19–010 ★ (Star Print) 

Calendar No. 72

108TH CONGRESS REPORT " SENATE ! 1st Session 108–37

CARING FOR CHILDREN ACT OF 2003

APRIL 10, 2003.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. GREGG, from the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 

Pensions, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

[To accompany S. 880]

The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, to 

which was referred the original bill (S. 880) to amend the Caring 

for Children Act of 2003 to reauthorize the Act, to improve early 

learning opportunities and promote school preparedness, and for 

other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably 

thereon without amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.

CONTENTS 

Page 

I. Purpose and Summary of the bill ................................................................. 1 

II. Background and need for legislation ............................................................ 2

III. Legislative history and committee action .................................................... 4

IV. Explanation of Legislation and Committee Views ...................................... 4

V. Cost estimate .................................................................................................. 14

VI. Regulatory impact statement ........................................................................ 16

VII. Legislative Impact ......................................................................................... 17

VIII. Section-by-section analysis ............................................................................ 17

IX. Additional views ............................................................................................. 27

X. Changes in existing law ................................................................................ 36

I. PURPOSE AND SUMMARY OF THE BILL

It is the purpose of the Caring for Children Act of 2003 to renew, 

improve, and strengthen the Child Care and Development Block 

Grant Act of 1990 for the next five years. The Caring for Children 

Act of 2003 is designed to maintain state flexibility and improve access to high quality child care for low income working families. 

2

II. BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

The current system of child care assistance, which is supported 

by Federal, State, and local funds, is largely a result of Federal legislative activity over the last 14 years. In 1988, the Family Support 

Act, which at the time represented groundbreaking legislation to 

reform the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program, for the first time provided a child care entitlement for families on welfare. Originated by the Senate Finance Committee, the 

Family Support Act created a child care entitlement for AFDC parents who were working, enrolled in job training, or enrolled in an 

educational program, and for parents needing transitional child 

care assistance for 12 months after leaving welfare (Transitional 

Child Care or TCC). 

In 1990, two more child care programs were created: the Child 

Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) program under the 

jurisdiction of the Senate Labor Committee (now renamed the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee), and the 

Title IV-A At Risk Child Care program under the jurisdiction of the 

Senate Finance Committee. Both of these programs were designed 

to help low income working families and CCDBG was designed to 

improve the quality of child care as well. Unlike the Family Support Act child care programs, these two new programs were block 

grants to the States (not individual entitlements) and were not designed to assist welfare families. 

In 1996, the four Federal child care programs (the AFDC child 

care entitlement, the Transitional Child Care entitlement, the IVA at Risk child care program and the Child Care and Development 

Block Grant) were consolidated under the Personal Responsibility 

and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA). The act 

eliminated the entitlement to child care assistance for parents receiving welfare and for those transitioning from welfare to work. 

The three Finance Committee programs were consolidated into one 

funding stream referred to as (mandatory funding) because the 

funding is specified in law and does not need to compete against 

other funding in the regular appropriations process. Funding for 

the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) remained 

under the jurisdiction of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and 

Pensions (HELP) Committee and was retained as a discretionary 

program. 

Child care funding 

Since 1988, funding for child care has grown dramatically. Federal child care spending through the CCDF has increased by over 

175 percent since 1996. Discretionary funding for the Child Care 

and Development Block Grant has more than doubled in the last 

five years to $2.1 billion in fiscal year 2003. Mandatory funding 

currently is set at $2.7 billion, for a total of $4.8 billion. 

In addition to Federal dollars provided through mandatory and 

discretionary funding, States currently may transfer up to 30 percent of their TANF block grant to the Child Care and Development 

Block Grant. In FY2001 and FY2002, States transferred a total of 

$3.8 billion of TANF funds to CCDBG. 

States also may spend additional TANF money directly on child 

care services outside of the CCDBG. In fiscal year 2000, States 

3

spent $1.4 billion of their TANF grants directly on child care. In 

fiscal years 2001 and 2002, TANF direct expenditures on child care 

reached $1.6 billion in each year. 

Expenditure data show that in fiscal year 2001, States spent 

more than $7.95 billion in Federal and State money from the Child 

Care and Development Block Grant (this amount includes spending 

from the TANF transfers to the CCDBG). In addition, States spent 

over $1.7 billion on child care within the TANF system. Therefore, 

in total, over $9.66 billion was spent on child care through the 

CCDBG and TANF in fiscal year 2001, of which $7.6 billion were 

Federal funds. As a result of CCDBG, TANF, and State funding of 

child care, over 2 million children receive child care assistance 

today. 

In addition to the CCDBG, TANF and Social Services Block 

Grants, which States may use to support child care for low-income 

families, other Federal programs provide funds for child care and 

early childhood development. These include Head Start (funded at 

$6.5 billion in fiscal year 2002), the Child and Adult Care Food 

Program ($1.9 billion), the Individuals with Disabilities Education 

Act preschool and infant/toddler grants ($807 million), and, for 

after-school and weekend activities for school age children, the 21st 

Century Community Learning Centers ($1 billion). In total, combined current funding for child care and early education programs 

is estimated by the Department of Health and Human Services to 

exceed $17 billion. 

Assistance for low-income working families 

Between 1996 and June 2000, the welfare caseload dropped by 

2.3 million families. The majority of welfare leavers are now employed. The share of TANF families working or participating in 

work-related activities while receiving TANF has soared to nearly 

900,000 in fiscal year 1999. Between 1996 and 1999, the number 

of employed single mothers grew from 1.8 million to 2.7 million. 

And, according to the Congressional Research Service, there has 

been a marked increase in single mothers working—from 63.5 percent in 1996 to 73 percent in 2001. Many of these parents need 

child care assistance to stay employed. 

The committee believes that the challenge for Congress this year 

is to build on the success of the 1996 welfare reform law—and put 

even more Americans on the path to self reliance and improve the 

quality of child care. The dramatic increase in the number of 

women participating in the labor force, and the number of these 

women who are the sole or primary financial supporters of their 

children are the most important factors affecting the demand for 

child care. 

Increasingly, the effect of child care on children also has become 

a significant public issue. Research in the field of child development demonstrates that low-income children can benefit from child 

care with an early childhood development focus. Therefore, the 

quality of child care available is important so that all young children are developmentally prepared to enter and succeed in school. 

The Caring for Children Act strengthens the Federal commitment 

to foster quality environments and early learning experiences for 

young children. 

4

Concerns about the supply, quality and affordability of child care 

for many low income families led to a national debate over the nature and extent of the Nation’s child care problems. Federal lawmakers recognized the need to address the accessibility and affordability of child care so that parents could participate in the workforce. 

III. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY AND COMMITTEE ACTION

EXECUTIVE SESSION

On April 2, 2003, the committee met in Executive Session to consider the Caring for Children Act of 2003. Three amendments were 

offered. A technical amendment by Senator Dodd was agreed to on 

a voice vote; an amendment by Senator Jeffords was offered on his 

behalf by Senator Dodd. It was later modified and subsequently accepted on a voice vote. An amendment by Senator Edwards to create a $100 million set aside for children with special needs was defeated on a recorded vote of 10 yeas, 11 nays. The bill as amended 

was subsequently approved on a voice vote. 

IV. EXPLANATION OF LEGISLATION AND COMMITTEE VIEWS

TITLE I—CHILD CARE AND DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT

Overview 

The Caring for Children Act of 2003 reauthorizes the Child Care 

and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) through 2008 at a level of 

$2.3 billion for fiscal year 2004, $2.5 billion for fiscal year 2005, 

$2.7 billion for fiscal year 2006, $2.9 billion for fiscal year 2007, 

and $3.1 billion for fiscal year 2008. The current 2003 appropriation is $2.1 billion. 

Program goals 

The Caring for Children Act amends the existing goals to emphasize that the Block grant is intended to serve both low income 

working families who receive cash assistance and those who do not. 

It continues to provide states maximum flexibility in developing 

child care programs and policies and promotes parental choice so 

that parents can select the type of child care and setting that they 

prefer. 

The legislation creates three new goals: (1) to assist States in improving the quality of child care available to families; (2) to promote school preparedness by encouraging children, families and 

caregivers to engage in developmentally and age appropriate activities in child care settings that will improve children’s social, emotional and behavioral skills and foster their early cognitive, 

prereading and language development; and (3) to promote parental 

and family involvement in the education of their young children in 

child care settings.

The new goals that have been added to encourage States to improve the quality of child care and to promote cognitive development and school readiness are consistent with the President’s new 

early childhood education initiative, Good Start, Grow Smart, designed to address the cognitive and other developmental needs of 

young children so that they are prepared to enter and succeed in 

school. 

5

Lead agency 

The committee bill amends the act to let States designate a collaborative agency or establish a joint interagency office to serve as 

the lead agency responsible for administering the program. 

State plan requirements 

The Caring for Children Act modifies the State plan in several 

ways. The legislation asks States to collect and disseminate information to both parents of eligible children and child care providers 

about: the quality and availability of child care services; resources 

to assist families in obtaining child care; research and best practices on children’s development; and, other programs and services 

for which families may be eligible, including the food stamp, WIC, 

Medicaid and SCHIP programs. 

This legislation requires States to describe partnerships between 

public and private entities that will increase the supply and quality 

of child care services, and coordination of child care services provided by this act with other child care and early childhood education programs, such as Head Start, Early Reading First, Even 

Start, and State-sponsored prekindergarten. 

Beginning in 2004, State plans will contain the outline of the 

state’s strategy to address the quality of child care available to children in that State. States will report on the use of quantifiable, objective measures for evaluating the quality of child care services 

and progress in improving child care quality. 

Finally, States are asked to address factors that can make finding care difficult for some parents. States will report how the state 

is working to meet the child care needs of parents eligible for assistance who have children with special needs, work non-traditional hours, or require infant and toddler care. 

The intent of the language in this section is to ensure that state 

re-determination policies do not interfere with parents’ ability to 

maintain employment while maintaining their eligibility for assistance. The committee encourages States to explore approaches to 

eligibility redetermination that support the work schedules of families receiving assistance, such as: the provision of extended office 

hours (including office hours before 8 a.m., after 6 p.m., or on the 

weekend); and the use of postal mail or electronic communications 

such as communications by telephone, fax, or electronic mail, and 

provision of a receipt providing confirmation that required documents have been submitted. 

Application and State plan requirements 

Under current law, each State that applies for a Federal block 

grant is required to submit a State plan to the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. The State plan is designed to ensure that States are complying with minimal Federal 

guidelines before receiving their grant. States are asked to certify 

that parents have unlimited access to their children while in care 

and the ability to choose their child’s care provider and setting. 

States also must assure compliance with State licensing, health 

and safety requirements, address the child care needs of certain 

population groups, and substantiate that payment rates for child 

care services are sufficient to ensure equal access to services available to children not eligible for subsidized care. 

6

The Caring for Children Act enhances the State plan in several 

ways to improve the quality of child care services provided to eligible families. This includes encouraging states to: (1) collect and disseminate information to parents to assist them in making informed 

child care choices; (2) put in place procedures and policies to protect working parents such as providing assistance for eligible families for not at least 6 months before redetermining eligibility; (3) 

coordinate this program with other Federal, State and local programs (including Head Start, Early Head Start, Early Reading 

First, Title I preschool program, Part C of IDEA, State prekindergarten programs and other early childhood education programs); 

(4) describe any training requirements that are in effect that are 

designed to enable childcare providers to promote the social, emotional, physical, and cognitive development of children; (5) encourage partnerships with private and other public entities to leverage 

existing service delivery systems of early childhood and increase 

the supply and quality of childcare services; (6) address the child 

care needs of parents eligible for child care services who have children with special needs, work nontraditional hours, or require child 

care services for infants or toddlers; and (7) inform parents receiving assistance under a program funded under part A of Title IV of 

the Social Security Act and low-income parents about eligibility for 

assistance under this subchapter. 

Beginning in 2004, State plans will contain the outline of the 

State’s strategy to address the quality of child care available to 

children in that State. States will report on the use of quantifiable, 

objective measures for evaluating the quality of child care services 

and its progress in improving child care quality. The committee 

does not intend or desire to create any Federal standards for quality of child care and intends for states to have broad discretion in 

fulfilling these provisions. 

Child care resource and referral system 

The Caring for Children Act allows States to use block grant 

funds to support child care resource and referral organizations. 

State and local child care resource and referral agencies (CCR&R) 

are often a community’s vital link between parents and child care 

providers. Most States have in place a comprehensive child care resource and referral network that supports families in finding child 

care; compiles, analyzes and shares information with parents, providers and communities on the supply, cost, and quality of child 

care and the availability of child care subsidies; and, supports individuals and programs providing care for children. Child care resource and referral organizations can be a costeffective resource because of their ability to leverage public dollars with contributions 

from private sources. 

Payment rates and market rate surveys 

Under current law, States are required to set payment rates that 

are sufficient to ensure equal access for eligible children to comparable child care services in the State for children who are not eligible for assistance with Federal guidelines suggesting a goal of 

reaching the 75th percentile of the market rate. 

States use a variety of means to determine and establish reimbursement and payment rates for subsidized child care. According 

7

to the General Accounting Office most States report using the results of market rate surveys to help set these rates but also report 

considering other factors such as budgets, the age group of the 

child needing care, and the geographic location of the care. The 

committee recognizes and intends to maintain the flexibility that 

States currently have to design and implement payment and reimbursement rates in ways that reflect their particular circumstances. 

The Caring for Children Act requires States to conduct a statistically valid and reliable survey of the market rates for child care 

services in the State within two years preceding the date of submission of the application, although the committee encourages 

States to conduct their survey as close as possible to the development of the State plan. States must also describe how the State 

will set payment rates to reflect the results of the market rates 

survey without reducing the number of families served as of the 

date of introduction of this act. 

The committee bill further requires States to publish the results 

of the survey within 30 days. Additionally, if in a fiscal year a 

State receives funds in an amount that exceeds the funds it received in fiscal year 2003 to carry out the CCDBG, the State is encouraged to consider using a portion of the excess to increase payment rates, support the establishment of tiered payment rates or 

to support payment rate increases for child care for children in 

communities served by elementary and secondary schools in need 

of improvement. In addition, the committee encourages States to 

examine the usual and customary practices with regard to payment 

for child absentee days. 

The committee bill preserves the equal access standard that 

State payment rates be sufficient to provide children receiving 

CCDBG funded assistance equal access to comparable child care 

services available to families which are not financially eligible to 

receive subsidy assistance. The committee reminds States that a 

key factor of equal access is determined by the degree to which low 

income families have access to care that is of comparable quality 

to other families. 

The provision on payment rates differentiation clarifies that 

nothing in the CCDBG statute is intended to prohibit States from 

having differentiated payment rates using such factors as geographic location of child care providers, age or particular needs of 

children (such as children with special needs and children served 

by child protective services), and care provided during weekends 

and other nontraditional hours. This provision is not intended to 

prevent States from developing and implementing differential rates 

for other appropriate reasons, such as a tiered rate structure which 

permits higher payments for care with specific quality standards. 

The committee intends to maintain flexibility in the ways in 

which the State gathers information used to inform the process as 

they set payment and reimbursement rates. The committee recognizes that there are multiple ways States actually survey the child 

care market. Some do telephone or mailed surveys to a sample of 

providers, others rely on the data collected by resource and referral 

agencies in the course of maintaining an accurate data base. Research indicates that both of these approaches can be statistically 

valid. Additionally, child care markets vary across States based on 

8

population demographics and density, culture, licensing and subsidy policies, provider practices and parent preferences, to name a 

few. A market rate survey that works in New York may not work 

in a rural State such as Idaho or Utah. Similarly, in a rural State, 

there may be little variation in the cost of care across geographic 

areas and types of care, while in other States, child care center 

care may cost twice as much in metropolitan as rural areas. In one 

case, the cost of a more complex survey may be justified, in another 

case not. Because of these variances, the committee has asked the 

Secretary to provide technical assistance to States on the design 

and implementation of statistically valid market rate surveys. 

Child care quality 

The Caring for Children Act of 2003 increases from four to six 

percent the amount of the total block grant that a State must 

spend on activities to improve the quality of child care provided to 

eligible families in that State, and establishes permissible uses for 

those funds. The quality set-aside may be used to support: programs that provide training, education, and other professional development activities to enhance the skills of the child care workforce, including informal caregivers; activities to enhance early 

learning and foster school readiness; initiatives to increase the retention and compensation of child care providers; and, other activities deemed by the States to improve the quality of child care services (for children up to age 13) provided in the State. 

In recognition of the importance of the quality of child care on 

all aspects of child development, including cognitive development, 

the bill seeks to emphasize the importance of early childhood development and encourages States to improve the quality of child care. 

Knowledge about children’s learning has expanded greatly during the past two decades. Research in the neurobiological and behavioral sciences related to young children suggests the importance 

of the first years of life for healthy brain development. From birth 

through age five, children rapidly develop the capabilities on which 

subsequent development builds. In addition to linguistic and cognitive gains, children exhibit dramatic progress in their emotional 

and social capacities. According to child development expert Dr. T. 

Berry Brazelton: 

A child’s experiences in the first months and years of life 

determine whether he or she will enter school eager to 

learn or not. By school age, family and caregivers have already prepared the child for success or failure. The community has already helped or hindered the family’s capacity to nurture the child’s development. 

High quality child care involves much more than the essential ingredients of love, nurture, and care. The committee included school 

preparedness activities as a permissible use to encourage States to 

invest in initiatives that will help foster children’s social and cognitive skills. These skills provide the foundation for school readiness and are easily attainable when young children are exposed to 

language-rich environments with caregivers who engage them in 

interactive activities, promote curiosity and challenge children to 

develop self-confidence and problem-solving skills. 

9

While many of a State’s school preparedness activities are likely 

to be directed at preschool children, such activities also concern 

younger or older children. A State’s responsibilities under CCDBG 

include providing child care services for children up to age 13 (or, 

at State option, nineteen when the child is physically or mentally 

incapable of caring for himself or herself or under court supervision). School preparedness is a continuing process and does not 

stop simply because a child has entered school. 

There is also general agreement among experts that the ways 

that parents, families and other caregivers relate and respond to 

a young child directly affect cognitive development. Research suggests that the quality of child care and early education is ultimately dependent on the quality of the relationship between the 

caregiver and child. Studies indicate that children are more advanced in all realms of development when their parents, teachers 

or caregivers provide regular verbal and cognitive stimulation, are 

sensitive and responsive, and give generous amounts of attention 

and support in safe and healthy environments. 

Based on this research, the Caring for Children Act stipulates 

permissible uses for the quality set-aside to help ensure that States 

spend their quality allocation on activities that have been proven 

to improve the quality of child care. Beginning in 2004, States are 

asked to report how these funds are used. 

The committee notes the importance of States evaluating and assessing child care programs in order to ensure their continued high 

quality and identify and correct weaknesses and has authorized 

such evaluations and assessments as allowable uses. However, 

nothing in this section should be construed to require formal testing of pre-school age children. 

The committee has allowed States to exercise broad discretion in 

additional quality activities (such as enforcing compliance with 

State licensing requirements and State and local health and safety 

standards) so long as those activities can be directly linked to improving child safety, child-well being, or school preparedness and 

are capable of being measured for outcomes. This requirement is 

intended to ensure that States consider the connection between a 

proposed activity and desired outcome goals, but it is not intended 

to require States to establish, track, or determine child outcomes 

in order for a particular activity to be allowable; it is sufficient that 

the State has determined that measurement of outcomes is possible 

in relation to child safety, child well-being, or school preparedness. 

The committee does not require States to actually measure or 

produce such outcomes in order to support its discretionary quality 

activities. 

Data collection and reporting requirements 

Under current law, lead State agencies are required to collect 

and submit data regarding the children, families, and child care 

providers participating in the program on both a quarterly and annual basis. The quarterly report collects disaggregate data for each 

family receiving child care assistance, and the annual report collects aggregate numbers over the course of a fiscal year. 

The committee bill streamlines data requirements so that lead 

agencies are only required to submit quarterly reports. The fourth 

quarterly report each year would preserve some of the data eleVerDate Jan 31 2003 06:47 Apr 29, 2003 Jkt 019010 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR037.XXX SR037
10

ments formerly required in the annual report. For any new requirements, States would need to begin submitting data 2 years from 

the date of enactment of the act. The bill provides the Secretary 

with the authority to grant waivers from the 2 year requirement 

if a State can show that it has plans to procure a data system. 

The bill deletes reporting elements that have proven to be unnecessary: receipt of housing assistance, receipt of food stamps; receipt 

of ‘‘other’’ assistance programs; and length of subsidy receipt. The 

bill requires a single data element regarding whether a family receives assistance under TANF or separate maintenance of effort 

State programs, and clarifies that the cost of child care data element should require both a statement about the amount of the 

State’s subsidy payment and a separate statement of the amount 

of the family’s copayment. The bill clarifies that data on the type 

of care provided to a family should include all those types listed in 

the subchapter’s definition of eligible child care provider.

New data elements are added: household size, whether the parent reports that the child has an Individualized Education Plan or 

an Individualized Family Services Plan under the Individuals with 

Disabilities Education Act, and case closure codes for each family 

that no longer receives child care assistance under the subchapter. 

States will no longer have to report an annualized unduplicated 

count of the number of children and families served. A requirement 

to submit data on the manner and number of parents receiving 

consumer education information is moved to the biennial State 

plan. In the fourth quarterly report of the year, lead agencies will 

be required to submit some annual information formerly required 

in the annual report: the annual number and type of child care providers receiving payments under the subchapter, and the annual 

number of those payments made by type of child care provider 

through vouchers, under contracts, or by payment to parent. 

The bill would also require States to collect monthly data on the 

number of children and families that receive child care assistance, 

submit this information in their quarterly reports, and to post this 

information on their websites. 

Reporting requirements 

Current law requires the Secretary of HHS to file biennial reports to Congress summarizing and analyzing the disaggregate and 

aggregate data reports that States submit, as well as other relevant information. 

The committee bill updates the current requirements for the Secretary to summarize and analyze State collected data on children 

and families, requiring that starting in April 2004, and then on an 

annual basis, the Secretary submit reports summarizing and analyzing State data provided on children and families, with regard to 

activities to improve the quality of child care, and in State plans. 

The language adds a requirement that the Secretary include information on the supply, demand, and quality of child care, early education, and nonschool-hour programs, and a progress report that 

describes State progress in meeting the new data requirements, 

plans for technical assistance to help States meet these requirements, and the explanation of any barriers States are facing in 

meeting the timeline for reporting on these new requirements. The 

Secretary must post these reports on the Department of Health 

11

and Human Services website no later than 30 days after submitting them to the relevant congressional committees. 

National activities: Infants and toddlers and child care hotline 

Many States are experiencing problems with access to quality, affordable infant and toddler care. This, combined with the increase 

in the number of mothers with babies and toddlers in the workforce, makes the need for quality child care even more critical. Approximately 60 percent of mothers with children under age three 

are in the workforce, at least on a part-time basis. The committee has included an authorization for a $100 million 

set-aside, subject to the availability of appropriations for this purpose. With this authorization, the committee intends that States 

maintain the flexibility that they have had under appropriations 

bills since FY 2000, to coordinate activities to enhance infant and 

toddler child care. States are encouraged to continue to support activities under the set aside that are designed to protect the health 

and well-being of infants and toddlers; offer specialized training for 

such providers that emphasizes the unique developmental needs of 

infants and toddlers; create statewide networks of specialists on infants and toddlers, to provide training and consultations for such 

providers who are center-based child care providers, group home 

child care providers, or relatives of the infants and toddlers; and 

establish local networks of support for family child care home providers and other activities to improve the quality and availability 

of infant care. 

Research indicates that the strongest effects of quality child care 

are found with at-risk children—children from families with the 

fewest resources and under the greatest stress. Yet, at-risk babies 

and toddlers receive some of the poorest quality care that exists in 

communities across the United States resulting in poorer cognitive, 

social, and emotional developmental outcomes. Research confirms 

that most child care centers do not meet infants and toddlers needs 

for health, safety, nurturing relationships, and learning. A child’s 

first three 3 are a critical time for child development. Numerous 

studies show that high quality care improves school readiness and 

prevents crime in the long-term. It is especially critical that access 

to high quality infant and toddler care be expanded to allow more 

parents who must work to leave their children in a safe and nurturing environment while they work. 

The committee recognizes the need for a toll free hotline that is 

assisting families nationwide in accessing local information on 

child care options and providing consumer education and has authorized $1 million, subject to the availability of appropriations for 

such purposes. 

Federal eligibility guidelines and direct services 

The Caring for Children Act eliminates the Federal income limit 

for eligibility, previously set at 85 percent of the State median income, which included families at both the lowest and more moderate income levels. Across all States 85 percent of SMO for a family of three ranged from $53,940 a year in Connecticut to $30,156 

in Mississippi for a family of the same size. 

Some advocates and lawmakers contend that many potentially 

eligible children do not receive subsidies due to limited resources. 

12

However, program officials in five of seven States interviewed by 

the General Accounting Office reported that all families eligible 

under the State’s income criteria who applied for child care assistance were being served.

Additionally, the demand for child care services and the number 

of eligible families in need of subsidies may be overestimated because not all low-income parents need subsidized child care. In 

fact, not all parents who receive welfare or are transitioning off 

welfare are working, and many parents make in-home or other informal care arrangements with friends or relatives instead of applying for child care assistance through the block grant. 

Estimates of subsidies needed by children through the Child 

Care and Development Block Grant and TANF might be reduced 

further by taking into account the availability of other programs 

and funding sources serving children, including State-funded prekindergarten programs and Head Start. Sixty-five percent of all 3 

and 4 year olds eligible for Head Start are enrolled, and it is estimated that 62,000 toddlers are served under the Early Head Start 

program. 

The committee received comments that States might interpret 

the elimination of a Federal eligibility limit as a suggestion that 

assistance provided through the block grant should be targeted to 

TANF families only. This is not the intent of the committee. The 

legislation amends the CCDBG goals to clarify the congressional 

intent to provide assistance to low-income working families, not exclusively those on or transitioning off TANF. States and territories 

must spend 70 percent of their mandatory child care money to subsidize child care for TANF families, families transitioning off 

TANF, and families at risk of becoming dependent on public assistance. 

The Caring for Children Act has included a new requirement 

that States also must ensure that 70 percent of the State grant is 

used to provide direct services to low-income working families. 

Though these services will be defined by the States, the committee 

intends at a minimum, to include services that are designed to assist families with the purchase of child care from an eligible child 

care provider such as vouchers for families and contracts and 

grants with child care providers in the definition of direct services. 

Children with special needs 

Families with children with disabilities often have difficulty finding high quality child care for their children. This problem is compounded for many low-income families. Early intervention services 

for pre-school age children can help identify, address, and sometimes prevent cognitive, physical and emotional disabilities at a 

young age. Unfortunately, many child care professionals have no 

experience with disabled children making accessing quality child 

care for children with special needs a challenge for many families. 

The committee notes that in addition to the Child Care and Development Block Grant there are several Federal programs that have 

been designed specifically to respond to the needs of children with 

special needs. The committee recommends greater collaboration between the CCDBG and these other programs. 

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prevents discrimination against children with disabilities by child care providers and 

13

requires providers to make reasonable accommodations to ensure 

their participation. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 

(IDEA) has two main programs that provide for specialized services 

(which may include child care) for young children with disabilities 

(Part C Early Intervention Program for Infants and Toddlers with 

Disabilities and Section 619 Pre-School Program). IDEA’s Part C 

supports developmental services for infants and toddlers, up to age 

three, and their families. More than 230,000 children participated 

in Part C in 2001. Most of the children who received Part C supports in 2001 were served in their homes or in a child care setting. 

IDEA’s Section 619 pre-school program provides special education and related services to preschool-aged children with disabilities. More than 598,000 children participated in the IDEA 619 preschool program in 2001, receiving services in public schools, child 

care, Head Start, or other settings. A child between the ages of 

three and five is eligible for Section 619 services if he or she has 

a disability and needs special education and related services. 

To further respond to the child care needs of families with children who have special needs, the committee has included language 

requiring States to demonstrate how they are addressing the child 

care needs of parents who have children who have special needs. 

Additionally, the committee has authorized States to use funds 

under the quality set-aside to offer training professional development, and educational opportunities for child care providers, and 

specifically providers who care for children with special needs. The 

committee recognizes the need of providers to be equipped to offer 

quality child care services to children with special needs, and believes additional opportunities for specialized training will assist in 

this effort. 

TITLE II—ENHANCING SECURITY AT CHILD CARE CENTERS IN FEDERAL

FACILITIES

The committee bill includes new requirements to ensure that 

Federal child care facilities have safe plans of action for children 

in the case of an emergency. The committee bill directs the Administrator of General Services, the Chief Administrative Officer of the 

House of Representatives, the Librarian of Congress, the head of 

a designated entity in the Senate, and the Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts to issue regulations for 

child occupant emergency plans and evacuation procedures, for 

their respective Federal child care facilities. 

The committee feels that administrators of Federal facilities 

should consider different types of emergencies in designing their 

action plans and should encourage an informed parent body. Further, the committee feels that it is important to inform parents of 

children in Federal child care facilities about evacuation procedures 

and relocation sites, and to ensure that directors of Federal facilities regularly update parental contact information.

TITLE III—REMOVAL OF BARRIERS TO INCREASING THE SUPPLY OF

QUALITY CHILD CARE

The committee bill includes a short-term, flexible grant program 

to encourage small businesses to work with other local agencies to 

provide child care services for employees. The committee recognizes 

that small businesses play a critical role in providing child care opVerDate Jan 31 2003 06:47 Apr 29, 2003 Jkt 019010 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR037.XXX SR037
14

tions to millions of working parents. Unfortunately, small businesses generally do not have the resources required to start up and 

support a child care center. This grant program takes the necessary steps to ensuring small businesses and other local organizations are able to work together to provide child care for employees. 

A consortium of small businesses and other organizations will be 

eligible for grants for start-up costs, training, scholarships, or other 

related activities. Businesses will be required to match Federal 

funds to encourage self-sustaining facilities well into the future. 

Business must continue to meet State quality and health standards. 

V. COST ESTIMATE

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

Caring for Children Act of 2003

Summary: The Caring for Children Act would amend and reauthorize the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) Act 

of 1990. The Child Care and Development Block Grant program 

was authorized through 2002 by the CCDBG and is currently authorized through 2003 by the Consolidated Appropriations Resolution, 2003 (Public Law 108–7). The bill also would create one new 

demonstration grant program and increase set-asides for quality 

improvements and other activities. If enacted, the bill would authorize appropriations totaling $2.3 

billion in 2004. Total authorizations under the Caring for Children 

Act would be $13.5 billion over the 2004–2008 period. CBO estimates that appropriations of these amounts would result in additional outlays of $12.2 billion over the 2004–2008 period. Enacting 

the bill would not affect direct spending or receipts. 

The bill contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA). 

It would increase the authorization of funds for the Child Care and 

Development Block Grant and increase some of the requirements 

for using those funds. The bill also would establish a new grant 

program for states to provide assistance to small business consortia 

and other entities to increase the availability of child care. The requirements associated with these programs would be conditions of 

assistance resulting from the state’s voluntary participation in the 

program, and thus, not intergovernmental mandates as defined by 

UMRA. 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact for the various components of each title under the 

Caring for Children Act is shown in the following table. The costs 

of this legislation fall within budget function 600 (income security).

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars—

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Spending Under Current Law: 

Budget Authority .............................................................................. 2,086 0 0 0 0 0

Estimated Outlays ........................................................................... 2,165 819 130 21 0 0

Proposed Changes: 

Title I—Child Care and Development Block Grant Program: 

Authorization Level ................................................................. 0 2,300 2,500 2,700 2,900 3,100

Estimated Outlays .................................................................. 0 1,472 2,290 2,593 2,814 3,014

15

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars—

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Title III—Small Business Child Care Grant Program: 

Authorization Level ................................................................. 0 30 0 0 0 0

Estimated Outlays .................................................................. 0 2 12 9 6 2

Total Proposed Changes: 

Authorization Level .......................................................................... 0 2,330 2,500 2,700 2,900 3,100

Estimated Outlays ........................................................................... 0 1,474 2,302 2,602 2,820 3,016

Total Spending Under the Bill: 

Authorization Level 1 ........................................................................ 2,086 2,330 2,500 2,700 2,900 3,100

Estimated Outlays ........................................................................... 2,165 2,292 2,432 2,623 2,820 3,016

1 The 2003 level is the amount appropriated for that year.

Notes.—Components may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

Basis of estimate: The Caring for Children Act would authorize 

funding for the CCDBC program (title I) at specific levels in all 

years, 2004 through 2008. The Small Business Child Care Grant 

program (title III) would be authorized at $30 million total over the 

five years. The bill would authorize total appropriations of $2.3 billion in 2004 and $13.5 billion over the 2004–2008 period. If the authorized amounts are appropriated, outlays would increase by $1.5 billion in 

the first year and by $12.2 billion over the five-year period. The estimated outlays reflect historical rates of spending for the affected 

programs or the historical rates of similar programs. 

Title I—Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990 

Title I of the bill would reauthorize the CCDBG program currently authorized under the Child Care and Development Block 

Grant Act. The bill would authorize $2.3 billion in 2004, $2.5 billion in 2005, $2.7 billion in 2006, $2.9 billion in 2007, and $3.1 billion in 2008. Funding in 2003 was $2.086 billion. 

The CCDBG program provides funding to states for child care 

subsidies to low-income families, quality improvement, and other 

activities. It is one of the two federal funding programs for child 

care subsidies within a program grouping often referred to as the 

Child Care and Development Fund. The other program is the Child 

Care Entitlement to States, a mandatory program that is not affected by the bill. 

Title II—Enhancing security at child care centers in Federal facilities 

Title II would direct certain federal officials to develop regulations for enhancing the security and fostering effective disaster 

plans in child care facilities operated by the federal government. 

CBO does not expect the regulations would have any significant effects on federal costs. Many of these facilities already have similar 

security procedures in place, while others are anticipated to implement such measures in the future even without the enactment of 

further legislation. 

Title III—Removal of barriers to increasing the supply of quality 

child care 

Title III would authorize a total of $30 million over the 2004–

2008 period to create a small business child care demonstration 

grant program. The program would encourage small businesses to 

establish and operate child care programs by providing grants to 

16

cover part of the costs of the programs. The grants would go to eligible consortia of small businesses. CBO estimates that outlays 

would be around $2 million in 2004 and $30 million over the 2004– 2008 period. The bill specifies that the program would be terminated September 30, 2009. 

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: The bill contains 

no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in 

UMRA. It would increase the authorization of funds for the Child 

Care and Development Block Grant and increase some of the requirements for using those funds. The bill also would establish a 

new grant program for states to provide assistance to small business consortia and other entities to increase the availability of child 

care. The requirements associated with these programs would be 

conditions of assistance resulting from the state’s voluntary participation in the program and thus not intergovernmental mandates 

as defined by UMRA. 

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Donna Wong; Impact on 

State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Leo Lex; and Impact on the 

Private Sector: Kate Bloniarz. 

Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

VI. REGULATORY IMPACT STATEMENT

A. REGULATORY IMPACT

In accordance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the committee has determined that there will 

be minimal increases in the regulatory burden imposed by this bill. 

Impact on individuals and businesses 

In general, the bill provides grants to States to provide child care 

assistance to low-income working parents. Regulations may be 

needed to implement these grants in specified areas but do not affect individuals or businesses, unless they choose to participate in 

providing services under this act. 

Impact on personal privacy and paperwork 

The bill provides grants to States to provide child care assistance 

to low-income working parents, to improve the quality of child care, 

early learning opportunities and promote school preparedness, and 

for other purposes. The bill should not increase the amount of personal information and paperwork required. 

B. UNFUNDED MANDATES STATEMENT

According to the Congressional Budget Office, the bill contains no 

intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA). It would increase the authorization of funds for the Child Care and Development Block 

Grant and increase some of the requirements for using those funds. 

The bill also would establish a new grant program for States to 

provide assistance to small business consortia and other entities to 

increase the availability of child care. The requirements associated 

with these programs would be conditions of assistance resulting 

from the State’s voluntary participation in the program, and thus, 

not intergovernmental mandates as defined by UMRA. The bill 

17

places several new requirements and limitations on State programs 

as conditions of receiving assistance. 

VII. LEGISLATIVE IMPACT

The committee has determined that there is no legislative impact. 

VIII. SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Caring for Children Act of 2003’’. 

Section 2. Table of contents 

Sec. 101. Short title and goals 

This Section modifies the goals of the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) in Section 658A(b) to add three new 

goals: (1) to assist states in improving the quality of child care 

available to families; (2) to promote school preparedness by encouraging children, families, and caregivers to engage in developmentally appropriate and age-appropriate activities in child care 

settings that will—(A) improve the children’s social, emotional, and 

behavioral skills; and (B) foster their early cognitive, pre-reading, 

and language development; and (3) to promote parental and family 

involvement in the education of young children in child care settings. 

Sec. 102. Authorization of appropriations 

This Section amends Section 658B to authorize $2,300,000,000 

for fiscal year 2004, $2,500,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, 

$2,700,000,000 for fiscal year 2006, $2,900,000,000 for fiscal year 

2007, and $3,100,000,000 for fiscal year 2008. 

Sec. 103. Lead agency 

This Section amends Section 658D of CCDBG by allowing a State 

receiving funds under this act to designate an agency (which may 

be an appropriate collaborative agency), or establish a joint interagency office to serve as the lead agency for the State under this 

Act. 

Sec. 104. State plan 

Section 658E of CCDBG is amended to require a State receiving 

funds under this act to collect and disseminate, through resource 

and referral services and other means, to parents of eligible children, child care providers, and the general public, information regarding (I) the promotion of informed child care choices, including 

information about the quality and availability of services; (II) research and best practices concerning children’s development, including early cognitive development; (III) the availability of assistance to obtain child care services; and (IV) other programs for 

which families may be eligible, eligible, including the food stamp 

program, the special supplemental nutrition program for women, 

infants, and children, the child and adult care food program, and 

the Medicaid and State children’s health insurance programs. The 

State must also report to the Secretary the manner in which the 

18

consumer education information described was provided to parents 

and the number of parents to whom such consumer education information was provided. This Section also requires the State to inform parents receiving assistance under TANF and low-income parents about eligibility for child care assistance. 

This Section requires that a State has procedures and policies in 

place to ensure that working parents are not required to unduly 

disrupt their employment in order to comply with the State’s requirements for eligibility re-determination, and requires that each 

child that receives assistance will receive such assistance for not 

less than 6 months before re-determination. This Section also gives 

states the option to not terminate child care assistance based on a 

parent’s loss of work or cessation of attendance at a job training 

or educational program without continuing the assistance for not 

less than 1 month. 

This Section requires the State to describe how it will coordinate 

early child education activities assisted under this act with programs such as Head Start, Early Head Start, Early Reading First, 

Even Start, Title I preschool, section 619 and part C of IDEA, and 

other early childhood education programs. A State must also describe any training requirements in effect designed to enable providers under this act to promote the social, emotional, physical, and 

cognitive development of children. A State must describe how it is 

encouraging partnerships between states and other public agencies, 

and private entities, to leverage existing service delivery systems 

and to increase the supply and quality of services for children ages 

0–13. A State must describe how it is addressing the child care 

needs of eligible parents, who have children with special needs, 

work nontraditional hours, or require child care services for infants 

and toddlers. 

This Section allows the State to use funds to establish or support 

a system of local child care resource and referral organizations coordinated by a statewide private, nonprofit, community-based lead 

child care resource and referral organization to provide parents 

with information, and consumer education concerning should concern the full range of child care options (including care provided 

during nontraditional hours and through emergency child care centers). This network may also collect and analyze data on the supply 

of and demand for child care in political subdivisions within the 

State; submit reports to the State containing the data and analysis; 

and work to establish partnerships with public agencies and private entities to increase the supply and quality of child care services. 

From amounts provided to a State for a fiscal year, the State 

shall reserve the minimum amount required for the quality set 

aside, administration, and other set asides, and from the remainder, use not less than 70% to fund direct services (as defined by 

the State). 

This Section requires the State to develop and conduct a statistically valid and reliable survey of the market rates for child care 

services in the State (reflecting variations in the cost of child care 

services by geographic area, type of provider, and age of child) 

within the 2 years preceding the date of the submission of the application containing the State plan. The State should also detail 

the results of the market rates survey; describe how the State will 

19

provide for timely payment for child care services, and set payment 

rates for child care services in accordance with the results of the 

market rates survey without reducing the number of families in the 

State receiving assistance (as of the date of introduction of the Caring for Children Act of 2003). The State shall make the results of 

the survey available to the public no later than 30 days after the 

completion of the survey. The State plan shall include a certification that the payment rates are sufficient to ensure equal access 

for eligible children to child care services comparable to child care 

services in the State or sub-state area provided to children not eligible to receive such child care assistance. 

This section includes a rule of construction stating that nothing 

shall prevent a State from differentiating the payment rates to providers on the basis of geographic location, the age or particular 

needs of children, and whether the providers provide child care 

during weekend and other nontraditional hours. 

Sec. 105. Activities to improve the quality of child care 

Section 658G of CCDBG is amended to require each state receiving funds under this act to reserve not less than 6% of the funds 

provided directly, or through grants or contracts with resource and 

referral organizations or other appropriate entities that are designed to improve the quality of child care services. This Section requires that funds be used only for: 

(A) to develop and implement voluntary guidelines on prereading and language skills and activities, that are aligned 

with State standards for kindergarten through grade 12 or the 

State’s general goals for school preparedness; 

(B) support activities and provide technical assistance in 

Federal, State, and local child care settings to enhance early 

learning for young children, to promote literacy, and to foster 

school preparedness; 

(C) offer training, professional development, and educational 

opportunities for child care providers that relate to the use of 

developmentally appropriate and age-appropriate curricula, 

and early childhood teaching strategies, that are scientifically 

based and aligned with the social, emotional, physical, and cognitive development of children, including—(i) developing and 

operating distance learning child care training infrastructures; 

(ii) developing model technology-based training courses; (iii) offering training for caregivers in informal child care settings; 

and (iv) offering training for child care providers who care for 

infants and toddlers and children with special needs; 

(D) engage in programs designed to increase the retention 

and improve the competencies of child care providers, including 

wage incentive programs and initiatives that establish tiered 

payment rates for providers that meet or exceed child care 

services guidelines, as defined by the State; 

(E) evaluate and assess the quality and effectiveness of child 

care programs and services offered in the State to young children on improving overall school preparedness; and

(F) carry out other activities determined by the State to improve the quality of child care services for which measurement 

of outcomes relating to improved child safety, child well-being, 

or school preparedness is possible. 

20

This Section also requires that beginning with FY2004, the State 

shall submit an annual certification to the Secretary that the State 

was in compliance with the quality activities described above and 

describes how the State used quality during that preceding fiscal 

year. Beginning with FY2004, the State is required to submit an 

annual report to the Secretary that outlines the strategy the State 

will use to address the quality of child care in the State, including 

a description of quantifiable, objective measures that the State will 

use to evaluate the State’s progress in improving the quality of the 

child care services and a list of State-developed child care services 

quality targets quantified for such measures. This section requires 

that beginning with FY2005, the State shall submit a report on its 

progress in achieving targets for the preceding fiscal year. A State 

failing to make progress in quality improvements shall submit an 

improvement plan to the Secretary, and that State shall comply 

with the improvement plan within 1 year. 

Nothing in this act shall be construed to require that the State 

apply measures for evaluating quality of child care services to specific types of child care providers. 

Sec. 106. Optional priority use of additional funds 

This Section amends Section 658G of CCDBG to require a State 

receiving funds under this act to consider using a portion of any 

funds exceeding the amount of funds the State received to carry 

out this act for FY2003 to support payment rate increases in accordance with the market rate survey results; to support the establishment of tiered payment rates for providers; and to support payment rate increases for care for children in communities served by 

local educational agencies that have been identified for improvement under section 1116(c)(3) of the Elementary and Secondary 

Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6316(c)(3)). 

This Section also states that nothing in Section 106 shall be construed to require a State to take an action that the State determines would result in a reduction of child care services to families 

of eligible children. 

This Section also defines ‘‘payment rate’’ to mean the rate of 

State payment or reimbursement to providers for subsidized child 

care. 

Sec. 107. Reporting requirements 

This Section amends Section 658K to require a State receiving 

funds under this act to collect, with respect to a family unit receiving assistance under this act, information concerning family income; county of residence; the gender, race, and age of children receiving such assistance; whether the head of the family unit is a 

single parent; the sources of family income (including employment, 

including self-employment and assistance under a State program 

funded under part A of title IV of the Social Security Act and a 

State program for which states spending is counted toward the 

maintenance of effort requirement under section 409(a)(7) of the 

Social Security Act); the type, amount and cost of child care; household size; whether the parent involved reports that the child has 

an individualized education plan under IDEA and the reason for 

any termination of benefits under this act (including the child’s age 

exceeding the allowable limit; the family income exceeding the 

21

State eligibility limit; the State recertification or administrative requirements not being met; parent work, training, or education status no longer meeting State requirements; a non income related 

change in status). 

A State shall, on a quarterly basis, submit to the Secretary the 

information required to be collected and the number of children 

and families receiving assistance. Information on the number of 

families receiving the assistance shall also be posted on the website 

of the State. In the fourth quarterly report of each year, a State 

shall also submit to the Secretary information on the annual number and type of child care providers that received funding under 

this act and the annual number of payments made by the State 

through vouchers, under contracts, or by payment to parents reported by type of child care provider. 

A State may comply with the requirement to collect the information through the use of disaggregated case record information on a 

sample of families selected through the use of scientifically acceptable sampling methods approved by the Secretary. The Secretary 

shall provide the states with such case sampling plans and data 

collection procedures as the Secretary determines necessary to 

produce statistically valid samples of the information. The Secretary may develop and implement procedures for verifying the 

quality of data submitted by the states. 

This Section requires states to comply with the changes in data 

collection and reporting requirement within 2 years from the date 

of enactment of this Act. The Secretary of Health and Human Services may grant a waiver to states with plans to procure data systems. 

Sec. 108. National activities 

This Section amends Section 658L to require the Secretary to no 

later than April 30, 2004, and annually thereafter, prepare and 

submit to the Committee on Education and the Workforce of the 

House of Representatives and the Committee on Health, Education, 

Labor, and Pensions of the Senate, and, not later than 30 days 

after the date of such submission, post on the Department of 

Health and Human Services website, a report containing a summary and analysis of the data and information provided to the Secretary in the State reports submitted under sections 658E, 658G(c), 

and 658K; aggregated statistics on and an analysis of the supply 

of, demand for, and quality of child care, early education, and nonschool hour programs; an assessment and, where appropriate, recommendations for Congress concerning efforts that should be undertaken to improve the access of the public to quality and affordable child care in the United States; and a progress report describing the progress of the states in streamlining data reporting, the 

Secretary’s plans and activities to provide technical assistance to 

states, and an explanation of any barriers to getting data in an accurate and timely manner. 

This Section also allows the Secretary to make arrangements 

with resource and referral organizations, to utilize the child care 

data system of the resource and referral organizations at the national, State, and local levels, to collect the information required by 

paragraph (1)(B). 

22

This Section also directs the Secretary to provide technical assistance to states on developing and conducting the State market 

rates survey. 

Under this section, the Secretary is instructed to award grants 

to states, to improve the quality of and access to child care for infants and toddlers, subject to the availability of appropriations for 

this purpose. The Secretary shall also award a grant or contract, 

or enter into a cooperative agreement for the operation of a national toll-free hotline to assist families in accessing local information on child care options and providing consumer education materials, subject to the availability of appropriations for this purpose. 

Sec. 109. Grants and hotline 

This Section amends Section 658O(a) of the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act to require the Secretary to reserve an 

amount not to exceed $100,000,000 for each fiscal year to carry out 

activities designed to improve the quality of and access to child 

care for infants and toddlers. The section also requires the Secretary to reserve an amount not to exceed $1,000,000 to carry out 

operation of a national toll-free hotline to assist families in accessing local information on child care options and providing consumer 

education materials. 

Sec. 110. Definitions 

This Section amends Section 658P of the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act by allowing states to set the income eligibility level for families, with priority given by need as defined by 

the State. The term ‘child with special needs’ was defined in section 

602 of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 

1401); and a child who is eligible for early intervention services 

under part C of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 

U.S.C. 1431 et seq.) Section 658P is also amended by redefining 

‘‘Native Hawaiian organization’’ as it is defined in section 7207 of 

the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 

7517) 

Sec. 111. Rules of construction 

Section 658P is amended to include a rule of construction stating 

that nothing in this act shall be construed to require a State to impose State child care licensing requirements on any type of early 

childhood provider, including any such provider who is exempt 

from State child care licensing requirements on the date of enactment of the Caring for Children Act of 2003. 

TITLE II—ENHANCING SECURITY AT CHILD CARE CENTERS IN FEDERAL

FACILITIES

Sec. 201. Definitions 

This Section defines the term ‘‘Administrator’’ as the Administrator of General Services. The term ‘‘corresponding child care facility’’, used with respect to the Chief Administrative Officer of the 

House of Representatives, the Librarian of Congress, or the head 

of a designated entity in the Senate, means a child care facility operated by, or under a contract or licensing agreement with, an office of the House of Representatives, the Library of Congress, or an 

23

office of the Senate, respectively. The term ‘‘entity sponsoring’’, used with respect to a child care facility, means a Federal agency 

that operates, or an entity that enters into a contract or licensing 

agreement with a Federal agency to operate, a child care facility 

primarily for the use of Federal employees. 

This section defines the term ‘‘Executive agency’’ as defined in 

section 105 of title 5, United States Code, except that the term— (A) does not include the Department of Defense and the Coast 

Guard; and (B) includes the General Services Administration, with 

respect to the administration of a facility described in paragraph 

(5)(B). The term ‘‘executive facility’’—(A) means a facility that is 

owned or leased by an Executive agency; and (B) includes a facility 

that is owned or leased by the General Services Administration on 

behalf of a judicial office. The term ‘‘Federal agency’’ means an Executive agency, a legislative office, or a judicial office. 

This section also defines the term ‘‘judicial facility’’ means a facility that is owned or leased by a judicial office (other than a facility 

that is also a facility described in paragraph (5) (B)). The term ‘‘judicial office’’ means an entity of the judicial branch of the Federal 

Government. 

Lastly, this section defines the term ‘‘legislative facility’’ means 

a facility that is owned or leased by a legislative office. The term 

‘‘legislative office’’ means an entity of the legislative branch of the 

Federal Government. 

Sec. 202. Enhancing security

This section (1) directs the Administrator of General Services to 

issue regulations for child care facilities, and entities sponsoring 

child care facilities, in executive facilities; (2) directs the Chief Administrative Officer of the House of Representatives, the Librarian 

of Congress, and the head of a designated entity in the Senate to 

issue the regulations for corresponding child care facilities, and entities sponsoring the corresponding child care facilities, in legislative facilities; and (3) the Director of the Administrative Office of 

the United States Courts to issue the regulations described in subsection for child care facilities, and entities sponsoring child care 

facilities, in judicial facilities. 

This Section directs the officers described above to issue regulations that concern matters relating to an occupant emergency plan 

and evacuations, such as providing for building security Committee 

membership for each director of a child care facility; establishing 

a separate section in an occupant emergency plan for a facility; promoting familiarity with procedures and evacuation routes for different types of emergencies; strengthening onsite relationships between security personnel and the personnel of such a facility; providing specific, clear, and concise evacuation instructions for a facility; providing for good evacuation equipment, especially cribs; and 

promoting the ability to evacuate without outside assistance; and 

This Section also directs the above officers to issue regulations 

that concern matters relating to relocation sites, such as promoting 

an informed parent body that is knowledgeable about evacuation 

procedures and relocation sites; providing regularly updated parent 

contact information (regarding matters such as names, locations, 

electronic mail addresses, and cell phone and other telephone numbers); establishing remote telephone contact for parents, to and 

24

from areas that are not less than 10 miles from such a facility; and 

providing for an alternate site (in addition to regular sites) in the 

event of a catastrophe, which site may include—(i) a site that 

would be an unreasonable distance from the facility under normal 

circumstances; and (ii) a facility with 24-hour operations, such as 

a hotel or law school library. 

TITLE III—REMOVAL OF BARRIERS TO INCREASING THE SUPPLY OF

QUALITY CHILD CARE

Sec. 301. Small business child care grant program 

This section requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish a program to award grants to states, on a competitive basis, to assist states in providing funds to encourage the establishment and operation of employer-operated child care programs. The Secretary shall determine the amount of a grant to a 

State under this section based on the population of the State as 

compared to the population of all states receiving grants under this 

section. 

This section allows a State to use awarded funds to provide assistance to a consortium of a small business and other appropriate 

entities located in the State to enable the small businesses to establish and operate child care programs. Such assistance may include the acquisition, construction, renovation, and operation of 

child care facilities and equipment; technical assistance in the establishment of a child care program; assistance for the startup 

costs related to a child care program; assistance for the training of 

child care providers; scholarships for low-income wage earners; the 

provision of services to care for sick children or to provide care to 

school-aged children; the entering into of contracts with local resource and referral or local health departments; assistance for care 

for children with disabilities; or assistance for any other activity 

determined appropriate by the State (including loans, grants, investment guarantees, interest subsidies, or other mechanisms to 

expand the availability of, and improve the quality of, employer-operated child care in the State). 

A consortium is required by this section to apply to the State for 

grants. A State is required to give priority to a consortium that desires to provide child care in a geographic area within the State 

where such care is not generally available or accessible. A State 

may not provide in excess of $500,000 in assistance from such 

funds to any single applicant. 

To be eligible to receive a grant under this section, a State shall 

provide assurances to the Secretary that, with respect to the costs 

to be incurred by a consortium receiving assistance from the State 

to carry out activities under this section—the consortium will make 

available non-Federal contributions to such costs in an amount 

equal to—(A) for the first fiscal year in which the consortium receives such assistance, not less than 50 percent of such costs; (B) 

for the second fiscal year in which the consortium receives such assistance, not less than 662.3 percent of such costs; and (C) for the 

third fiscal year in which the consortium receives such assistance, 

not less than 75 percent of such costs; and 

(2) the consortium will make the contributions available—(A) directly or through donations from public or private entities; and (B) 

25

as determined by the State, in cash or in kind, fairly evaluated, including plant, equipment, or services. 

To be eligible to receive assistance under a grant awarded under 

this section, a child care provider shall comply with all applicable 

State and local licensing and regulatory requirements and all applicable health and safety standards in effect in the State. 

A State may not retain more than 3 percent of awarded funds 

for State administration and other State-level activities. The Secretary requires that the State has responsibility for administering 

the awarded grant under this section and for monitoring consortia 

that receive assistance under such grant. Each State shall require 

each consortium receiving assistance under the grant awarded to 

conduct an annual audit with respect to the activities of the consortium. Such audits shall be submitted to the State. If the State determines, through an audit or otherwise, that a consortium has 

misused the assistance, the State shall notify the Secretary of the 

misuse. The Secretary, upon such a notification, may seek from 

such a consortium the repayment of an amount equal to the 

amount of any such misused assistance plus interest. 

This section requires the Secretary to by regulation provide for 

an appeals process with respect to repayments under this paragraph. 

This section requires the Secretary to conduct a study not later 

than 2 years after the date on which the Secretary first awards 

grants under this section to determine the capacity of consortia to 

meet the child care needs of communities within states; the kinds 

of consortia that are being formed with respect to child care at the 

local level to carry out programs funded under this section; and 

who is using the programs funded under this section and the income levels of such individuals. 

This Section requires the Secretary to prepare and submit to the 

appropriate Committees of Congress not later than 28 months after 

the date on which the Secretary first awards grants under this section, a report on the results of the study conducted in accordance 

with subparagraph (A). 

This Section requires that not later than 4 years after the date 

on which the Secretary first awards grants under this section, the 

Secretary shall conduct a study to determine the number of child 

care facilities that are funded through consortia that received assistance through a grant awarded under this section and that remain in operation and the extent to which such facilities are meeting the child care needs of the individuals served by such facilities. 

This Section requires that not later than 52 months after the 

date on which the Secretary first awards grants under this section, 

the Secretary shall prepare and submit to the appropriate Committees of Congress a report on the results of the study conducted in 

accordance with subparagraph (A). 

As defined by this section, the term ‘‘consortium’’ means 2 or 

more entities that—include at least 1 small business; and may include other small businesses, nonprofit agencies or community development corporations, local governments, or other appropriate entities. The term ‘‘small business’’ as defined by this section is an 

employer who employed an average of at least 2 but not more than 

50 employees on business days during the preceding calendar year. 

26

This section authorizes $30,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 

2004 through 2008 to carry out the grant program. With respect to 

the total amount appropriated for such period in accordance with 

this subsection, not more than $2,500,000 of that amount may be 

used for expenditures related to conducting evaluations required 

under, and the administration of, this section. The grant program 

established by this section shall terminate on September 30, 2009. 

(27)

IX. ADDITIONAL VIEWS 

While we support the Caring for Children Act and were pleased 

to work with the majority in drafting bipartisan legislation, there 

are a few areas in the report where we would like to clarify the 

basis of our views and support. 

Federal funds for child care and early education 

It is true that $17 billion is currently spent by the federal government on child care and early child development, however, many 

of the programs mentioned in the report do not provide child care 

services. In short, they are simply not child care, they are not designed to meet the needs of working parents, and they are services 

provided regardless of a parent’s work status. Head Start, the 

Child and Adult Care Food Program, IDEA preschool and Part C 

infant and toddler grants, and the 21st Century Community Learning Centers program do not fund child care services. These programs provide critical services, but each of these programs targets 

different children for different purposes. None pay for the cost of 

child care. 

Head Start is not child care. There is no requirement for Head 

Start parents to be working. Assistant Secretary Wade Horn said 

before the Senate Finance Committee in March of 2002, ‘‘I agree 

that Head Start is not child care.’’ In response to questions, Dr. 

Horn agreed that of the 800,000 or so children in Head Start, about 

450,000 of them needed child care in addition to Head Start. Most 

Head Start programs and state pre-kindergarten programs are part 

day. The short hours of part-day programs can be a challenge for 

working poor families who work full-time. For families working 

part-time, the hours of operation may not correspond to parent 

work schedules. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that an 

additional $500 million per year would be necessary to meet the 

needs of current Head Start parents who report that they need 

child care, but are not provided assistance. 

While it is true that during the time a child spends in Head 

Start, child care services are not needed, it is also true that only 

if the hours in which a child spends in Head Start perfectly correspond with a parent’s work schedule, is there an overall reduction in hours of child care that a particular family may need. Since 

the majority of Head Start programs are part-day, many parents 

require child care assistance in addition to Head Start. 

The IDEA preschool and Part C infant and toddler grant programs provide critical services for children with disabilities. However, the provision of services for a few hours a week is not child 

care. With regard to the Section 619 preschool grants program, 

most of the programs are 21⁄2 hours a day. Again, this can be a 

challenge to working families who work longer than 21⁄2 hours a 

day. 

28

What the list of programs (excluding child care) has in common 

is that these programs are designed to meet the needs of children, 

not working parents. On the otherhand, child care is designed to 

meet the needs of working parents and their children. Since the intent of the Caring for Children Act is to meet the child care needs 

of parents while promoting quality care for children, the fact that 

there is $17 billion available for child care and early education is 

irrelevant. Funding for intervention programs is not a substitute 

for child care funding. 

More mothers, particularly single mothers, are working now than 

in years past, which makes juggling part-day programs, child care 

needs, and work that much more challenging. Among children 

under age 18 living in families headed by a single mother, the proportion whose mother was working full-time, year-round, increased 

from 38 percent in 1995 to 50 percent in 2000. For children under 

age 6, the percentage with a single mother working full-time, yearround, increased from 24 percent in 1995 to 37 percent in 2000. 

The proportion of employed single mothers with children under 6 

rose from 44 percent in 1992 to 65 percent in 2000. In addition, while $17 billion is currently spent on child care and 

early education, such spending is subject to the annual appropriations process. For fiscal year 2004, the President has proposed a 

$400 million cut in the 21st Century program, freezes in program 

spending for IDEA preschool grants and child care. A modest but 

below inflation adjustment was proposed for IDEA Part C (grants 

for infants and toddlers. If one assumes that program costs increase with inflation, particularly the salaries needed to attract 

and retain quality teachers, then budget freezes in these programs 

could have the effect of reducing the number of children served. 

The President proposed a modest inflation adjustment for Head 

Start (which will not create new Head Start programs in communities or extend the hours of operation of existing Head Start centers). 

Children with special needs 

While we recognize that efforts have been made in this legislation to expand access and improve the quality of care for disabled 

children, in too many states, parents with children with disabilities 

have a great deal of difficulty finding child care. Forty-five percent 

of mothers of infants with disabilities do not work outside the home 

for pay because they cannot find child care, according to the Institute of Medicine at the National Academies. Mothers are less likely 

to re-enter the labor force by the time their child is one and those 

who do enter the workforce work fewer hours than mothers of typically developing children. For these reasons, despite the improvements in the bill, we will continue to work to see how we can further address the child care needs of families with children who 

have disabilities. 

We want to allay any misconception that programs under IDEA 

pay for child care for disabled children. They do not. Under IDEA 

Part C, the infant and toddler grant program, and Part 619, the 

preschool grant program, funds are provided for therapeutic services to address specific disabilities or developmental delays in children. These services are not child care. For example, IDEA Part C 

29

provides infants and toddlers with occupational and physical therapy, and other services to enhance disabled infants and toddlers’ functioning (such as physical therapy for a child with cerebral 

palsy). To be eligible for special education services, children must 

be classified by the state as having a disability and being in need 

of services to address the disability; in no way does eligibility relate 

to whether a parent works or needs child care. In fact, for working 

families, the hours of services provided can be a challenge in finding ‘‘wrap-around’’ child care. Or, too often, parents can’t work because not only do their children require special services, but then 

the parents can’t find a child care provider to care for a disabled 

child. Special education services under IDEA Part C can take place 

across a variety of settings (e.g., within the infant or toddler’s 

home, in day care, etc), and often require the presence of a family 

member (for training, etc.). IDEA Part C monies pay for these 

therapeutic and other services; families do not receive these IDEA 

funds directly. In addition, IDEA Part C services may be 30 minutes a day, 30 minutes a week, it depends on the disability of the 

child and the services needed. But, these are intervention services, 

for the most part with the parent present, not child care for working parents. 

While it is true that while a child is receiving a service, like 

physical therapy, the child may not need supervision by a parent, 

that doesn’t make the service child care. Saying otherwise, would 

mean that pediatric surgery for ear tubes (a common procedure for 

infants and toddlers) is child care since parents don’t need to supervise such children while they are in the operating room. But, we 

feel everyone would agree that the time a child spends in the operating room is not child care. The same is true with IDEA intervention programs. 

Payment rates and access to quality care 

We are particularly concerned about state payment rates for 

child care. Low payment rates directly affect the kind of care children receive and whether families can find quality child care in 

their communities. Low rates can also compromise the quality of 

care offered by providers who are unable to attract and retain 

qualified staff or invest in curriculum enhancements. 

We are strongly concerned that the suggestion of state flexibility 

could lead to even lower payment rates; the clear intent of the bill’s 

provisions on rates are to encourage states to improve their market 

rate surveys and raise rates when needed to reflect the findings 

from those surveys. Indeed, requiring states to develop and conduct 

a representative market rates survey and set payment rates based 

on its results is critically important to address problems that stem 

from low payment rates and help states set payment rates that 

keep pace with the marketplace. 

Current law requires states to set rates that ensure equal access 

to comparable child care services provided to those who are not eligible for assistance. The Department of Health and Human Services recommends that states set payment rates at or above the 75th 

percentile of market rates in order to meet the equal access requirements, and we believe that nothing in this bill is intended to 

modify that guidance. However, nearly half the states set rates 

30

below this level, leaving parents with few choices among child care 

providers. 

The survey requirement is not intended to preclude a state from 

raising payment rates if the state has previously found it necessary 

to reduce the number of families assisted for other programmatic 

or fiscal reasons. In addition to encouraging states to conduct their 

survey as close as possible to the development of the state plan so 

that the findings are not outdated, we hope that states will make 

adjustments between survey intervals as necessary to reflect increases in the cost of living. 

Yet, we believe the bill does not go far enough. The bill retains 

the requirement that rates be sufficient to provide for equal access, 

but does not set out a quantified, objective payment level that 

states must reach. Setting the bar at the HHS recommended level 

of the 75th percentile would improve the situation that exists in 

half the states that have not yet reached this level. But, even the 

75th percentile means that rates are too low to pay for 25% of care 

in a community, so that low-income parents lack choice among the 

full range of care and may be unable to access high quality care 

for their children. We should be setting the bar higher than the 

75th percentile to ensure that states strive to do better to improve 

access to high quality child care, so children have safe, healthy 

child care that prepares them for school. 

The Committee’s recognition of the importance of rates-related 

expenditures to improve parental access to higher quality child 

care is underscored by the inclusion of a provision to encourage 

states to spend funds in excess of amounts received for fiscal year 

2003 on supporting payment rate increases, establishing tiered reimbursement rates, and increasing payment rates for care in communities identified for improvement under the Elementary and 

Secondary Education Act. We believe that states should set their 

payment rates so all parents have the option of high quality care.

However, we also believe that states need resources to ensure 

higher rates and increased quality of care, and we regret that there 

are no actual funds devoted for this much needed purpose. Indeed, 

little or nothing will come of our efforts to improve child care quality and ensure children are ready for school and not left behind, if 

states merely maintain the current strategy of pushing more and 

more children into inadequately supported child care settings. The 

serious issue of affordable high quality child care merits specific requirements and dedicated funding for increased payment rates. 

Otherwise, we will not see improved payment rates and real, high 

quality choices for parents in child care. We will seek to address 

these issues as this bill moves forward. 

Federal eligibility guidelines and direct services 

The majority says, ‘‘program officials in five of seven states interviewed by the General Accounting Office reported that all families 

eligible under the state’s income criteria who applied for child care 

assistance were being served.’’ This data is out of date, pre-dates 

the impact of the recession on states, and will soon be replaced by 

a new GAO study reflecting more current information, including 

the impact of the recession. 

31

The majority of states are currently not able to provide child care 

assistance to all eligible families who need help—even under state 

criteria. Studies repeatedly support this conclusion. Many states 

have very long waiting lists for child care assistance. Most states 

cannot serve all eligible families (even under state criteria). Over 

200,000 eligible children are on the waiting list in California, more 

than 50,000 children in Florida, more than 22,000 families in Georgia, 12,000 families in Indiana, and 17,000 in Massachusetts. Several states including Connecticut, Tennessee, and Maryland as well 

as the District of Columbia—each with existing waiting lists—have 

stopped taking new applications for assistance from some eligible 

families. 

Many states choose not to keep waiting lists, which does not 

mean that the demand is not there for child care assistance. In 

other cases, this may have more to do with weak state efforts to 

advertise child care assistance or to perform outreach activities to 

let eligible families know about the availability of assistance. Recent reports found that some states do not perform aggressive outreach because it would increase demand at a time when states 

don’t have the resources. Twenty-one states said that most low-income families do not know that they could receive assistance and 

another eight states reported that they were uncertain about 

whether or not most eligible families know about child care assistance. 

In more than a quarter of the states, a family of three earning just $25,000 does not qualify for assistance. This includes four 

states where a family of three earning $20,000 per year would not 

qualify for assistance. Families with low earnings cannot afford the 

cost of care on their own. Full-day care in a center can easily cost 

$4,000 to $10,000 per year—at least as much as college tuition at 

a public university. Child care ranks among the largest expenses 

for young families, rivaling what even middle-income families 

spend on rent or food. Other programs such as Head Start and 

state pre-kindergarten programs provide support to low-income 

families who are eligible for child care assistance. However, the 

majority of these programs operate on a part day schedule. This requires parents who work full time to also have access to child care 

assistance to supplement these part-day programs. 

What is clear is that by eliminating the 85% state median income eligibility threshold, on a national level we would not be able 

to say what percentage of eligible children receive assistance. 

The majority contends, ‘‘the demand for child care services and 

the number of eligible families in need of subsidies may be overestimated because not all low-income parents need subsidized child 

care.’’ While informal care may be the choice of care for some families, for others it is a default. If state subsidy rates (or payment 

vouchers) are too low, families are limited in their child care 

choices. If families work nontraditional hours, there may be few 

nontraditional hour child care providers in their community. Increasingly, relative care is not free. With increasing economic pressure on relatives, many parents find that they have to pay relatives 

so that relatives can forgo other employment. Last, in an increasingly transient society, many families simply do not have close geographic access to relatives. 

32

The majority also contends that ‘‘estimates of subsidies needed 

by children through the Child Care and Development Block Grant 

and TANF might be reduced further by taking into account the 

availability of other programs and funding sources serving children, including state funded pre-kindergarten programs and Head 

Start.’’ As already mentioned, the short hours of these part-time 

programs can be a challenge to working parents and may not correspond to parent work schedules. According to a nationwide study 

released in 2000, more than 25 percent of low income working families primarily work evening or overnight shifts. In contrast, 83 

percent of higher-income working families work traditional daytime 

hours, with only 17 percent primarily working evening or overnight 

shifts. An even higher percentage (42 percent) of working women 

earning less than $25,000 a year had nontraditional schedules 

(nights and weekends). 

A study of mothers participating in welfare-to-work programs in 

California, Connecticut, and Florida found that nearly one-third 

worked evening shifts and four out of ten worked weekends. A 

study of 207 Illinois families receiving transitional child care assistance after leaving welfare for work found that nearly 75 percent 

were working nontraditional hours. 

We want to be clear on current law. States have complete flexibility to set income eligibility at whatever level they choose. New 

Mexico is a prime example of this recently reducing eligibility to 

the poverty level. Eliminating the federal maximum income level 

could lead to a race to the bottom. Already, Connecticut, Tennessee, 

D.C., Maryland, and Colorado have restricted child care assistance 

to families on welfare. 

The child care block grant, authored by this committee, has long 

been designed to address the needs of low income and working families. The Finance Committee child care money has historically 

been used for welfare recipients and those most at-risk of welfare 

receipt. We are very concerned that the removal of the 85 percent 

state median income threshold will send a signal to the states that 

child care assistance is for welfare recipients alone. It is not. That’s 

not the history of this committee action and not the record of the 

Congress. 

Child care in nearly every state costs as much if not more than 

public college tuition. If we truly care about the quality of care that 

children receive, we need to ensure that all low income and working families who need child care assistance have access to it, not 

just families on welfare. 

State supplantation 

An issue that was not addressed in this bill and one that we will 

seek to address on the floor is the issue of state supplanting. We 

have worked very hard on this bill to improve the quality of care 

and the child care subsidy system and we are concerned that states 

could undercut our efforts by using any new child care funds to 

supplant state budget cuts. 

According to the National Governors Association, state budgets 

are in the worst shape since World War II. For fiscal year 2004, 

states are facing budget deficits of between $70 billion and $85 billion. Last year, 13 states (Alabama, Arizona, Maine, MassachuVerDate Jan 31 2003 06:47 Apr 29, 2003 Jkt 019010 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR037.XXX SR037
33

setts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina, 

North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, and Utah) cut child care funding. Seven states (Alabama, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Utah, and Wyoming) were not able to provide state matching funds to draw down all their available federal child care funding. 

Several states have cut state pre-kindergarten funds, with the 

threat of further cuts this year. Recent budget cuts in Ohio will 

mean 18,500 children will lose child care by September. Connecticut’s Governor has proposed cutting child care by $40 million over 

the next 3 years, which will drop 30,000 children from child care 

assistance. Maryland’s Governor has proposed a 25 percent reduction in child care. 

A large number of states are cutting TANF funding transferred 

to child care and also TANF funding spent directly on child care. 

States are reducing eligibility for child care, reducing payment 

rates for child care vouchers, and increasing parent co-pays. North 

Carolina, Oklahoma, and Kansas are cutting funds for infant and 

toddler care. Some states, like Tennessee and Arizona, are even 

cutting funds used to ensure child care safety. Nothing will come 

of our efforts to improve the quality of child care and expand access 

to child care if states merely use new child care money to supplant 

state child care cuts. 

School-age children 

The term ‘‘school-age children’’ is not specifically mentioned in 

the Caring for Children Act, but it is clear in the bill that children 

through age 12 are eligible for child care assistance. The capacity 

of child care to foster children’s social, emotional, physical and cognitive development must continue when children enter school. Improved access to, and quality of, school-age care is critical for the 

at least 2.4 million children ages 5 to 11, and the 24 percent and 

33 percent of 11 and 12 year old children, respectively, who are 

regularly left alone or unsupervised when they are out of school 

and their parents are away from the home. 

School-age children also face multiple child care arrangements 

that vary sometimes by day and week. Access to programs, like 

those supported by 21st Century Community Learning Centers 

funds, is limited. Moreover, traditional before and after school program hours may not correspond to parent work schedules. For instance, a typical 21st Century middle school program runs for two 

and a half hours a day, from 2:30 to 5 pm, after which time children typically go home on buses. Census data show that working 

parents (or parents in school) with children aged 5 to 14, on average, must piece together multiple child care arrangements per 

week to meet their needs for child care during non-school hours. 

According to Census data, nearly 7 million children between the 

ages of 5 and 14 go home alone unsupervised each week. Those 

home alone include: two percent of 5 year-olds, three percent of 6 

year-olds, 4 percent of 7 year-olds, 8 percent of 8 year-olds, 10 percent of 9 year-olds, and 14 percent of 10 year-olds. It could very 

well be that a far greater number of children are home alone each 

week, but 7 million represents the data collected by the Census Bureau. Many people believe that the number of children home alone 

34

is much greater, but parents don’t like to admit that their children, 

particularly young children, are home alone. 

Unsupervised time is a significant factor that affects children’s 

safety, well being, and school performance; therefore, enhancing 

the quality of, and access to, child care for school-aged populations 

is a critical component of this bill. 

National activities: (child care hotline and infants and toddler setaside) 

The Appropriations Act for the Departments of Labor, HHS, and 

Education has set aside funds for infants and toddlers since 

FY2000. The President’s budget has also recognized the importance of this funding for infants and toddlers by requesting $100 million 

for this purpose for the last 3 years. With the funds made available 

through the Appropriations Committee, all states already have activities in place to improve the quality of care for infants and toddlers. This legislation encourages the Appropriations Committee to 

continue to fully fund this proven effective initiative. Maintaining 

these targeted funds is especially important in light of recent state 

cut backs in initiatives that support infant and toddler care. 

We want to highlight Child Care Aware as a very good model for 

a national toll free hotline currently assisting families nationwide 

in accessing local information on child care options and providing 

consumer education. It is important for families to continue to have 

national access to the same level of services, and we agree with the 

President’s FY 2004 budget request which would continue support 

for this project. Furthermore, we are aware of the Child Care 

Aware quality assurance program that has been developed to ensure families receive the highest quality local services possible, and 

encourage the Secretary to continue this initiative. 

Funding 

The Caring for Children Act authorizes $2.1 billion in FY2004, increasing to $3.1 billion in FY2008, an increase of $1 billion over 

current CCDBG discretionary funding over the next five years. We 

are hopeful that the appropriations process will result in increases 

to match the authorized levels. At the same time, we will work to 

increase funding for child care through the mandatory child care 

funding stream during consideration of welfare reform. 

About 16 million children under the age of 13 live in families 

with incomes below 200% of poverty where someone works and no 

one receives welfare. These are our primary target families, yet 

only 2 million children receive child care assistance. These are the 

families we are concerned have the least amount of choice in child 

care providers. 

We believe that funding for child care must be adjusted for inflation to ensure that current assistance retains its purchasing power 

in the market, particularly given the already low subsidy rates for 

child care used by many states. The Congressional Budget Office 

estimated last year that adjusting assistance for 2 million children 

would cost $4.5 billion over the next 5 years. Some argue that it 

is not Congressional policy to adjust block grants for inflation. Congressional policy is whatever the Congress supports; there is no 

written policy prohibiting the adjustment of block grants for inflaVerDate Jan 31 2003 06:47 Apr 29, 2003 Jkt 019010 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR037.XXX SR037
35

tion. By not providing inflation adjustments, states will bear the 

burden by reducing the number of children served, reducing eligibility levels, reducing subsidies for care (voucher levels), or increasing parent co-payments. The fact is, if we want to maintain current 

services without reducing the number of children served, some one 

must pick up the cost of care. If the federal government does not 

adjust its contribution for inflation, then either states or low income parents will be left to make up the shortfall. 

Beyond adjusting current assistance, we also believe that any 

child care funding made available this year (and through CCDBG 

and TANF reauthorization) must also reflect any increased TANF 

work requirements for parents (as estimated by the Congressional 

Budget Office), sufficient funds to invest in improving the quality 

of child care, and sufficient funds to expand access to child care for 

more working poor families. 

EDWARD M. KENNEDY. TOM HARKIN. JAMES JEFFORDS. PATTY MURRAY. JOHN EDWARDS. CHRISTOPHER DODD. BARBARA A. MIKULSKI. JEFF BINGAMAN. JACK REED. HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON. 

(36)

X. CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

In compliance with rule XXVI paragraph 12 of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the following provides a print of the statute 

or the part or section thereof to be amended or replaced (existing 

law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed 

is shown in roman): 

* * * * * * *

CHILD CARE AND DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ACT 

OF 1990

* * * * * * *

øSEC. 658A. SHORT TITLE AND GOALS.¿

SEC. 658A. SHORT TITLE AND GOALS.

(a) SHORT TITLE.—This subchapter may be cited as the ‘‘Child 

Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990’’. (b) GOALS.—The goals of this subchapter are— (1) to allow each State maximum flexibility in developing 

child care programs and policies that best suit the needs of 

children and parents within such State; 

(2) to promote parental choice to empower working parents 

to make their own decisions on the child care that best suits 

their family’s needs; 

(3) to øencourage¿ assist States to provide consumer education information to help parents make informed choices 

about child care; 

(4) to assist States to provide child care to øparents trying 

to achieve independence from public assistance; and¿ low-income and working parents;

(5) to assist States in improving the quality of child care 

available to families; 

(6) to promote school preparedness by encouraging children, 

families, and caregivers to engage in developmentally appropriate and age-appropriate activities in child care setting that 

will— (A) improve the children’s social, emotional, and behavioral skills; and 

(B) foster their early cognitive, pre-reading and language 

development; 

(7) to promote parental and family involvement in the education of young children in child care settings; and

ø(5)¿ (8) to assist States in implementing the health, safety, 

licensing, and registration standards established in State regulations. 

* * * * * * *

37

SEC. 658B. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this øsubchapter $1,000,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 1996 through 

2002.¿ subchapter $2,300,000,000 for fiscal year 2004, 

$2,500,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, $2,700,000,000 for fiscal year 

2006, $2,900,000,000 for fiscal year 2007, and $3,100,000,000 for 

fiscal year 2008.

* * * * * * *

SEC. 658D. LEAD AGENCY. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The chief executive officer of a State desiring 

to receive a grant under this subchapter shall ødesignate, in an application submitted to the Secretary under section 658E, an appropriate State agency that complies with the requirements of subsection (b) to act as the lead agency.¿ designate an agency (which 

may be an appropriate collaborative agency), or establish a joint 

interagency office, that complies with the requirements of subsection 

(b) to serve as the lead agency for the State under this subchapter.

* * * * * * *

SEC. 658E. APPLICATION AND PLAN. 

(a) APPLICATION.—***

* * * * * * *

(c) REQUIREMENTS OF A PLAN.—

(1) LEAD AGENCY.—The State plan shall identify the lead 

agency ødesignated¿ designated or established under section 

658D. 

(2) POLICIES AND PROCEDURES.—The State plan shall: 

(A) PARENTAL CHOICE OF PROVIDERS.—Provide assurances that—

(i) the parent or parents of each eligible child within 

the State who receives or is offered child care services 

for which financial assistance is provided under this 

subchapter are given the option either—

(I) to enroll such child with a child care provider 

that has a grant or contract for the provision of 

such services; or 

(II) to receive a child care certificate as defined 

in øsection 658P(2)¿ section 658T(2); 

(ii) in cases in which the parent selects the option 

described in clause (i)(I), the child will be enrolled 

with the eligible provider selected by the parent to the 

maximum extent practicable; and 

(iii) child care certificates offered to parents selecting the option described in clause (i)(II) shall be of a 

value commensurate with the subsidy value of child 

care services provided under the option described in 

clause (i)(I); 

and provide a detailed description of the procedures the 

State will implement to carry out the requirements of this 

subparagraph. 

(B) UNLIMITED PARENTAL ACCESS.—***

* * * * * * *

38

ø(D) CONSUMER EDUCATION INFORMATION.—Certify that 

the State will collect and disseminate to parents of eligible 

children and the general public, consumer education information that will promote informed child care choices.¿

(D) CONSUMER AND CHILD CARE PROVIDER EDUCATION IN- FORMATION.—Certify that the State will— (i) collect and disseminate, through resource and referral services and other means as determined by the 

State, to parents of eligible children, child care providers, and the general public, information regarding— (I) the promotion of informed child care choices, 

including information about the quality and availability of child care services; 

(II) research and best practices concerning children’s development, including early cognitive development; 

(III) the availability of assistance to obtain child 

care services; and 

(IV) other programs for which families that receive child care services for which financial assistance is provided under this subchapter may be eligible, including the food stamp program established under the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 

2011 et seq.), the special supplemental nutrition 

program for women, infants, and children established by section 17 of the Child Nutrition Act of 

1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786), the child and adult care 

food program established under section 17 of the 

Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 

U.S.C. 1766), and the medicaid and State children’s health insurance programs under titles XIX 

and XXI of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 

et seq. and 1397aa et seq.); and 

(ii) report to the Secretary the manner in which the 

consumer education information described in clause (i) 

was provided to parents and the number of parents to 

whom such consumer education information was provided, during the period of the previous State plan.

(E) COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LICENSING REQUIREMENTS.—

(i) IN GENERAL.—***

* * * * * * *

(H) MEETING THE NEEDS OF CERTAIN POPULATIONS.—

***

* * * * * * *

(I) PROTECTION FOR WORKING PARENTS.—

(i) REDETERMINATION PROCESS.—Describe the procedures and policies that are in place to ensure that 

working parents (especially parents in families receiving assistance under a State program funded under 

part A of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

601 et seq.)) are not required to unduly disrupt their 

employment in order to comply with the State’s requireVerDate Jan 31 2003 06:47 Apr 29, 2003 Jkt 019010 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\SR037.XXX SR037
39

ments for redetermination of eligibility for assistance 

under this subchapter. 

(ii) MINIMUM PERIOD.—Demonstrate that each child 

that receives assistance under this subchapter in the 

State will receive such assistance for not less than 6 

months before the State redetermines the eligibility of 

the child under this subchapter, except as provided in 

clause (iii). 

(iii) PERIOD BEFORE TERMINATION.—At the option of 

the State, demonstrate that the State will not terminate 

assistance under this subchapter based on a parent’s 

loss of work or cessation of attendance at a job 

tranining or educational program for which the family 

was receiving the assistance, without continuing the assistance for a reasonable period of time, of not less 

than 1 month, after such loss or cessation in order for 

the parent to engage in a job search and resume work, 

or resume attendance of a job training or educational 

program, as soon as possible. 

(J) COORDINATION WITH OTHER PROGRAMS.—Describe 

how the State, in order to expand accessibility and continuity of quality early care and early education, will coordinate the early childhood education activities assisted 

under this subchapter with— (i) programs carried out under the Head Start Act 

(42 U.S.C. 9831 et seq.), including the Early Head 

Start programs carried out under section 645A of that 

Act (42 U.S.C. 9840a); 

(ii)(I) Early Reading First and Even Start programs 

carried out under subparts 2 and 3 of prt B of title I 

of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 

1965 (20 U.S.C. 6371 et seq., 6381 et seq.); and 

(II) other preschool programs carried out under title 

I of that Act (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.); 

(iii) programs carried out under section 619 and part 

C of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 

(20 U.S.C. 1419, 1431 et seq.); 

(iv) State prekindergarten programs; and 

(v) other early childhood education programs. 

(K) TRAINING IN EARLY LEARNING AND CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT.—Describe any training requirements that are in 

effect within the State that are designed to enable child 

care providers to promote the social, emotional, physical, 

and cognitive development of children and that are applicable to child care providers that provide services for which 

assistance is made available under this subchapter in the 

State. 

(L) PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS.—Demonstrate how 

the State is encouraging partnerships among State agencies, other public agencies, and private entities, to leverage 

existing service delivery systems (as of the date of submission of the State plan) for early child-hood education and 

to increase the supply and quality of child care services for 

children who are less than 13 years of age. 

40

(M) ACCESS TO CARE FOR CERTAIN POPULATIONS.—Demonstrate how the State is addressing the child care needs 

of parents eligible for child care services for which assistance is provided under this subchapter, who have children 

with special needs, work nontraditional hours, or require 

child care services for infants and toddlers. 

(N) COORDINATION WITH TITLE IV OF THE SOCIAL SECU- RITY ACT.—Describe how the State will inform parents receiving assistance under a State program funded under 

part A of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.) and low-income parents about eligibility for assistance under this subchapter.

(3) USE OF BLOCK GRANT FUNDS.— (A) GENERAL REQUIREMENT.—The State plan shall provide that the State will use the amounts provided to the 

State for each fiscal year under this subchapter øas required under¿ in accordance with subparagraphs (B) 

through ø(D)¿ (E). (B) CHILD CARE SERVICES AND RELATED ACTIVITIES.— øThe State¿

(i) IN GENERAL.—The State shall use amounts provided to the State for each fiscal year under this subchapter for child care services on a sliding fee scale 

basis, activities that improve the quality or availability of such services, and and any other activity 

that the State deems øappropriate to realize any of 

the goals specified in paragraphs (2) through (5) of 

section 658A(b)¿ appropriate (which may include an 

activity described in clause (ii)) to realize any of the 

goals specified in paragraphs (2) through (8) of section 

658A(b), with priority being given for services provided 

to children of families with very low family incomes 

(taking into consideration family size) and to children 

with special needs.

(ii) CHILD CARE RESOURCE AND REFERRAL SYSTEM.— A State may use amounts described in clause (i) to establish or support a system of local child care resource 

and referral organizations coordinated by a statewide 

private, nonprofit, community-based lead child care resource and referral organization. The local child care 

resource and referral organizations shall— (I) provide parents in the State with information, and consumer education, concerning the full 

range of child care options, including child care 

provided during nontraditional hours and through 

emergency child care centers, in their communities; 

(II) collect and analyze data on the supply of 

and demand for child care in political subdivisions within the State; 

(III) submit reports to the State containing data 

and analysis described in clause (II); and 

(IV) work to establish partnerships with public 

agencies and private entities to increase the supply 

and quality of child care services.

41

(C) LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.—*** (D) ASSISTANCE FOR CERTAIN FAMILIES.—*** (E) DIRECT SERVICES.—From amounts provided to a 

State for a fiscal year to carry out this subchapter, the 

State shall— (i) reserve the minimum amount required to be reserved under section 658G, and the funds for costs described in subparagraph (C); and 

(ii) from the remainder, use not less than 70 percent 

to fund direct services (as defined by the State).

(4) PAYEMNT RATES.— (A) IN GENERAL.—øThe State plan shall certify that payment rates for the provision of child care services for 

which assistance is provided under this subchapter are 

sufficient to ensure equal access for eligible children to 

comparable child care services in the State or substate 

area that are provided to children whose parents are not 

eligible to receive assistance under this subchapter or for 

child care assistance under any other Federal or State programs and shall provide a summary of the facts relied on 

by the State to determine that such rates are sufficient to 

ensure such access.¿

(i) SURVEY.—The State plan shall— (I) demonstrate that the State has, after consulting with local area child care program administrators, developed and conducted a statistically 

valid and reliable survey of the market rates for 

child care services in the State (that reflects variations in the cost of child care services by geographic area, type of provider, and age of child) 

within the 2 years preceding the date of the submission of the application containing the State 

plan; 

(II) detail the results of the State market rates 

survey conducted pursuant to subclause (I); 

(III) describe how the State will provide for timely payment for child care services, and set payment 

rates for child care services, for which assistance is 

provided under this subchapter in accordance with 

the results of the market rates survey conducted 

pursuant to subclause (I) without reducing the 

number of families in the State receiving such assistance under this subchapter, relative to the 

number of such families on the date of introduction of the Caring for Children Act of 2003; and 

(IV) describe how the State will, not later than 

30 days after the completion of the survey described in subclause (I), make the results of the 

survey widely available through public means, including posting the results on the Internet. 

(ii) EQUAL ACCESS.—The State plan shall include a 

certification that the payment rates are sufficient to ensure equal access for eligible children to child care 

services comparable to child care services in the State 

42

or substate area that are provided to children whose 

parents are not eligible to receive child care assistance 

under any Federal or State program.

(B) CONSTRUCTION.—øNothing¿

(i) NO PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION.—Nothing in this 

paragraph shall be construed to create a private right 

of action.

(ii) NO PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN DIFFERENT RATES.—

Nothing in this subchapter shall be construed to prevent a State from differentiating the payment rates described in subparagraph (A) on the basis of—

(I) geographic location of child care providers 

(such as location in an urban or rural area); 

(II) the age or particular needs of children (such 

as children with special needs and children served 

by child protective services); and 

(III) whether the providers provide child care 

during weekend and other nontraditional hours. 

* * * * * * *

øSEC. 658G. ACTIVITIES TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF CHILD CARE. 

øA State that receives funds to carry out this subchapter for a 

fiscal year, shall use not less than 4 percent of the amount of such 

funds for activities that are designed to provide comprehensive consumer education to parents and the public, activities that increase 

parental choice, and activities designed to improve the quality and 

availability of child care (such as resource and referral services).¿

SEC. 658G. ACTIVITIES TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF CHILD CARE. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—

(1) RESERVATION.—Each State that receives funds to carry 

out this subchapter for a fiscal year shall reserve and use not 

less than 6 percent of the funds for activities provided directly, 

or through grants or contracts with resource and referral organizations or other appropriate entities, that are designed to improve the quality of child care services. 

(2) ACTIVITIES.—The funds reserved under paragraph (1) may 

only be used to—

(A) develop and implement voluntary guidelines on prereading and language skills and activities, for child care 

programs in the State, that are aligned with State standards for kindergarten through grade 12 or the State’s general goals for school preparedness; 

(B) support activities and provide technical assistance in 

Federal, State, and local child care settings to enhance 

early learning for young children, to promote literacy, and 

to foster school preparedness; 

(C) offer training, professional development, and educational opportunities for child care providers that relate to 

the use of developmentally appropriate and age-appropriate 

curricula, and early childhood teaching strategies, that are 

scientifically based and aligned with the social, emotional, 

physical, and cognitive development of children, including—

43

(i) developing and operating distance learning child 

care training infrastructures;

(ii) developing model technology-based training 

courses; 

(iii) offering training for caregivers in informal child 

care settings; and 

(iv) offering training for child care providers who 

care for infants and toddlers and children with special 

needs. 

(D) engage in programs designed to increase the retention 

and improve the competencies of child care providers, including wage incentive programs and initiatives that establish tiered payment rates for providers that meet or exceed 

child care services guidelines, as defined by the State; 

(E) evaluate and assess the quality and effectiveness of 

child care programs and services offered in the State to 

young children on improving overall school preparedness; 

and 

(F) carry out other activities determined by the State to 

improve the quality of child care services provided in the 

State and for which measurement of outcomes relating to 

improved child safety, child well-being, or school preparedness is possible. 

(b) CERTIFICATION.—Beginning with fiscal year 2004, the State 

shall annually submit to the Secretary a certification in which the 

State certifies that the State was in compliance with subsection (a) 

during the preceding fiscal year and describes how the State used 

funds made available to carry out this subchapter to comply with 

subsection (a) during that preceding fiscal year. 

(c) STRATEGY.—The State shall annually submit to the Secretary—

(1) beginning with fiscal year 2004, an outline of the strategy 

the State will implement during that fiscal year to address the 

quality of child care services for which financial assistance is 

made available under this subchapter, including—

(A) a statement specifying how the State will address the 

activities carried out under subsection (a); 

(B) a description of quantifiable, objective measures that 

the State will use to evaluate the State’s progress in improving the quality of the child care services (including 

measures regarding the impact, if any, of State efforts to 

improve the quality by increasing payment rates, as defined 

in section 658II(c)), evaluating separately the impact of the 

activities listed in each of such subparagraphs on the quality of the child care services; and 

(C) a list of State-developed child care services quality 

targets quantified for such fiscal year for such measures; 

and 

(2) beginning with fiscal year 2005, a report on the State’s 

progress in achieving such targets for the preceding fiscal year. 

(d) IMPROVEMENT PLAN.—If the Secretary determines that a State 

failed to make progress as described in subsection (c)(2) for a fiscal 

year—

44

(1) the State shall submit an improvement plan that describes 

the measures the State will take to make that progess; and 

(2) the State shall comply with the improvement plan by a 

date specified by the Secretary but not later than 1 year after 

the date of the determination. 

(e) CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this subchapter shall be construed to require that the State apply measures for evaluating quality of child care services to specific types of child care providers. 

* * * * * * *

SEC. 658H. OPTIONAL PRIORITY USE OF ADDITIONAL FUNDS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—If a State receives funds to carry out this subchapter for a fiscal year, and the amount of the funds exceeds the 

amount of funds the State received to carry out this subchapter for 

fiscal year 2003, the State shall consider using a portion of the excess— (1) to support payment rate increases in accordance with the 

market rate survey conducted pursuant to section 658E(c)(4); 

(2) to support the establishment of tiered payment rates as described in section 658G(a)(2)(D); and 

(3) to support payment rate increases for care for children in 

communities served by local educational agencies that have 

been identified for improvement under section 1116(e)(3) of the 

Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 

6316(c)(3)). 

(b) NO REQUIREMENT TO REDUCE CHILD CARE SERVICES.—

Nothing in this section shall be construed to require a State to take 

an action that the State determines would result in a reduction of 

child care services to families of eligible children. 

(c) PAYMENT RATE.—In this section, the term payment rate 

means the rate of State payment or reimbursement to providers for 

subsidized child care. 

* * * * * * *

øSEC. 658K. REPORTS AND AUDITS.¿

(45)

SEC. 658K. REPORTS AND AUDITS.

ø(a) REPORTS.— ø(1) COLLECTION OF INFORMATION BY STATES.— ø(A) IN GENERAL.—A State that receives funds to carry 

out this subchapter shall collect the information described 

in subparagraph (B) on a monthly basis. 

ø(B) REQUIRED INFORMATION.—The information required 

under this subparagraph shall include, with respect to a 

family unit receiving assistance under this subchapter information concerning— ø(i) family income; 

ø(ii) county of residence; 

ø(iii) the gender, race, and age of children receiving 

such assistance; 

ø(iv) whether the head of the family unit is a single 

parent; 

ø(v) the sources of family income, including— ø(I) employment, including self-employment; 

ø(II) cash or other assistance under— ø(aa) the temporary assistance for needy 

families program under part A of title IV of 

the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

and 

ø(bb) a State program for which State 

spending is counted toward the maintenance 

of effort requirement under section 409(a)(7) 

of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

609(a)(7)); 

ø(III) housing assistance; 

ø(IV) assistance under the Food Stamp Act of 

1977; and 

ø(V) other assistance programs; 

ø(vi) the number of months the family has received 

benefits; 

ø(vii) the type of child care in which the child was 

enrolled (such as family child care, home care, or center-based child care);

ø(viii) whether the child care provider involved was 

a relative; 

ø(ix) the cost of child care for such families; and 

ø(x) the average hours per month of such care; during the period for which such information is required 

to be submitted. 

ø(C) SUBMISSION TO SECRETARY.—A State may described 

in subparagraph (A) shall, on a quarterly basis, submit the 

information required to be collected under subparagraph 

(B) to the Secretary. 

ø(D) USE OR SAMPLES.—

46

ø(i) AUTHORITY.—A State may comply with the requirement to collect the information described in subparagraph (B) through the use of disaggregated case 

record information on a sample of families selected 

through the use of scientifically acceptable sampling 

methods approved by the Secretary. 

ø(ii) SAMPLING AND OTHER METHODS.—The Secretary 

shall provide the States with such case sampling plans 

and data collection procedures as the Secretary deems 

necessary to produce statistically valid samples of the 

information described in subparagraph (B). The Secretary may develop and implement procedures for 

verifying the quality of data submitted by the States. 

ø(2) ANNUAL REPORTS.—Not later than December 31, 1997, 

and every 12 months thereafter, a State described in paragraph (1)(A) shall prepare and submit to the Secretary a report 

that includes aggregate data concerning— ø(A) the number of child care providers that received 

funding under this subchapter as separately identified 

based on the types of providers listed in section 658P(5); 

ø(B) the monthly cost of child care services, and the portion of such cost that is paid for with assistance provided 

under this subchapter, listed by the type of child care services provided; 

ø(C) the number of payments made by the State through 

vouchers, contracts, cash, and disregards under public benefit programs, listed by the type of child care services provided; 

ø(D) the manner in which consumer education information was provided to parents and the number of parents to 

whom such information was provided; and 

ø(E) the total number (without duplication) of children 

and families served under this subchapter; 

during the period for which such report is required to be submitted.¿

(a) REPORTS.— (1) IN GENERAL.—A State that receives funds to carry out this 

subchapter shall collect the information described in paragraph 

(2) on a monthly basis. 

(2) REQUIRED INFORMATION.—The information required 

under this paragraph shall include, with respect to a family 

unit receiving assistance under this subchapter, information 

concerning—

(A) family income; 

(B) county of residence; 

(C) the gender, race, and age of children receiving such 

assistance; 

(D) whether the head of the family unit is a single parent; 

(E) the sources of family income, including— (i) employment, including self-employment; and 

(ii) assistance under a State program funded under 

part A of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

601 et seq.) and a State program for which State 

47

spending is counted toward the maintenance of effort 

requirement under section 409(a)(7) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 609(a)(7)); 

(F) the type of child care in which the child was enrolled 

(such as family child care, home care, center-based child 

care, or other types of child care described in section 

658T(5)); 

(G) whether the child care provider involved was a relative; 

(H) the cost of child care for such family, separately stating the amount of the subsidy payment of the State and the 

amount of the co-payment of the family toward such cost; 

(I) the average hours per month of such care; 

(J) household size; 

(K) whether the parent involved reports that the child has 

an individualized education program or an individualized 

family service plan described in section 602 or 636 of the 

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 

1401 and 1436); and 

(L) the reason for any termination of benefits under this 

subchapter, including whether the termination was due 

to— (i) the child’s age exceeding the allowable limit; 

(ii) the family income exceeding the State eligibility 

limit; 

(iii) the State recertification or administrative requirements not being met; 

(iv) parent work, training, or education status no 

longer meeting State requirements; 

(v) a nonincome related change in status; or

(vi) other reasons; 

during the period for which such information is required to be 

submitted. 

(3) SUBMISSION TO SECRETARY.—A State described in paragraph (1) shall, on a quarterly basis, submit to the Secretary 

the information required to be collected under paragraph (2) 

and the number of children and families receiving assistance 

under this subchapter (stated on a monthly basis). Information 

on the number of families receiving the assistance shall also be 

posted on the website of such State. in the fourth quarterly report of each year, a State described in paragraph (1) shall also 

submit to the Secretary information on the annual number and 

type of child care providers (as described in section 658T(5)) 

that received funding under this subchapter and the annual 

number of payments made by the State Through vouchers, 

under contracts, or by payment to parents reported by type of 

child care provider. 

(4) USE OF SAMPLES.—

(A) AUTHORITY.—A State may comply with the requirement to collect the information described in paragraph (20 

through the use of disaggregated ease record information 

on a sample of families selected through the use of scientifically acceptable sampling methods approval by the Secretary. 

48

(B) SAMPLING AND OTHER METHODS.—The Secretary 

shall provide the State with such case sampling plans and 

data collection procedures as the Secretary determines necessary to produce statistically valid samples of the information described in paragraph (2). The Secretary may develop 

and implement procedures for verifying the quality of data 

submitted by the States. 

* * * * * * *

øSEC. 658L. REPORT BY SECRETARY. 

øNot later than July 31, 1998, and biennially thereafter, the Secretary shall prepare and submit to the Committee on Economic and 

Educational Opportunities of the House of Representatives and the 

Committee on Labor and Human Resources of the Senate a report 

that contains a summary and analysis of the data and information 

provided to the Secretary in the State reports submitted under section 658K. Such report shall include an assessment, and where appropriate, recommendations for the Congress concerning efforts 

that should be undertaken to improve the access of the public to 

quality and affordable child care in the United States.¿

SEC. 658L. NATIONAL ACTIVITIES. 

(a) REPORT.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall, not later than April 

30, 2004, and annually thereafter, prepare and submit to the 

Committee on Education and the Workforce of the House of 

Representatives and the Committee on Health, Education, 

Labor, and Pensions of the Senate, and, not later than 30 days 

after the date of such submission, post on the Department of 

Health and Human Services website, a report that contains the 

following: 

(A) A summary and analysis of the data and information 

provided to the Secretary in the State reports submitted 

under sections 658E, 658G(c), and 658K. 

(B) Aggregated statistics on and an analysis of the supply 

of, demand for, and quality of child care, early education, 

and nonschool-hour programs. 

(C) An assessment and, where appropriate, recommendations for Congress concerning efforts that should be undertaken to improve the access of the public to quality and affordable child care in the United States. 

(D) A progress report describing the progress of the States 

in streamlining data reporting, the Secretary’s plans and 

activities to provide technical assistance to States, and an 

explanation of any barriers to getting data in an accurate 

and timely manner. 

(2) COLLECTION OF INFORMATION.—The Secretary may make 

arrangements with resource and referral organizations, to utilize the child care data system of the resource and referral organizations at the national, State, and local levels, to collect the 

information required by paragraph (1)(B). 

(b) GRANTS TO IMPROVE QUALITY AND ACCESS.— (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall award grants to States, 

from allotments made under paragraph (2), to improve the 

49

quality of and access to child care for infants and toddlers, subject to the availability of appropriations for this purpose. 

(2) ALLOTMENTS.—From funds reserved under section 

658O(a)(3) for a fiscal year, the Secretary shall allot to each 

State an amount that bears the same relationship to such funds 

as the amount the State receives for the fiscal year under section 658O bears to the amount all States receive for the fiscal 

year under section 658O. 

(c) TOLL-FREE HOTLINE.—The Secretary shall award a grant or 

a contract, or enter into a cooperative agreement for the operation 

of a national toll-free hotline to assist families in accessing local information on child care options and providing consumer education 

materials, subject to the availability of appropriations for this purpose. 

(d) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.—The Secretary shall provide technical assistance to States on developing and conducting the State 

market rates survey described in section 658E(c)(4)(A)(i). 

* * * * * * *

SEC. 6580. AMOUNTS RESERVED; ALLOTMENTS. 

(a) AMOUNTS RESERVED.— (1) TERRITORIES AND POSSESSIONS.—The Secretary shall reserve not to exceed one half of 1 percent of the amount appropriated under this subchapter in each fiscal year for payments 

to Guam, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands of the United 

States, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands to be allotted in accordance with their respective needs. 

(2) INDIAN TRIBES.—The Secretary shall reserve not less than 

1 percent, and not more than 2 percent, of the amount appropriated under section 658B in each fiscal year for payments to 

Indian tribes and tribal organizations with applications approved under subsection (c).

(3) GRANTS TO IMPROVE QUALITY AND ACCESS.—The Secretary shall reserve an amount not to exceed $100,000,000 for each fiscal year to carry out section 658L(b), subject to the availability 

of appropriations for this purpose. 

(4) TOLL-FREE HOTLINE.—The Secretary shall reserve an amount not to exceed $1,000,000 to carry out section 658L(c), 

subject to the availability of appropriations for this purpose. 

* * * * * * *

SEC. 658P. RULES OF CONSTRUCTION. 

Nothing in this subchapter shall be construed to require a State 

to impose State child care licensing requirements on any type of 

early childhood provider, including any such provider who is exempt from State child care licensing requirements on the date of enactment of the Caring for Children Act of 2003. 

* * * * * * *

SEC. 658øP¿T. DEFINITIONS.

As used in this subchapter: 

(1) CAREGIVER.—The term ‘‘caregiver’’ means an individual 

who provides a service directly to an eligible child on a personto-person basis. 

50

(2) CHILD CARE CERTIFICATE.—The term ‘‘child care certificate’’ means a certificate (that may be a check or other disbursement) that is issued by a State or local government under 

this subchapter directly to a parent who may use such certificate only as payment for child care services or as a deposit for 

child care services if such a deposit is required of other children being cared for by the provider. Nothing in this subchapter shall preclude the use of such certificates for sectarian 

child care services if freely chosen by the parent. For purposes 

of this subchapter, child care certificates shall not be considered to be grants or contracts.

(3) CHILD WITH SPECIAL NEEDS.—The term ‘‘child with special 

needs’’ means—

(A) a child with a disability, as defined in section 602 of 

the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 

1401); and 

(B) a child who is eligible for early intervention services 

under part C of the Individuals with Disabilities Education 

Act (20 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.).

(4) ELIGIBLE CHILD.—The term ‘‘eligible child’’ means an individual—

(A) who is less than 13 years of age; 

(B) whose family income does not exceed ø85 percent of 

the State median income for a family of the same size¿ an 

income level determined by the State involved, with priority 

based on need as defined by the State; and 

(C) who—

(i) resides with a parent or parents who are working 

or attending a job training or educational program; or 

(ii) is receiving, or needs to receive, protective services and resides with a parent or parents not described 

in clause (i). 

* * * * * * *

(8) LEAD AGENCY.—The term ‘‘lead agency’’ means the agency 

designated under øsection 658B(a)¿ section 658D(a).

* * * * * * *

(14) TRIBAL ORGANIZATION.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘‘tribal organization’’ has the 

meaning given it in section 4(l) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b(l)). 

(B) OTHER ORGANIZATIONS.—Such term includes a øNative Hawaiian Organization, as defined in section 4009(4) 

of the Augustus F. Hawkins-Robert T. Stafford Elementary 

and Secondary School Improvement Amendments of 1988 

(20 U.S.C. 4909(4))¿ Native Hawaiian organization, as defined in section 7207 of the Elementary and Secondary 

Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7517) and a private nonprofit organization established for the purpose of serving 

youth who are Indians or Native Hawaiians.

Æ