healthy eating and physical activity. Under the Team Nutrition initiative, FNS is creating an 8-page handout (hereby known as Mealtimes With Toddlers in the CACFP) to assist CACFP providers in meeting the updated CACFP meal pattern for children ages 1-2 years. The handout will be made available to CACFP operators in English and Spanish. In conjunction with the handout, three 1-2 minute videos will be developed in both English and Spanish.

Purpose

The objective of this formative research is to collect feedback from CACFP child care providers and directors that will inform the development of the resources described above. Specifically, this study seeks to:

• Understand CACFP operators’ perceived challenges to feeding toddlers in a child care setting;

• Understand how providers and directors currently learn about CACFP-related practices and information (i.e. videos, trainings, handouts) and how they want to learn;

• Ensure the information, images, and materials:

  • Clearly communicate the meal pattern for children 1-2 years old and the differences between the meal pattern requirements of the five age groups (under 12 mos., 12-13 mos., 13-23 mos. 24-35 months, and 3-5 years);

  • Are relevant, engaging, relatable, and reflective of the diversity of the CACFP child care providers; and

  • Effectively motivate providers and directors to change their practices.

• Learn if the Toddler Transitions in CACFP materials, video concepts, and video instructional format effectively communicate detailed information about ways to encourage young children to try new foods and beverages, the feeding skills and behaviors of toddlers as compared to infants and older children, and how to identify and manage the behaviors that impact meal and snack time;

• Identify and understand contextual, cultural, and attitudinal variables that may inhibit or engender the utilization of the Mealtimes With Toddlers in the CACFP materials and adoption of the communicated information; and

• Understand how the resource and videos will be used by CACFP child care providers.
  
  

Methodology/Research Design

To meet the objectives described above, we will conduct 30-minute in-depth interviews (IDIs) with 36 directors and providers from diverse child care settings (see Sampling for details), that serve diverse families in terms of race, ethnicity, and cultural ancestry.

In-depth interviews (IDIs) will be conducted over the phone at a time that is convenient for each participant. Providers will briefly describe the challenges to feeding toddlers before providing specific feedback about the research stimulus. In particular, we will focus on their comprehension and perceived relevance and usability of the materials, the extent to which the materials would motivate them and any language or terms that are unclear or confusing. Participants will also provide feedback about video concepts and audition tapes.

Interview guidelines (see Attachments N & O) are grounded in established qualitative research methodologies¹. Trained researchers will conduct all in-depth interviews over the phone using semi-structured interview guidelines and an open-ended approach, giving the moderator freedom to spontaneously reword questions, establish rapport, and prod areas of conversation that were salient for the participant². Spanish-language interviews will be conducted by native Spanish speakers (see Attachment O).

All hard copies of the handouts (see Attachments Q & R) will be mailed prior to the interview to allow time for more than a cursory review. The handouts will be accompanied by an introduction letter (Attachment M) to remind participants about their responsibilities.

Participants will be reminded via text, email, or phone (see Attachments H, I, & J) to review the handout prior to the interview, and we will confirm that participants have already reviewed the materials at the start of each interview. Interviews will be rescheduled if participants indicate or demonstrate they have not reviewed the materials. Participants will receive a link to watch audition clips and video concepts (see Attachments S, T, U, & V) during the interview via text. This method is preferred, as providers may not have reliable access to a computer during the interview if it takes place during work hours, but we will also offer email links for those with computer access.

Design/Sampling Procedures

Our sampling strategy will consider several key variables related to the audiences that will use the materials: 1) primary language of the audience; 2) race, ethnicity, and cultural ancestry of the providers; 3) type of child care site; 4) child care provider responsibility; 5) geographic location; 6) population density; and 7) providers’ gender.

Primary language. Since a primary objective of the study is to evaluate the Spanish translation of the materials, 50% of the sample will be conducted with Spanish-speaking, Hispanic providers. Within the Hispanic sample, we will recruit providers from multiple cultural backgrounds to represent the diversity of U.S. Hispanic populations and ensure the Spanish materials integrate language that is widely understood and utilized by multiple cultural groups.

Race, ethnicity, and cultural ancestry. The 2017 employment data from the Department of Labor Employment Statistics shows 19.4% of workers in “Child Day Care Services” are Black/African-American and 3.9% are Asian/Pacific Islander, while the majority are White (77.3%). Using these figures to construct our sample isn’t feasible given the small sample size (e.g. 3.9% of 18 interviewees is .5), so we oversample Black/African American and Asian/Pacific Islander providers and include a small sample of Native American providers to ensure a diversity of opinions (see Table D.1 below). We will target specific zip codes within each target state that have large communities of each target Race/Ethnicity and Culture, as the providers in these communities are more likely to match the Race/Ethnicity and/or culture of the surrounding community.

Table D.1 - Provider's Race, Ethnicity, & Culture by State and FNS Region
	IDIs in Spanish (N=18)			IDIs in English (N=18)				Total
	Hispanic - Mexican	Hispanic - Puerto Rican	Hispanic - Other	Asian/ Pacific Islander	Black/ African American	Native American	White
California West	6		1	2				9
West Virginia Mid-Atlantic			1		1		3	5
Louisiana Southwest	1		2		3		1	7
Florida Southeast		5	1		2			8
South Dakota Mountain Plains			1			2	4	7
TOTAL	7	5	6	2	6	2	8	36

Type of child care site. Considerable differences exist between family day care homes (FDCH) and child care centers. However, the most recent available data from the National Center for Educational Statistics³ shows that fewer children ages 1-2 years attend non-relative home-based care (7.9%) than center-based care (24.7%). We will therefore target eight FDCHs and 28 child care centers to approximate the distribution of child care arrangements among toddlers. In addition, within the sample of child care centers our final sample will include a diversity of center size.

Child care provider responsibility. Since child care directors and classroom providers each bring unique perspective and expertise, we will sample both directors (n=12), classroom providers (n=16), and FDCH staff (n=8) across the Spanish- and English-speaking samples (see Table D.2 below). In FDCHs, the director and classroom provider are often the same person, so we will consider this sample of participants separately.

Table D.2 – Distribution of provider responsibilities across site type and language.
	Spanish		English
Site Type	# Directors	# of Providers	# Directors	# of Providers
Family Day Care Home	n=4		n= 4
Child Care Centers	n=6	n=8	n=6	n=8

Geographic Location. We will sample providers from five states, each in a different FNS Region – California, Florida, Louisiana, South Dakota, and West Virginia (see Table D.1). These states were chosen with input from FNS and in order to sample specific communities (e.g. Puerto Rican providers in Florida, rural Black/African American providers in Louisiana).

Population Density. The final sample of providers will represent a diversity of urban, suburban, and rural communities as measured by the USDA’s Rural-Urban Continuum (RUC) code.

Providers’ gender. The 2017 Dept. of Labor Statistics employment data shows 6% of workers in “Child Day Care Services” are male. While a small percentage, it is nevertheless crucial to understand their experience and perspectives. However, it’s not possible to target specific locations with more male providers, so a firm target will be challenging. We will therefore collect information about gender in our screeners and aim to recruit four male providers. Collecting information about gender is critical for this data collection because men are typically underrepresented in the child care industry, so their opinions about these materials will be important to understand.

Finally, we will collect provider’s age and years of experience on the participant screener (see Attachment L). While we will not use this data to sample participants, we will report this information to capture this variation and ensure we’re interpreting the findings accurately.

Recruitment and Consent

Using the sampling plan detailed above, we will utilize multi-method, OMB-compliant recruitment strategies to efficiently recruit research sites, child care directors, and child care providers. These strategies will be adapted from previously successful efforts to recruit educational sites, site operators, and classroom providers in previous FNS contracts. All consent forms and research methods were reviewed by an external IRB and determined to be exempt from IRB oversight (see Attachment P).

In order to ensure recruitment and fielding occur on schedule, we will work with FNS to identify potentially interested stakeholders and gatekeepers by networking through relevant professional organizations (e.g. National CACFP Sponsors Association, National Association for the Education of Young Children, and National Head Start Association) that can facilitate site recruitment after OMB clearance. In addition, we will build a database of potential sites that fit the specifications described above using reliable data sources (e.g. child care councils, state agency websites, community action groups, National Center for Education Statistics). This database will include contact information and site characteristics that are relevant to the sampling plan.

Once OMB approval is granted, we will proceed with recruitment in a few phases: 1) Initial interest and eligibility; 2) eligibility and scheduling; and 3) confirmation and consent.

Phase 1: Initial Interest and Eligibility

First, site directors will be contacted to assess interest and eligibility, using one of three strategies:

1. Flyers. Flyers will be mailed to directors (Attachment A) inviting them to participate and encouraging them to sign up online. Enclosed with the flyer will be additional provider flyers (Attachment B) to distribute to providers at the site inviting their participation.

2. Phone calls. The research team will call sites directly to invite directors and/or providers to participate (see Attachment C). Any interested directors or providers will receive a follow up email (Attachment E) with instructions for signing up online.

3. Emails. The research team will email (Attachment D) directors inviting them to participate and sign up online.

Phase 2: Confirming Eligibility and Scheduling

Providers and directors will sign up for the interview by completing the online screener (Attachment L) to determine their eligibility.

Once participants have completed the screener, they will receive a phone call (Attachment F) from a member of the research team. During this call, the research team will schedule the interview, and ask for the participant's mailing address to send the materials. The participant will also be asked which mode of communication is best to receive a reminder of their interview (Attachments H, I, and J).

Phase 3: Confirmation and Consent

After the interview has been scheduled, participants will receive a confirmation email (Attachment G) with the date and time for their interview and a link to complete the online consent form (Attachment K).

Prior to their interview, participants will receive an email (Attachment I), call (Attachment H), or text (Attachment J) reminding them of their scheduled interview, depending on their preferred communication method.

Compensation

Site Stipend. Research sites will receive a $25 Visa gift card as a reimbursement for any costs associated with paying additional staff to maintain mandated adult-child classroom ratios while providers participate in the interview.

The participating providers will need to complete an in-depth interview during working hours, which will require them to leave the classroom. However, child care sites are required to maintain low adult-child ratios in the classroom to be licensed by the state. Table D.3 below shows the requirements for the five states in which research is proposed⁴. Therefore we anticipate some sites will have to hire temporary staff to be in the classroom while the participating providers complete their interview, and that this may be a burden for sites, which in turn could be a barrier to research participation.

Table D.3 - Adult-child ratios required by state agencies for licensing by age group
	12-17 months	18-23 Months	24 to 35 Month
California	1 to 4	1 to 6	1 to 6
West Virginia	1 to 4	1 to 4	1 to 8
Louisiana	1 to 6	1 to 8	1 to 8
Florida	1 to 6	1 to 6	1 to 6
South Dakota	1 to 5	1 to 5	1 to 5

Table D.4 - Average hourly wages by state
State	Average hourly wage
California	$13.30
Florida	$10.73
Louisiana	$9.29
South Dakota	$10.19
West Virginia	$10.17
Total	$10.74

To encourage participation, we propose a $25 reimbursement. This figure is derived from approximately two hours at the average hourly rate of child care workers (SOC code 399011) in the five states in which research is proposed⁵ (see table D.4). We anticipate sites will need to incentivize temporary staff to cover the classroom by guaranteeing a minimum of two hours of pay, as they will have to turn down other employment opportunities.

Data Analysis

Qualitative Data. All IDIs will be audio-recorded (with respondent permission) and transcribed. This text will become the data for qualitative analysis. Codes, representing new insights and relevant participant experiences and opinions, will be identified using Grounded Theory, by which codes and themes are allowed to emerge from the text (Corbin & Strauss, 1990; Glaser, 1992; Henwood & Pidgeon, 2003; Walker & Myrick, 2006) and entered into the NVivo software package in order to organize themes. In order to ensure that individuals did not bias findings, multiple researchers will code interview transcriptions, and themes will be compared and synthesized in Qualitative Debriefing Sessions. Findings will be considered descriptive and directional, but not definitive. No attempt will be made to generalize findings as nationally representative.

Outcomes/Findings

Information and formative input gathered from target audiences through the research will help refine materials so the materials are relevant, meaningful, and easy-to-use as well as educationally and pedagogically effective. Research summary findings may be published either electronically or in print, but such documents will not include information that personally identifies any of the research participants.

8. Confidentiality:

Personally identifiable information will be collected via the participant screener, which includes the Privacy Act Statement, and this information will be protected as described in this section. System of Record Notice FNS-8, FNS Studies and Reports, published in the Federal Register on 4/25/1991 at 56 FR 19078, covers personal information collected under this research and identifies safeguards for the information collected.

Participants will be informed of measures to maintain privacy and data security on the participant consent form (Attachment K), including file storage and de-identified data. Prior to completing in-depth interviews (see Attachments N & O), participants will be reminded that their name will not be attached to their comments or shared outside the research team.

The research team will take several precautions to maintain the privacy of research participants, including de-identification of screener responses, notes, and transcripts. The research team will not disclose the participant’s name or any personally identifiable information in any report or presentation. The information will be kept secure and will only be used for research purposes, except as otherwise required by law. All data will be identified only by an ID number assigned by the research team, not by any name. Only de-identified data will be shared with individuals outside of the immediate research team, unless it is necessary to protect participants, or if required by law.

All of the information collected will be kept for three years. The information, audio files, notes, and transcripts will be stored on a password-protected computer and/or in locked cabinets that only the research team can access. After three years, all of the collected information will be destroyed by securely shredding documents and/or permanently deleting electronic information.

As with all research, there is a chance that privacy could be breached. For example, despite the best efforts of the research team to keep the information we collect during the study private, a breach may occur as a result of accidental human error or hacking. In the event a breach occurs, it will be reported. If needed, participants will be contacted and notified as to the extent of the breach, any damages incurred, and future potential risks.

Results from this study may appear in professional journals or at scientific conferences. However, no individual participants will be identified or linked to the results. Results may also be used in future research or shared with other researchers. However, other researchers will not have access to any identifying information of participants.

Federal Costs: – The total cost to the Federal government is $108,953.01, which includes the total cost for contractor and Federal staff costs for developing the study instruments, recruiting research participants, collecting and analyzing qualitative data, and fully loaded wage rates. The contractor cost is estimated at $90,844.80. This is based on an estimate of hours, with fully loaded wage rates of $81.36 to $176.60 per hour, and includes overhead costs.

The Federal staff cost is estimated at $18,108.21, assuming a total of 275 hours of Federal employee time. Federal employee time includes 270 hours for a GS-13, Step 2 Nutritionist at $49.10 per hour ($13,257.00 total), and 5 hours for a GS-14, Step 6 Branch Chief at $65.51 per hour for supervisory oversight ($327.55 total), for a total of $13,584.55. To account for a fully loaded wage rate, an additional 33 percent, or $4,523.66 ($13,584.55 X 0.333), was added to the total Federal hourly wages. Federal employee hourly rates are based on the General Schedule and locality payment for the Washington D.C. Metropolitan Area provided by Office of Personnel Management (OPM) for 2019 (https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/salary-tables/pdf/2019/DCB_h.pdf).

9. Research Tools/Instruments:

Attachment A: Mailing flyer for child care site directors
Attachment B: Mailing flyer for child care site providers
Attachment C: Initial call script for child care site directors and providers
Attachment D: Initial email for child care site directors
Attachment E: Email instructions for child care site directors and providers
Attachment F: Follow up call to screened research participants
Attachment G: Scheduling confirmation email for research participant
Attachment H: Scheduling reminder call for research participant

Attachment I: Scheduling reminder email for research participant
Attachment J: Scheduling reminder text for research participant
Attachment K: Consent form for research participation

Attachment L: Screener for research participation
Attachment M: Research introduction
Attachment N: Guideline for in-depth interviews (English)

Attachment O: Guideline for in-depth interviews (Spanish)
Attachment P: IRB Exempt Letter
Attachment Q: English Handouts

Attachment R: Spanish Handouts

Attachment S: English Video Scripts

Attachment T: Spanish Video Scripts

Attachment U: Audition Clips

• U1.a: English Audition - Alexis Smith

• U1.b: English Audition - Anita Horwath

• U1.c: English Audition - Devin Nikki Thomas

• U1.d: English Audition - Karyn-Siobhan Robinson

• U1.e: English Audition - Lynette Rathnam

• U1.f: English Audition - Rochelle Simeon

• U2.a: Spanish Audition - Dominique Ravelo-Napoli

• U2.b: Spanish Audition - Sussy Tomer

• U2.c: Spanish Audition - Tanairi Zarazua

• U3.a: English and Spanish Audition - Alina Collins Maldonado

• U3.b: English and Spanish Audition - Arami McCloske

• U3.c: English and Spanish Audition - Nina-Sophia Pacheco

Attachment V: Key Frames

1 e.g. Corbin & Strauss, 2014; Strauss & Corbin, 1990; Denzin & Lincoln, 1994; Knight, Roosa, & Umana-Taylor, 2009

2 e.g. Chun, Organista & Marin, 2003; Taylor & Bogdan, 1998

3 [1] https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d17/tables/dt17_202.30.asp?current=yes

4 According to data obtained from www.acf.hhs.gov

5 Based on 2017 wage data extracted from the US Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics - Occupational Employment Statistics Query System on - https://data.bls.gov/oes/

11