|**Table 1 continued**<br>**Section in this**|||**Years of**|**Ages of**<br>**children in**|**Dail lenth**||**MLFP rate of**<br>**study population**<br>**(baseline or**|**Imact on labor force**|**Imact on hours**||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|<br>**paper**<br>D-in-D (triple<br>differences)|**Author Year**<br>**Country**<br>**Calderon 2014** Mexico|**Population**<br>Low-<br>income/informa<br>workers, though<br>work<br>requirement<br>lacked<br>enforcement;|<br>**study**<br>**Type of childcare**<br>l<br> <br>2000-2010 Estancias Infantiles para<br>Apoyar a Madres<br>Trabajadoras (Preschools<br>to support working<br>mothers) Government<br>provision|<br>**care (years)**<br>1-3|<br>**y g**<br>**of care**<br>Probably full-<br>day since<br>targeted to<br>working<br>mothers|**Type of analysis**<br>Triple-difference and<br>synthetic control<br>methods|<br>**control group)**<br> <br>35%|**p**<br>**participation**<br>The increase in preschool<br>coverage for 10% of children<br>resulted in a 1.5% increase i<br>MLFP (comparable to a 15%<br>increase from none to full<br>coverage)|**p**<br>**worked**<br> <br>n<br> <br>Reduction in time<br>spent in caring for<br>children|**Impact on income**<br>Slight increase if not<br>previously working|
||**De la Cruz**<br>**Toledo 2015**<br>Mexico|national<br>National|2004-2012 Preschool|3-5|Not specified,<br>but some<br>indication<br>that does not<br>extend to<br>cover<br>commuting|<br> <br>Difference in<br>differences<br>considering facilities<br>across regions and<br>exposure across<br>cohorts|<br>44% if youngest<br>child is age 3-5|Increase of 8-15 percentage<br>points from having a child<br>enrolled, strongest if no<br>younger children|<br>Child care enrollmen<br>reduces hours<br>worked|t|
||**Halim, Johnson**<br>**& Perova 2019**<br>Indonesia|National|1993-2014 Public preschool|3-6|time<br>3 hours|Difference in<br>differences<br>considering facilities<br>across regions and<br>exposure across<br>cohorts|<br>53%|4.8 percentage points<br>increase in probability of<br>working for an additional<br>preschool per 1,000 children<br>in the district, driven largely<br>by an increase in the<br>likelihood of becoming an<br>unpaid family worker|<br> <br>No impact|No impact|
|D-in-D (double<br>differences,<br>categorical<br>treatment variable)|**Du & Dong**<br>**2013**<br>China<br>|Married women<br>in urban areas|<br>1991-2006 Daycare and primary<br>schooling; public &<br>private. Public have two-<br>tier pricing: employees<br>received subsidized care,<br>non-employees paid<br>market prices|0-6|Not specifiied<br>but<br>historically<br>child care wa<br>full-time to<br>allow mother<br>to work full-<br>|,<br>s<br>s<br>Difference in<br>differences<br>considering facilities<br>across regions and<br>exposure across<br>cohorts|<br>82%|The addition of a daycare to<br>a community without<br>daycare would result in<br>10.5% increase in MLFP|<br>The addition of a<br>daycare to a<br>community without<br>daycare would result<br>in 6 more hours<br>worked per week||
||**Kilburn &**<br>**Datar 2002**<br>China|Urban|1991-1997 Not specified|0-5|time<br>Not specifiied<br>but<br>historically<br>child care wa<br>full-time to<br>allow mother<br>to work full-<br>|,<br>s<br>s<br>Difference in<br>differences<br>considering facilities<br>across regions and<br>exposure across<br>cohorts|<br>91%, 21% in wage<br>labor|<br>70% increase in marginal<br>effects for participation in<br>wage work several years<br>after the center is<br>established|||
|D-in-D (double<br>differences,<br>continuous<br>treatment variable)|**Berlinski &**<br>**Galiani 2007**<br>Argentina<br>|National|1994-2000 Public preschool|3-5|time<br>Not specified,<br>focused on<br>physical<br>construction<br>of classrooms|<br> <br>Difference in<br>differences<br>considering facilities<br>across regions and<br>exposure across<br>|<br>38%|An increase from no<br>coverage to full coverage<br>would result in a 7-14<br>percentage point increase in<br>the maternal employment|<br>2.25-4.5 hours per<br>week, but<br>imprecisely<br>estimated||
||**Berthelon,**<br>**Kruger &**<br>**Oyarzun 2015**<br>Chile|National|2004-2009 Elementary school|6-13|38 hours/<br>week|cohorts<br>Difference in<br>differences<br>considering facilities<br>across regions and<br>exposure across<br>cohorts|<br>68%|Increasing to all schools<br>having the full day would<br>increase female labor force<br>participation by 11.2<br>percentage points<br>(concentrated among<br>mothers of 1st & 2nd grade<br>students & less-educated|||
||**Medrano 2009** Chile|Lower 40% of<br>income<br>distribution in<br>Santiago|2003-2008 Day care|0-4|8:30 am -<br>3:30 pm|Difference in<br>differences<br>comparing women<br>who benefit from the<br>policy with those<br>|<br>28%|mothers)<br>No impact|Preschool availabilty<br>reduces hours<br>worked||
|continues next page|**Padilla-Romo**<br>**& Cabrera-**<br>**Hernandez**<br>**2018**<br>Mexico<br>|Vulnerable area|s 2007-2016 Elementary school|6-12|Full time|who do not<br>Difference in<br>differences<br>considering facilities<br>across regions and<br>exposure across<br>cohorts|<br>Around 44%|An increase from none to ful<br>coverage would result in a<br>5% increase in employment|l<br>An increase from<br>none to full coverage<br>would result in an<br>increase of around 2<br>hours/ week|<br> <br>22% increase in<br>earnings overall, with<br>a 36% increase in<br>high poverty areas|

3