Appendix 2—Environmental Policy Scan Sampling Memo
The F4EQ project’s environmental policy scan intends to document and analyze policies within Head Start and state-level funding sources. While we anticipate variations within policies across states, we expect that there are some similarities in state structures that are likely correlated with funding and implementation policies. These include the following state characteristics:
Head Start region
Presence and reach of state-funded pre-K
Presence and reach of state-funded Head Start
Presence of Early Head Start-Child Care Partnership (EHS-CCP) grants
Whether other state early care and education (ECE) programs are housed in the same agency as the Head Start Collaboration Office
Centralized versus local governance structures
State size and urbanicity based on state population
We documented these characteristics for each state and then structured a purposeful sampling approach based on each of the characteristics. Table 1 shows the characteristics in order of prioritization and our selection approach within each characteristic. We used this structure to heuristically rank and select states. We then selected 20-states in which to conduct the policy scan, as shown in Table 2.
Table 1: State Characteristics and Sampling Priorities
State Characteristic |
Sampling Priority or Approach |
Head Start Region |
Two states per region |
Presence of State-funded Pre-K |
States without State-funded Pre-K were excluded |
Presence of State-funded Head Start |
Selection of one state with State-funded Head Start and one state without per region |
Presence of Early Head Start- Child Care Partnership Grant |
Prioritized states with EHS-CCP |
Governance Structures |
Select mix of governance structures based on state-level location of ECE offices (whether they are housed in the same agency as the Head Start Collaboration Office) and whether state has centralized or local governance structure |
Reach of State-funded Pre-K |
Prioritized states with higher reach (i.e., higher proportions of children are funded by state-funded pre-K) |
State Size and Urbanicity |
Within above priority characteristics, maximized mix of size and urbanicity (ensuring inclusion of states that are largely rural) |
Table 2: Preliminary Selection of States for Environmental Policy Scan
Head Start Region |
Selected State 1 |
Selected State 2 |
Selected State 3 |
1 |
Massachusetts |
Maine |
- |
2 |
New York |
- |
- |
3 |
Pennsylvania |
West Virginia |
- |
4 |
Alabama |
Georgia |
North Carolina |
5 |
Wisconsin |
Illinois |
- |
6 |
Oklahoma |
Louisiana |
- |
7 |
Iowa |
Kansas |
- |
8 |
Colorado |
Utah |
- |
9 |
Nevada |
Arizona |
- |
10 |
Oregon |
Washington |
- |
Our sampling approach and final selection allowed us to maximize variation in characteristics we expect are correlated with state structures for braiding funding. We included several states with potentially more sophisticated policies that support braiding (e.g., Pennsylvania, Alabama, Illinois, Louisiana, Colorado, Oregon, Washington), while including states that may have less progressive braiding policies (e.g., Wisconsin, Iowa, Kansas, Utah). Some states have centralized governance structures (e.g., Maine, New York, Pennsylvania), as well as structures that have more local implementation (e.g., North Carolina). Additionally, we have a variety of states by size and rurality.
File Type | application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document |
Author | Sarah Kabourek |
File Modified | 0000-00-00 |
File Created | 2023-10-26 |