Arrangements and Costs for Child Care

Frequently, the suggestion is made that inad-
equate child-care provisions may hinder the ca-
reers of women in a number of ways. For in-
stance, a mother may be forced to be late to, or be
absent from, work because of child-care prob-
lems, which could delay advancement on the job
or even cause loss of a job. Anticipation of such
problems may prevent a woman from accepting
a career-oriented job and lead her to search for
jobs in which there is more tolerance of tardiness
and absenteeism, even though they are low pay-
ing and offer little chance for promotion.'’ The
inability to find suitable child-care arrangements
may even prevent a woman from searching for a
job.'*

The National Longitudinal Surveys provide
information that directly relates to whether the
employment and career progress of American
women is being constrained by lack of adequate
child care. Women who are currently employed
are asked whether or not they have been absent
from work during a specified period of time
because of child-care problems. It is important
tonote the difference in the way the question was
posed in the two surveys. In the 1983 Young
Women Survey, a respondent was asked if she
had missed any work within the previous year
because of child-care problems. In the 1988
Youth Survey, the respondent was asked if she
or her husband had missed any work within the
previous 4 weeks because of child-care prob-
lems.

Because of differences in the question, there
are differences in the results. While only 3.6
percent of the respondents (or their spouses)
missed work over the previous 4 weeks in the
1988 survey, 21.7 percent answered the question
affirmatively in 1983.'’ (See table 6.)

Examining both groups of women, it is diffi-
cult to make any generalizations regarding the
relationship between lost work and the age of the
youngest child. Surprisingly, older married moth-
ers are more likely to be absent from work than
are single mothers. Married mothers may have
more flexible working arrangements than have
single mothers, which allow them to take time
off from work to deal with child-care problems.

Among older women, there appears to be a
positive relationship between net family income
and lost work due to child-care problems. While
the 1983 Youth Survey shows that 16.3 percent
of mothers with net family incomes below
$15,000 were absent from work within the last
year because of child-care problems, 27.7 per-
cent of mothers with family incomes above
$50,000 also lost work. In contrast, for younger
women, there is no clear relationship between
family income and lost work caused by child-
care problems.

This finding that women in relatively higher-
income families are more likely to miss work has
a number of possible implications. First, be-
cause most women in high-income families are
married (spouse present), they may have less
attachment to their own jobs, and with their
husband’s income, they can “afford” time off
from work in order to handle child-care prob-
lems. Second, this result could also be inter-
preted as suggesting that child-care does not
really constrain the employment and career
progress of women. Third, the measure used
here—the percentage of women who have missed
time from work because of child-care prob-
lems—may not be a very good indicator of the
existence of child-care constraints on women’s
career advancement.

Table 4. Child-care arrangement for youngest children of women in the National
Longitudinal Survey, by marital status
~ Percent of children cared for
Youth Survey Young Women Survey
Provider (Women ages 23-31)' 19-39)"
Married,
spouse present Other spouse present Other
Father... 147 43 18.3 09
Sibling .. 8 16 8 10.7
Other relative ..........0,, 24.1 37.9 15: 25.0
Other person : 24.0 18.9 24.3 23.3
Child-care canter... . 172 20.1 11.8 7.0
Mother cares for child at wor cee 34 23 46 32
Child caras for self veeeeeeees 13 34 21.3 35.2
Other... 2... a toes 14.3 11.8 13.6 69
" Data are from the 1988 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth.
? Data are from the 1983 National Longitudinal Survey of Young Women. {n the survey, respondents were allowed to
choose from more than one type of arrangement. Thus, percentages total more than 100 percent.

14 Monthly Labor Review October 1991


(Statement before the Select Committee on Children, Youth,
and Families, July 1, 1987), finds that among families in
which the youngest child is under age 5, those whose
income level faiis below the poverty level spend 22.6
Percent on child-care, while those whose income level is
above the poverty line have child-care expenditures that
account for 8.8 percent of their income,

25 In dual labor market theory, these jobs are referred (o
as secondary sector jobs, and once workers find themselves
in such a job, they find it difficult to obtain a primary sector
job. For a review of the dual labor market literature, see
Glen Cain, “The Challenge of Segmented Labor Market
Theory to Orthodox Economic Theory,” Journal of Eco-
nomic Literature, December 1976, pp. {215—57.

‘6 Research on this issue has shown that women do feel
constrained in their employment prospects by child-care
responsibilities. See Karen Mason, “The Perceived Impact

of Child-care Costs on Women’s Labor Supply and Fertil-
ity,” conference paper presented at The Population Asso-
ciation of America, April 1987; Harriet Presser and Wendy
Baldwin, “Child-care as a Constraint on Employment:
Prevalence, Correlates, and Bearing on the Work and Fam-
ily Nexus,” American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 85, 1980,
pp.1202-13; and David Blau and Phil Robins, “Fertility,
Employment, and Child-care Costs: A Dynamic Analysis,”
conference paper presented at The Population Association
of America, April 1986.

17 The figures in table 6 reflect the judgment of the
respondents as to what constitutes a “child-care problem"
that is serious enough to prevent them from working.

18 For an analysis of the relationship between labor
force nonparticipation and child-care problems, see Peter
Cattan, “Child-care problems: an obstacle to work,” pp.
3-9.

More on wage rigidity

Efficiency wage theory has been both severely criticized and staunchly

defended in recent years,

Most of the criticisms have been aimed at

demonstrating that there are superior ways of handling the shirking prob-
Jem that are more likely to emerge in a market setting. For example, it has
been argued that each worker should be willing to post a bond that would be
forfeited if he or she was detected shirking. All that would be needed to
guarantee that the worker would not shirk would be a sufficiently high bond,
unemployment would no longer be needed as a discipline device. Afterna-
tively, the worker could pay an “entrance fee” when initially hired. Com-
petition among workers for the jobs would then increase the fee until all
involuntary unemployment disappeared. The fear of losing your job and
having to pay another entrance fee would then be sufficient to keep workers

from shirking.

— Carl Davidson

Recent Developments in the

Theory of Involuntary Unemployment
(Kalamazoo, MI, W. E. Upjohn Institute
for Employment Research, 1990), p. 134.

Monthly Labor Review October 1991

7


Table 3. Child-care arrangement for youngest children of women in the National
Longitudinal Survey, by family income

Percent of children cared for Percent of children cared for
Youth Survey Young Women Survey
Provider (Women ages 23-31) (Women ages 29-39)"
Family income (1988 dollars) Family income (1988 dollars)
$o- $15,000- | $25,000-| $50,000 $o- $15,000~ | $25,000-| $50,000
$14,999 | $24,999 | $49,999 | and over | $14,999 | $24,999 | $49,990 | and over
Father... 06... 0.0020 ee WT 15.3 12.0 4.0 11.6 13.9 16.9 13.8
Sibling .... 23 8 1.0 oO 87 87 9.8 75
Other relative . 33.1 26.1 29.1 16.3 25.8 28.0 14.9 87
Other person .......... 21.0 19.8 22.1 33.1 18.2 17.6 29.0 30.4
Child-care center. 14.7 18.1 19.9 10.7 5.2 63 97 17.0
Mother cares for child
at work 6.0... ee 41 44 19 43 5.2 5.4 24 6.3
Child cares for self ...... 3.2 22 14 1.6 30.2 23.3 21.8 23.6
Other 9.8 13.5 12.8 19.9 10.1 _ 9.4 11.4 77

to choose from more than one type of arrangement. Thus, p

' Data are from the 1988 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth.
2 Data are from the 1983 National Longitudinal Survey of Young Women. In the survey, respondents were allowed

jercentages total more than 100 percent

on relatives (25 percent) or to let the child care
for himself or herself (35.2 percent), (See table 4.)

Child-care expenditures

In addition to information about the child-care
arrangements used in families, the National Lon-
gitudinal Surveys also include information on
child-care expenditures and the average number
of hours of child care used per week. Child-care
expenditures reflect the amount spent on the care
of ali children within the family. The averages
are calculated only for those families who actu-
ally used child care and who spent money on
child-care services. (See table 5.)

Average weekly expenditures on child care
are about $60 for younger women and $45 for
older women (in 1988 dollars). However, younger
women utilize child-care services an average of
39.4 hours a week, compared with 24.7 hours a
week for older women. Therefore, the hourly
expenditures are larger for older women, who
spend $1.80 per hour as opposed to $1.56 for
younger women. These differences in expendi-
tures may be partially attributed to the fact that
older women generally have higher incomes
than do younger women. Also, the variation in
family structure between the two groups might
be responsible for differences in the number of
hours and payment per hour. Older women tend
to have more children, and older children, than
do young women. Because these children are
older, and spend more time in school, the need
for child care decreases. They may also have
older siblings to provide care. Yet, older women
have more children for whom to pay the costs of
care, which may result in their expenditures per

hour on ail children being slightly greater than
the expenditures of young women.

The data indicate that there is a difference in
the average weekly and hourly expenditures for
married and single women. Among young
women, those who are married pay $64.36 per
week and $1.67 per hour, and those who are
single pay $55.11 per week and $1.27 per hour.
Among older women, those who are married pay
$46.58 per week and $1.87 per hour, while
single mothers pay $36.61 per week and $1.54
per hour. This difference between married and
single mothers can probably be attributed to the
type of arrangement used. Single women rely on
relatives (who may charge a nominal fee) more
often than do married women. (See table 4.)
Because relatives can provide a relatively inex-
pensive form of child care, single women pay
jess, on average, for child care.

The data also suggest that child-care expendi-
tures and hourly usage are related to family
income. For both married and single women, it
appears that those with net family incomes of
$50,000 or more use child care for more hours
than do other women, There appears to be a
direct relationship between the income level of a
family and their child-care expenditures (both
weekly and hourly) for both younger and older
women. '*

Constraints on women’s employment

Thus far, arrangements for the care of the child
have been the prime consideration. Yet, an im-
portant related issue to consider in determining
the seriousness of child-care problems is the
extent to which these problems affect the em-
ployment and career opportunities of women.

Monthly Labor Review October 1991

13

|


| table 5. Weekly and hourly expenditures

week used by women in the National Longitudinal Survey who use paid chiid

on child care and the number of hours per

care
Youth Survey Young Women Survey
(Women ages 23-31)' (Women ages 20-39)"
Provider ‘Average | Average | Average ‘Average | Average
number of | hourly number of } hourly
hours per expenditures hours per Jexpenditures
(1988 dollars)| week {1988 dollars)|(1968 dollare)| week —_{(1988 dollars)
Total .. 61.51 39.38 1.56 44.46 24.69 1.80
Age of youngest
Birth to t year ........ 59.51 43.73 1.36 63.48 35.55 4.79
2-4 years... 71.46 40.19 1.78 52.59 34.28 1.53
5 years and over... 49.03 35.42 1.38 37.63 20.46 4.84
Marital status:
Married, spouse present. | 64.36, 38.54 1.67 46.58 24.97 1.87
Other... 56.11 41.03 1.34 36.61 23.79 1.54
Net family income
{in 1988 dollars):
$0-$14,999 . . 44.11 39,69 44 32.84 23.05 4.42
$15,000-$24,999 43.14 40.31 1.07 42.08 23.76 177
$25,000-$49,999... 66.12 38.17 1.73 44.28 24.38 1.82
$50,000 and mare . . 83.99 44.06 1.91 53.33 28.33 1.88

" Data are from the 1988 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth.
2 Data are from the 1983 National Longitudinal Survey of Young Women.

Because of this third possibility, it may be
useful to examine the extent to which child-care
responsibilities adversely affect the career
progress of women. The Youth Survey asks a
question dealing with whether a woman has left
the labor force because of child-care problems.'*
(See table 6.)

The 1988 survey data indicate that 2.3 per-
cent of all 23- to 31-year-old working mothers
had some period within the past year when they
were out of the labor force because of child-care
problems. These employment gaps are more
common for women with infants, who have a
spouse present in the household, and whose
family income is low. While 4.2 percent of
women in families earning less than $15,000 had
anemployment gap within the past year that was
attributed to child-care problems, only 0.3 per-
cent of women in families with incomes of
$50,000 or more had such a gap. Although em-
ployment gaps tend to lead to low income (as
opposed to low income leading to employment
gaps), these figures do suggest that young women
lose employment because they cannot find satis-
factory child care.

IN THIS ARTICLE, the National Longitudinal Sur-
veys are used to examine child-care problems in
the United States. The data indicate that children
are cared for in three major types of arrange-
ments: by relatives, by other persons, and in

child-care centers. Among these, the most com-
mon form is care by relatives, with about 2 of
every 5 children whose mother works receiving
care in this way. Husbands are a frequent child-
care provider for married women. Young and
single women often use relatives to provide care,
while older married women often use the child’s
siblings to provide care.

A factor related to the type of arrangement
used is the age of the child. While care in child-
care centers is infrequent among infants, it is
relatively common among children 2 to 4 years
old. Once a child reaches 6 years, child-care ar-
rangements are less necessary, as most children
attend school at this age.

Family income also is related to child-care
arrangements. Relatively low-income families
are more likely to depend on relatives outside the
immediate family for care. High-income fami-
lies are more likely to use child-care centers than
are low-income families. Also high-income fam-
ilies are more likely to use private child-care
centers while low-income families are more likely
to use public centers.

Average weekly expenditures on child care
range from about $45 for older mothers to almost
$60 for younger mothers (in 1988 dollars). This
amount varies widely with family income level, as
higher-income families tend to spend more on child
care than do lower-income families.

Finally, it is difficult to determine the extent
to which child care affects the career advance-

Monthly Labor Review October 1991

15


Jonathan R. Veum
and
Philip M. Gleason

Jonathan R. Veum is an
economist and Philip M.
Gleason is a former intern
in the Office of Economic
Research, Bureau of Labor
Statistics.

Child care:

arrangements and costs

Employed mothers most often use relatives

to care for their children, according to data

from the National Longitudinal Surveys;

weekly expenditures for care vary by family income

hild care has become an important public

policy issue in the United States. The

attention drawn to child care stems pri-
marily from the changing employment and de-
mographic patterns of women. In 1970, 28.7
percent of mothers with children under age 6
were in the labor force; by 1990, this percentage
had doubled, reaching 58.2 percent.'

The composition of families also has changed
significantly over the past 20 years. In particu-
lar, among families with children, the number of
single mothers has grown in importance. Be-
tween 1970 and 1988, families headed by women
increased from 10,6 percent to 16.3 percent of all
families. Two reasons are given for this in-
crease: (1) the percentage of women age 18 and
older who were divorced but had not remarried
increased from 3.9 percent in 1970 to 8.8 percent
in 1988, and (2) the frequency of births to unwed
mothers increased from 10.7 percent of total
births in 1970 to 24.5 percent in 1987.7

Because of these major social changes, the
government’s role in subsidizing child care has
been expanding. The U.S. Department of Labor
estimated that the Federal Government spent
nearly $7 billion on child-care assistance pro-
grams in 1988,* in addition to the amount spent
by State and local governments. The Chitd-care
and Development Block Grant‘ will expand the
role of both State and Federal Governments in
the provision of child care.

This article discusses a number of issues
related to child care in the United States. In
particular, the types of child-care arrangements

10 Monthly Labor Review October 1991

used, and factors that determine the type of
arrangement, such as the child’s age, the mother’s
marital status, and the net income of the child's
family are analyzed. The expenditures for child
care by different population groups are also
examined, as well as the degree to which child-
care concerns limit the employment opportuni-
ties of the mother.

Background on surveys

The data used in this article are from two sources
within the National Longitudinal Surveys of
Labor Market Experience (NLS). Sponsored by
the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the NLS is an
ongoing longitudinal study, which examines the
labor market experiences of Americans. Data
from the 1988 National Longitudinal Survey of
Youth (Youth Survey) as well as the 1983 Na-
tional Longitudinal Survey of Young Women
(Young Women Survey) are used here.’ The
Youth Survey provides information on a sample
of 6,283 young women and 6,403 young men
who were 14 to 22 years old in 1979 and who
have been interviewed annually since 1979. In
1988, the sample, which includes an over-
representation of blacks, Hispanics, and eco-
nomically disadvantaged whites, had 10,466
respondents.

The Young Women Survey obtains informa-
tion from regular interviews of acohort of women
who were 14 to 24 years old in 1968. The
original sample, in which there was an over-
representation of blacks, included 5,553 young


Arrangements and Costs for Child Care

Table 6. Chiid-care related constraints on women’s employment
Youth Survey:
Young Women Survey: Youth Survey:
Mother (23-31) or spouse
Characterlatics lost "Oe Bd Ad reata” | Mother (29-38) lost work | Mother (23-31) dropped
weeks because of within iast year because jout of labor force because
child-care problems of child-care problems of child-care problems:
Total ...... 37 217 23
‘Age of youngest child:
Birth to 1 year .. 5.3 18.4 3.0
Bod years 0... 28 27.0 2.0
5 years and over 34 20.4 20
Marital status:
Married, spouse
present ..... 37 27.8 26
‘Other 3.6 18.14 1.9
Net family income
(in 1988 dollass):
$0-$14,999 ... . 37 16.3 42
$15,000-$24,999....... 34 18.6 26
$25,000-$49,999 : 34 24.6 1.6
$50,000 and more ...... 47 27.7 3
‘Source: National Longitudinal Surveys of Youth and Young Women Cohorts.

ment of mothers. Evidence for women 29 to 39
years old suggests that those in high-income
families are more likely to take time off from
work to handle child-care problems. However,
findings from the Youth Survey imply that
women in low-income families are more likely

Footnotes

to have gaps in employment because they cannot
find adequate child-care arrangements. Further
research into the relationship between employ-
ment and child-care problems would be helpful
in understanding the child-care situation in the
United States.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT: The authors would like to ac-
knowledge the contributions of Karima Nagi and David
Schaffner of the Center for Human Resource Research who
created the tables used in this article.

‘ March 1990 Current Population Survey, unpublished
tabulations (Bureau of Labor Statistics).

2 These numbers are taken from the 1980 and 1990
Statistical Abstract of the United States (Bureau of the
Census).

> U.S. Department of Labor, Child-care: A Workforce
Issue, Report of the Secretary's Task Force, 1988.

* Signed into law in November 1990. The grant pro-
vides additional money to the States to increase the avail-
ability, improve the quality, and reduce child-care costs.

5 See Marilyn Manser and others, “National Longitu-
dinal Survey: development and uses," Monthly Labor Re-
view, July 1990, pp. 32-37.

©The Young Women Survey was taken in 1968-73,
1975, 1977, 1978, 1980, 1982, 1983, 1985, 1987, and 1988.

7 In all of the computations in this report, weights are
used to adjust for the different sampling rates and
nonresponse rates, so that the tabulations are representative
of the age groups studied.

* This is somewhat confusing, because the cohorts are
not mutually exclusive and women from the Young Women
Survey are referred to here as “older.” However, most of
these women are older relative to the youth cohort.

° The 1988 Youth Survey contains information on the
child-care arrangements for children other than the young-

16 Monthly Labor Review October 1991

est in the household, Child-care arrangements for all chil-
dren are similar to the arrangements for the youngest child
alone among 23- to 31-year-old mothers.

"© Because table 2 uses cross-sectional rather than time
series data and because it may be true that women whose
child is at least 5 years old are systematically different from
those whose youngest child is less than age 5, care should
be taken in interpreting this information. It should not be
interpreted as how the child-care arrangements for a given
child can be expected to change as he or she ages. Also,
because the age of the child is not completely controlled for
in this table, there is probably some bias in determining
how the age of the mother affects caring for a child of a
given age. The children of older women are more likely to
be near the top of any age intervat. This problem is the most
severe for the interval of age 5 and older because there is no
upper limit, Children of the younger women are likely tobe
5 or 6 years old, while many of the older women’s children
are in their teens.

" Allinferences drawn here are statistically significant.
Standard errors are available from the authors upon re-
quest.

" See General Accounting Office, Child-care: Em-
ployee Assistance for Private Sector and Federal Employ-
ers, Report to Congressional Requesters, February 1986.

"A public/private distinction is not made in the Youth
Survey.

“ However, low income families actually spend alarger

percentage of their income on child care than do wealthier
families. Sandra Hofferth, in “Child-care in the U.S.”


women; in 1983, 68.7 percent of them were still
being interviewed.’

The 1988 Youth Survey and the 1983 Young
‘Women Survey are used here because both asked
the female participants a variety of questions
about child care, including the type of arrange-
ment used, its cost, and the number of hours per
week it is used. Questions as to how child-care
problems have affected the careers of mothers
also were asked.

The major advantage of using both the 1988
Youth Survey and the 1983 Young Women
Survey is that, together, they allow us to exam-
ine a wide age range of mothers, as the youth
cohort was aged 23 to 31 in 1988 and the young
women cohort was aged 29 to 39 in 1983. In this
report, women from the Youth Survey are re-
ferred to as “younger mothers” and women from
the Young Women Survey will be referred to as
“older mothers.”®

There are a number of differences between
the two sets of survey questions. For example, in
the 1983 Young Women Survey, respondents
were allowed to specify more than one type of
primary child-care arrangement, whereas in the
1988 Youth Survey, respondents were allowed
to report only one type of primary child-care
arrangement. Also, the reference period for the
child-care questions in the 1988 Youth Survey is
the previous 4 weeks, whereas the reference
period for the 1983 Young Women Survey is the
previous year. Also, it is important to note that
older mothers are more likely than younger
mothers to have older children, who require
different child-care arrangements and expendi-
tures on child care.

Child-care arrangements

The most common form of child care is provided
by relatives, with more than 40 percent of 23- to
39-year-old mothers relying on a relative to take
care of their child while they work. Younger
mothers often depend on the child’s father (11.3
percent) or a relative (28.8 percent) for child-
care. Older mothers commonly rely on the child’s
father (14,1 percent) and the child’s siblings (8.8
percent) for care.° (See table 1.)

About 22.3 percent of younger mothers and
24 percent of older mothers rely on persons other
than relatives for child care. This type of ar-
rangement includes care by inhome sitters as
well as care in other private homes, often re-
ferred to as family day-care homes.

Child-care centers have continued to grow in
importance, as 18.1 percent of younger mothers
and 10.6 percent of older mothers enroll their
youngest child in either a day-care center or a
nursery school. Respondents to the 1983 Young

Women Survey who used child-care centers
were asked whether the centers they used were
public or private. The data indicate that only 1.7
percent of all of the older working mothers used
publicly run centers. This figure should not be
interpreted as indicating the extent of the
government’s involvement in providing child
care, because it does not account for other ways
in which the government provides help, for ex-
ample, through income tax credits given to par-
ents for child-care expenses.

Alarge percentage of children of older women
care for themselves (24.6 percent). Many of
these children probably attend school, although
the exact percentage cannot be determined, be-
cause “school” is excluded as a child-care ar-
rangement for the older mothers.

By age of child. The age of the youngest child
has a bearing on the type of child-care arrange-
ments used by both younger and older mothers.'°
There are two noteworthy child-care patterns
which are common to both groups of women.
Child-care centers are used more frequently for
2- to 4-year-old children than for infants (27.6
percent versus 15.1 percent for younger mothers
and 22.6 percent versus 3.7 percent for older
mothers).'' Also, it is more common for other
persons to provide care for infants than for
children 2 to 4 years old. This difference in care
for infants and 2- to 4-year-olds may be related
to parental preference and to the fact that many
child-care centers do not accept children under
age 3, or accept them only at a higher fee.’
There are some notable differences in the
child-care arrangements between younger and
older women. While relatives frequently
provide child care for both younger and older

Table 1 Child care arrangement for youngest children of
women In the National Longitudinal Survey
Percent of children cared for
Young
Provider Youth Survey | Women
(Women ages | Survey
23-31)' — (Women ages
29-39)
Father 113 144
Siblings .... 14 88
Other relative 28.8 18.0
Other person 22.3 24.0
Child-care center fect eeee 18.1 10.6
Mother cares for child at work... .. 3.0 42
Child cares for self......... 19 24.6
Other 13.5 12.4

percentages total more than 100 percent.

* Data are from the 1988 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth.
? Data are from the 1983 National Longitudinal Survey of Young Women. In the
survey, respondents were allowed to choose more than one type of arrangement. Thus,

Monthly Labor Review October 1991

11


Arrangements and Costs for Child Care

women, care by a child’s siblings is more com-
mon among older women, with 10.8 percent of
children 5 years and older being cared for by a
brother or sister, compared with only 2.3 percent
for younger women. Older women frequently
use persons other than relatives (in-home sitters
and family day care homes), with the rate of use
being substantially higher for these women com-
pared with young mothers ateach of the children’s
age levels. In particular, older women appear to
rely heavily on persons other than relatives for
child care in the youngest age category, as 58.2
percent of these mothers claimed to use this form
of child care for their infants.

The percentage of younger women who use
child-care centers for their infants (15.1 percent)
is almost three times that for older women (3.7
percent)—a striking difference. More than 8
percent of older women care for their children
under 5 years old while working, while fewer
than 4 percent of younger women do so.

By family income and marital status. Family
income is defined as the earnings of the child’s
parents who are currently living in the house-
hold. There are a number of interesting findings.
First, women in families with income levels
above $50,000 (in 1988 dollars) are less likely
than those in lower income families to have their
children cared for by “other relatives.” This
probably occurs because care by relatives, such
as the child’s grandparents, is relatively less
expensive than other forms of child care.
Second, women in families with incomes of
$25,000 or more would most likely use persons
other than relatives as caregivers. Thus, it ap-
pears that as income rises, care by in-home

sitters and in other private homes is an afford-
able option.

Third, the use of child-care centers by moth-
ers appears to be directly related to family in-
come. Families in the highest income category
are more likely to use child-care centers than are
families in the other income ranges. (See table
3.) As income increases, the use of public child-
care centers declines while the use of private
centers rises. Hence, these results indicate that
upper income families can more easily afford
private centers while poorer families are more
likely to use public centers, as might be ex-
pected. The following tabulation provides a
breakdown of child-care center usage by family
income and public/private distribution for older
mothers:

Type of child-care center

Family income Public Private
(1988 dollars)

To $14,999 ... 24 3.1
$15,000-$24,999 . 2.2 41
$25,000-$49,999 . . 18 79
$50,000 and over .......... 1.0 16.0

A higher percentage of older married (spouse
present) mothers (18.3 percent) receive child-
care help from the child’s father than do younger
married mothers (14.7 percent). However,
younger single women are more apt to depend on
the child’s father to provide care than are older
single women.

Younger single women turn to other relatives
(37.9 percent) and child-care centers (20.1 per-
cent) more often than do married women. Older
single women do not use child-care centers as
often as do married women, but tend torely more

Table 2. Child-care arrangement for youngest children of women in the National
Longitudinal Survey, by age of child
Percent of children cared for Percent of children cared for
Youth Survey Young Women Survey
3-31)" wi ?
provider (Women ages 23-31) {Women ages 29-39)
Children | Children | cI Children | Children | Children
from birth ages 90 from birth ages ages
totyear | 2to4 |Sandover | toiyear | 2to4 | Sand over

Father..... 12.8 12.2 9.4 15.6 16.1 13.5
Sibling 0.0 6 23 8 27 10.8
Other rel : 30.0 26.1 30.3 29.7 15.9 159
Other person 00.2... 32.8 24.5 13.0 58.2 43.7 17.2
Child-care center 15.1 278 107 a7 22.6 7
Mother cares for child

at work oo... 32 35 24 86 83 3.0
Child cares for self 0 a 5.2 0 a 32.3
Other wee 60 5.6 26.5 ) 20 15.3

* Data are from the 1988 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth.

? Data are from the 1983 National Longitudinal Survey of Young Women. In the survey, respondents were allowed
to choose from more than one type of arrangement. Thus, percentages total more than 100 percent.

12 Monthly Labor Review October 1991