completed the child’s EDI (though this teacher was not always the child’s direct classroom teacher). The EDI was adapted and translated for use in the Indonesia ECED Project by the authors and members of the research team.<sup>12</sup> Descriptive statistics of the EDI for the analytic sample are shown in Table 2.

Overall, we find variation in the EDI outcomes of children in the sample. Children score relatively high on the physical health and wellbeing domain (mean score of 8.1 out of 10) while results for social competence, emotional maturity, language and cognitive development, and communication and general knowledge range between 6.0 and 6.8. We also find variation in the developmental outcomes across different types of centers. On average, the means score of all EDI domains are higher among children enrolled in kindergarten and Islamic kindergarten than those attending non-project playgroup and project-playgroup. This likely reflects the fact that children are older when they are in kindergartens.

# **_Child covariates_**

Along with the EDI, the data contains information on basic demographic information about the children in the sample. Summary statistics in table 2 show that while both girls and boys are equally represented across the four types of early childhood programs, children attending kindergarten are slightly older (mean age of 5 years) than those enrolled in playgroups (mean age of 4 years). Islamic Kindergartens have slightly higher rates of special needs children than both kindergartens and playgroups. The highest level of education attained by mothers of children in the sample is similar across all four types of ECD; about 40% report they have completed elementary school, followed by junior high (about 25%), senior high (about 25%), and higher education (less than 10%).

# **_ECERS-R_**

One of the key predictor variables of interest is the quality of early childhood programs as measured by ECERS-R—an observation-based assessment of the learning environment of early childhood centers. Seven subscales make up the ECERS-R: Space and Furnishings, Personal Care Routines, Language-Reasoning, Activities, Interaction, Program Structure, and Parents and Staff. The instrument has good test-retest reliability, high inter-rater reliability (Clifford et al., 2010), and many studies have demonstrated its predictive validity (Burchinal et al., 2008; Montes et al., 2005; Peisner-Feinberg et al., 2001).

In accordance with the instructions of use for the ECERS-R, two raters assessed each center at the same time. Both raters were present in the room with the class they were observing for three hours and followed this group if they left the room for outdoor play. Raters did not interact with staff or students during their observation. Prior to observation in the field, all raters were provided with training on the use of the ECERS-R. This training involved viewing of the ECERS-R video training package, practice observations in settings similar to those that would be rated as part of the study, and subsequent review of these practice ratings.

Each item on the seven subscales was assessed by the two raters on a seven-point Likert

> 12 During piloting of the initial adaptation of the EDI it was found that respondents struggled with the original 5 point Likert scale response options. As a result, response options were changed to the binary can (“bisa” in Indonesian language) or cannot (“tidak bisa”). It was also found that respondents found it difficult to respond to questions, which asked for their subjective evaluation of a child’s abilities (e.g. How would you rate _[child’s name]’s_ overall social/emotional development?). Questions such as these were omitted from the final Indonesian version of the instrument. Finally, the wording of 11 questions was altered to make their meaning clearer in the Indonesian language.

7