|**Table 1 continued**<br>**Section in this**|||**Years of**||**Ages of**<br>**children in**|**Daily length**||**MLFP rate of**<br>**study population**<br>**(baseline or**|<br>**Impact on labor force**|**Impact on hours**||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|**paper**|**Author Year**<br>**Country**|**Population**|**study**|**Type of childcare**|**care (years)**|**of care**|**Type of analysis**|**control group)**|**participation**|**worked**|**Impact on income**|
|Waitlist|**Angeles,**<br>**Gadsen,**<br>**Galiani,**<br>**Gertler,**<br>**Herrera,**<br>Mexico|Low-<br>income/informal<br>workers, though<br>work<br>requirement|<br>2008-2011|Estancias Infantiles para<br>Apoyar a Madres<br>Trabajadoras (Preschools<br>to support working<br>mothers) Government|1-3|Probably full-<br>day since<br>targeted to<br>working<br>mothers|Mothers of enrolled<br>children contrasted<br>with mothers of<br>waitlist children|36%|18% increase in<br>employment, 8% increase in<br>short term labor force<br>stability among those who<br>were previously employed|<br>6 more hours of wor<br>a week, 7 hours less<br>on child care|k<br>Inconclusive|
||**Kariger &**<br>**Seira 2011**|lacked<br>enforcement;<br>national||provision||||||||
||**Ranganathan &**<br>**Pedulla 2018**<br>India|Mothers<br>working in a<br>local garment|2012-2016|Employer-provided<br>childcare|0-5|Full time|Panel data with<br>mother fixed effects|Average work<br>attendance: 89%<br>of days|<br>Odds of being present at<br>work were 1.71 times higher<br>with childcare provision|||
|||factory||||||||||
|IV|**Attanasio &**<br>**Vera-**<br>**Hernandez**<br>**2004**<br>Colombia|Poor families in<br>54 small towns<br>with a rural<br>component|2002-2003|Community mothers<br>(Hogares Comuniatrios)<br>Families pay a small fee<br>for care, government<br>provides food|0-6|Likely full time<br>(includes<br>lunch & 2<br>snacks)|<br>Longitudinal analysis,<br>instrumenting child<br>attendance with<br>distance to nearest<br>HC|<br>37%|Increase in MLFP of 37%<br>with a child's attendance|Increase of 75<br>hours/month (from<br>an average of 39<br>hours/ month) with a<br>child's attendance||
||**Du, Dong &**<br>**Zhang 2019**<br>China|Urban|1991-2011|Contrasts daycare<br>services with grandparent<br>care|<br>0-6|Not specified,<br>but most<br>mothers<br>worked full<br>time|<br>longitudinal 2SLS<br>predicting availabilty<br>of child care from<br>grandparents &<br>centers|84%|Access to daycare services<br>increases MLFP by 24-29%|||
||**Hojman &**<br>**Lopez Boo**<br>**(2019)**<br>Nicaragua|Urban||Community daycare<br>centers|0-4||Random assignment<br>and distance to<br>nearest daycare used<br>as instruments for<br>enrollment||14% increase in work<br>participation|||
||**Rosero &**<br>**Oosterbeek**<br>Ecuador|Rural famliies|2006-2008|Fully subsidized non-<br>profit child care centers &|<br>0-6|8 hours|Regression<br>discontinuity that|around 40%|22% increase in probabilty o<br>working results from access|f<br> <br>7 hours/week<br>increase for child|Increase in<br>household (but not|
||**2011**|||<br>home visiting|||<br>instruments<br>childrens' eligibility<br>for one or both<br>programs by whether<br>local center received||<br>to child care centers, no<br>impact of home visiting|<br>care centers, 4<br>hours/week<br>reduction for home<br>visiting|<br>maternal) income by<br>$60/month|
||||||||funding|||||
||**Sanfelice 2019** Brazil|Sao Paulo|2010|Free daycare. Either<br>publicly operated &<br>publicly funded but|1-4|Full time|Mothers of enrolled<br>children contrasted<br>with mothers of|0.47|Having a child in care would<br>increase the probability of<br>employment by 44|<br>Increases the<br>probability of<br>working full time by||
|||||privately operated|||waitlist children||percentage points|42.3 percentage<br>points||

4