Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-04-19; City Council; 9392; CHILD CARE TASK FORCE REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCILn MTG. 4-19-88 CHILD CARE TASK FORCE DEPT. R/AG REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL CITY CITY , *, Lo 3 C g a, a, u a, m co co I o\ 4 I * .. 2 2 e =! g 3 0 0 5 L - -%#- TITLE: DEPl RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. 2. Review the six specific recommendations (page 2, Child Care Report) Child Care Task Force and consider the staff recommmended action item. Accept the Child Care Task Force's Report. ITEM EXPLANATION: The Child Care Task Force was established in February 1987 to assess ch needs, explore funding sources and to recommend programs to the City C The Child Care Task Force's Report dated April 1988 (attached) responds City Council's charge. The Child Care Task Force has surveyed the child care providers in Carl child care users and potential users via both a school survey and an indi survey. During this past year, a substantial amount of literature was re by the Task Force, plus public input from concerned citizens, child care viders both existing and potential and from various City departments. TI Care Task Force Report to the City Council dated April 1988 is the culmit this effort. The Task Force believes that the six recommendations summa the Executive Summary provide a sound and workable foundation upon wh City can structure its child care program, projects and activities. The s marized recommendations, as contained on page 2 of the report, with reco staff action, are as follows: 1. Adopt proposed Child Care Policies. Recommended Action: Instruct ! return to Council with formatted policy for adoption. 2. Establish Child Care Commission. Recommended Action : Consider nee Child Care Commission and take appropriate action. 3. Create and fund Child Care Coordinator. Recommended Action: Refe for return for consideration at budget hearings. 4. Develop State and Federal Legislative Policy supporting child care. R ded Action: Refer to Council Legislative Committee for inclusion into City lative Platform. 5. viders. Recommended Action : Refer to staff for implementation. 6. Implement recommended land use and community development process Y Recommended Action: Refer to Planning Commission for consideration, he: and recommendations. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: None required at this time. Develop and provide a public information packet for child care users i ? F e * , r PAGE TWO OF AGENDA BILL NO. ysi?& FISCAL IMPACT: To be determined based on City Council action. EXH I BITS : 1. Agenda Bill No. 8901, dated 2-24-87, establishing a Child Care Task 2. 3. Child Care Survey - Schools, June 1987. 4. Child Care Survey - industrial, November 1987. 5. Child Care Survey - Providers, May 1987. Report to Carlsbad City Council by Child Care Task Force, April 198 L o/ > AB# .- I .7 r )-r d aa M)-r ha : ZP MTG.2/24/87 DEPT.RlAC DE TITLE: ESTABLISHMENT OF A CARLSBAD CII CHILD CARE TASK FORCE CI1 YL Ll ala c m- .ri x 40 3E: crn ?% cc -a ale 34 3 a- ha LILl a, cm c)-r ma x0 Fri ?a aJe Ma Ll * -rl ca (0 .U - 2424cm a, U.dY al a00 3 3 a*rl as 0 ala 3c E u 0 -.d mr) Ll Llh 0 om - u-l woo m 24 -0-0.u. aJaloac 3 32 a(d cc CnE -4 .ri . a) u 'am a, a, ' a,Gk d (d Frr c, .d aca c mma, a d au -9 3 3aa 0r:a Ll alalaam h-0 v) c a EEumE a-l-l a zoom @Mum= 03 h corn r-h N4-I I I1 Nmm u u .d 2-i UriJ c c *d ri aal3LlCrc I I1 3 Oh .. 2 0 i= 0 4 d 0 z /' '\ 3 1 0 L/ 0 A""v BlLL I ur ~H~L~OHU - r-- n RECOMMENDED ACTION: That City Council adopt Resolution Number 97737 creating and establi nine-member task force to assess child care needs in the City and make mendations for specific programs to City Council. ITEM EXPLANATION: The Council at its meeting of February IO, 1987 amended the Land Use f text as follows: "Encourage and promote the establishment of childcare facilities in safe and convenient locations throughout the community to accommodate the growing demand for childcare in the community caused by demographic, economic and social forces." The Council further recommended that a task force be formed immediate childcare needs in the City, explore funding sources and to recommend programs to City Council for consideration. The specific make-up of the task force is a matter for Council discretior order to assist Council in this matter, staff suggests that the following make-up be considered : 1 Planning Commission member 1 School District Board of Trustees member 1 Childcare provider 1 Chamber of Commerce member 5 Members of the community at large Finally, the staff support for the task force will be the Research/Analy: using additional staff resources within the City, as needed. (Dee Land1 Planning Department, AI Capuchino, Finance Department. 1 FISCAL IMPACT: No direct cost to the City except staff time identified at this time. if necessary will be identified and presented for approval. EXH 1 B ITS : Resolution Number ar Spec 1 I ' p 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 RESOLUTION NO. 8975 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, CREATING AND ESTABLISHING A CHILDCARE TASK FORCE WHEREAS, the City Council approved an amendment to the 1 Element of the General Plan adding a goal to encourage childcare in t community; and 'I WHEREAS, the City Council approved the formation of a tasl to assess the childcare needs within the City and make recornmendatic I 8 specific childcare programs; 9 10 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council 01 City of Carlsbad, California, as follows: I.1 12 13 14 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. 2. That a childcare task force be formed consisting of the following general membership categories : 1 Planning Commission member I I.5 I 16 I 17 18 1 School District Board of Trustees member 1 Childcare provider 1 Chamber of Commerce member 5 Citizens at large 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 report for the City Council with its recommendations. '1 I 4. That the City Council will have the authority to appoint, replace and remove members. 5. That the childcare task force will be terminated within 6 months of its first meeting, or upon presentation of its final report whichever occurs first. 7. That appointment to the childcare task force is a volunta position and does not entitle the members to any compen tion or reimbursement for expenses. ?I I I -1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ?! 8. That the following persons are hereby appointed to serve as members of the childcare task force: Jeanne McFadden , Planning Commission Julianne Nygaard , School District Board of Tru Doris Lipska , Childcare provider Diane Sparks , Chamber of Commerce Jim Hicks , Citizen Barbara Ford , Citizen Anna Knox , Citizen Barbara Hallman , Citizen Jan Freeman , Citizen PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of Carlsbad City Council, held on the 24th day of February, 1987 by thc > 141' 15 16 17 , e 9 lowing vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Pettine, Mamaux, and NOES: None ABSENT: None I l8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 L ~ I ATTEST : d- @& ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Cldk (SEAL) II ( LArll~ 1 2 I 0 0 - __ (. 0 0 7 I I TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION 11. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 111. NEEDS ASSESSMENT A. Supply Inventory - Summary B. Demand 1. Population 2. School Child Care Survey - Summary 3. Industrial Child Care Survey - Summary IV. CHILD CARE POLICY 1. Need 2. Partnerships 3. Model 4. Planning 5. Facilitation 6. Property 7. Expertise 8. Resource 9. Legislation 10. Policies 11. Review V. SPECIFIC PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS A. Child Care Commission B. Child Care Coordinator C. D . Public Information Packets E. Legislative Position Land Use & Community Development Process Revisions VI. FUNDING OPTIONS VII. GLOSSARY VIII. BIBLIOGRAPHY IX. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS X. APPENDICES Appendix A - Child Care Survey - Schools Appendix B - Child Care Survey - Industrial/City Employees Appendix C - Child Care Survey - Child Care Providers t 0 e ) I. INTRODUCTION During the spring of 1986, the Planning Commission directe Planning Department staff to examine the issue of child cai facilities within the City of Carlsbad. Various government: agencies were contacted and statistical data was compiled whic indicated that the lack of child care is becoming a nationwit problem as well as a local problem. As a result of this analysis, Planning staff proposed that tl following statement be added as Item I to page 6 of the Land U: Element (Goals) of the General Plan: "Encourage and promote the establishment of child ca facilities in safe and convenient locations throughout tl community to accommodate the growing demand for chi care in the community caused by demographic, economic 81: social forces. !I This General Plan Amendment as well as possible further actio1 were approved by the Planning Commission as recommendations the City Council. On February 10, 1987, the City Council approved the propos amendment and on February 24, 1987 established a nine-memb Child Care Task Force to assess child care needs in the Cit and make specific recommendations to the Council. The Ta Force was charged with assessing the child care need exploring funding sources and recommending programs. To thoroughly analyze the child care issue in Carlsbad, the Ta Force accomplished the following: assessed child care needs in the City explored funding sources, and now is recommending specific programs for Council consideration Based on this review, the Child Care Task Force has prepai the following report which discusses these issues and mal specific recommendations. It is the belief of the Task Force tl these recommendations provide a sound and workable f oundat upon which the City can structure its child care progran projects and activities. 1 t 0 0 r h 11. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY After considerable review of the child care issue for the City Carlsbad,* the Child Care Task Force recommends that the Ci Council adopt the following: 1. Adopt the attached proposed Task Force Recommend Policies on Child Care, which, in part, acknowledges t importance of affordable, accessible and quality child care as necessary component of the City's human and economic growt and recognizes that the provision of child care is a collecti responsibility to be shared by parents, child care professional employers, employee organizations, schools, business , communi leaders, and government officials. 2. Establish a Child Care Commission which shall function an advisory capacity to the Mayor and City Council. T Advisory Commission shall be comprised of seven members to appointed by the Mayor and City Council. The Commission sh be further organized as set forth in this report. 3. Instruct the City Manager to establish and fund the positi of 'child care coordinator.' The coordinator position sh pursue and implement the goals and objectives set forth in t City's Child Care Policy. This position shall provide assistar to City departments, child care providers, private secl developers and other parties interested in the expansion of ch care services within the City of Carlsbad; such assistance shot include, but not be limited to, the tasks set forth in tl report. The child care coordinator shall report to the C: Council on a quarterly basis and serve as staff resource to t Child Care Commission. 4. Develop and implement a State and Federal Legislatj Program on child care in keeping with adopted Council Policy. 5. Develop and provide a public information packet for bc child care users and providers. 6. With the assistance of the child care coordinator, implemc the recommended policy change to the General Plan, Zoni Standards, and Master and Specific Plans. *After conducting a school survey, the Child Care Task Force f they did not have a true picture of the under age five population with( older siblings. In an attempt to address this age group, a sample sur\ was taken of nine companies plus the City of Carlsbad employees. In SF of this second survey, the Task Force still feels that they do not yet hs a clear picture of the under age five needs. 2 P 0 e I 1 111. NEEDS ASSESSMENT A. Supply Inventory - Summary The Child Care Task Force conducted a survey of operators existing family day care homes and child care centers within t' Carlsbad area. The survey was designed to measure the exte and types of services presently being offered the residents Carlsbad . Interviews were held with 10 child care centers a questionnaires were mailed to 57 licensed family day care homc A 39% return was experienced on the mailed questionnair Based on both the interview and responses, 116 Carlsk children were receiving care in child care centers. The following specific findings were made in this survey: costs 1. - The cost of this care to families varies from approximately $6C week to $125 a week in family home care, with hourly rates fr $1.75 to $2.50 (this includes infant care). Centers charge fr $220 a month to $300 and also have schedules for part time car In both cases, policies on vacation and sick leave rates vary. 2. Hours The hours of care do not vary much. 7 p.m. are the outside limits. 3. Sick Child Care In the matter of sick children, many providers will take "sniffle or two," but nothing contagious. As one operator 1 it, l'. . .the child would have to be isolated with a full-time adt and that gets too expensive." 4. Handicapped Handicapped children can go to Ivy Ranch Park in Oceanside, to one of five centers in town. The latter require that children be "...able to fit in with the program." Additiona- four of the family day care homes stated that they are willing take handicapped. 5. Abused Children North River Road Children's Center in Oceanside (through C de Amparo) takes abused children and their parent(s) f Carlsbad. Local centers and a limited number of family h care homes will take respite care children. Weekdays from 6 a.m. . I 0 0 I 6. School Programs Two Montessori schools provide child care in connection wj limited number of public school children to bring to their facili after school. The third Montessori school, the Lutheran school and t Catholic school have no child care provisions. Howeve recreational programs are available. The Girls' Club picks up children after school and provides after school program. The Boys' and Girls' Club "Scamper program is held at five elementary school sites and is consider recreational--this program is consistently full with a waiting lis Both programs allow children to come and go at will. 7. Referral Service It should be noted that the YMCA Child Care Resource a Referral Service is available at no cost and provides 1 following services : / their elementary school program and additionally will pick up Resource and referral to parents and child care provide Bimonthly newsletter Toy lending library (located in San Diego) Resource library of legislation Referrals to social services organizations and agencies Workshops for parents and child care providers Financial assistance to low income parents, homeless parents, and abused or neglected children Special needs program with respite care for developmentally disabled 8. Providers' Comments Providers' Comments on Insurance: ten said the rates were too high two said insurance ought to be subsidized one carries no insurance and has the parents sign a one is caring for children in their own home (the of six day care providers who have dropped services, exclusions in coverage were a concern, i.e. trips 0 the ratio of adults to children is higher for insurance there is a need to write legislators of these problems waiver children's) because of insurance costs three commented that it was because of insurance costs than for State licensing 4 I 0 0 I Providers! Comments on Possible City Help : cut the red tape publish a pamphlet to help new providers know the step waive or reduce restrictions on signs and fences make City staff aware of the Committee and its function help with a support group for providers. in getting a permit Providers' Additional Suggestions : subsidies for families who cannot afford care tax incentives for providers review of State licensing requirements listing providers by school district coordinate City and State regulations, i.e. height of fences varies in each case . train older citizens to care for children provide parenting classes. 5 20000- 10000- 21700 I Public School or or School District ' Private Grade Span dl Carlsbad Unified public K-12 San Marcos Unified Public K-12 Encinitas San Dieguito Unified public 7-12 St. Patrick's Army t Navy Academy private 7-12 Victory Beautiful Savior Casa Montessori private K Totals: 9 Union public K-6 private 1-8 Christian private 6-12 Luthern private 1-8 Enrollment Trior Year,, Currenc Year Date Enrollnent- Enrollment- O/ 4,386 5,806 540 645 902 1.081 705 762 200 200 17 14 50 39 10 20 4 8 7.428 8,561 , 0 0 2. School Child Care Survev Summary - The Child Care Ta Force conducted a survey of parents of children enrolled Carlsbad schools. The survey was sent home from school w elementary students and mailed to homes of junior high and hi school students. The survey was designed to measure 1 demand for child care within the jurisdiction. The survey was limited to school age children in Carlsbad. D to time constraints San Marcos, San Dieguito and various priv: schools were not included in the survey. The survey cove1 1,962 Carlsbad children representing over 16% of all school a children in Carlsbad, plus another 8% of the estimated populat of children less than 5 years old. The following specific findings were made by this survey: a) Household Type Approximately 33% of the families surveyed had one part employed, while 46% had both parents employed. Another ! were from single parent households where , presumably, 1 parent worked. b) Type of Care: It was found that almost 88% of all respondents I nonstructured care for their children. This percent increases 96% for parents of teenagers. Structured care is defined as care within child care cente licensed family home care homes, and after school prograr Non-structured care ranges from no care needed to parent relative provides care. c) The majority of respondents, 84%, reported they were satisf with their current child care arrangements. Of the dissatisfied respondents, approximately 7% indicated they j uneasy about the l'latch key" situation. By age group children, 90% of the preschoolers were satisfied, 84% of pre-teens and 87% of the teenagers. d) Child Care Preference: In spite of the 84% who reported they were satisfied with tk arrangements, a larger number of respondents prefer structured child care programs than were using them and larger number of respondents preferred after school progrz and l'spouse carel' than were using these methods. It interesting to note that 13% of the children took care themselves, over half of which were younger than 13 years olc Satisfaction Level of Existing Child Care: 7 0 0 .' e) Location of Child Care: Over 90% of the respondents indicated they preferred child CE to be located closer to the child's environment, either home school. Only 9.9% preferred child care to be on the way, near , work. f) Over 50% of respondents in families where both parents work€ and in single parent homes, missed at least one day's wc during the last six months due to children's illness. Parents pre-teenagers reported missing more time from work than parei of preschool age children and teenagers. g) Child Care for Teenagers: Parents of teenagers were divided in their preference for af school supervised care. The detailed survey is contained in the Appendix. Days Missed from Work Due to Children's Illness: 8 , 0 0 I' 3. Industrial Child Care Survey S g - The Task For conducted a sample survey of nine companies plus the City Carlsbad employees, to determine if employee child care nee were satisfactory. The companies asked that only parents children 0-18 years old and future parents respond. The C of Carlsbad requested all employees to respond, even if they h no children 0-18 years old. There were 501 returned survej of which 20% (100) were from Carlsbad City employees. a) Need for Child Care Nearly half of all parents with children under five anticipal needing child care within two years. ( Represents approximatl 119 children.) b) Location of Child Care Approximately 60% of parents of children under five years of E stated they would use child care within five minutes of WOI an additional 30% would consider it; while only 12% rejected completely. c) 45% of the respondents reported missing at least one day of w( during the last six months. d) Household Type Approximately 15% of the families had one parent employed, wl 68% had both parents employed. Another 11% were single parr households. e) Home Location of Respondents Approximately 29% reside in Carlsbad, while another 53% res in adjacent communities. The detailed survey is contained in the Appendix. Days Missed from Work Due to Children's Illness 9 e * I( IV. CHILD CARE POLICY The City of Carlsbad acknowledges that the American work pk has changed dramatically. An increasing number of women I now a permanent part of the American labor force. It projected that by 1990, women will comprise some 60% of 1 work force. An even more profound change is the increase the number of working mothers. At present, in Carlsbad, 07 66% of women in the school survey with children under the a of 18 work outside the home. National, state and local stud have shown that the availability of affordable, quality child CL programs enhance worker productivity, reduce absenteeism a increase employee morale. The City of Carlsbad further recognizes that children represc the future. Recent studies suggest that children of work parents who are placed in quality child care programs, : well-adjusted and perform well in school. Based on surveys and reports nationwide reviewed by the Ti Force, accessible and affordable quality child care is, therefo cost effective in long-term human and economic terms, and iz critical and needed investment in tomorrow. The City of Carlsbad also recognizes that the demand for ck care services and facilities is increasing. To ignore this nc will seriously and detrimentally affect the physical, social 2 economic life of our city in the future. The provision of accessible, affordable, quality child care is responsibility that must be collectively shared among paren employers, child care professionals, employee organizatioi schools, business and community leaders, and governm officials. Moreover, only through cooperative and coordina actions can this effort succeed. The City of Carlsbad acknowledges that it can best address child care needs of the City by establishing within the City ability to use its resources as educator, employer, mc employer, and facilitator (coordination), to act as a catal towards attaining the goal of readily accessible and affordal quality child care. This policy statement is intended to express a commitment on part of the City of Carlsbad to work to encourage the expans of child care services throughout Carlsbad. All C departments and commissions are hereby directed and reques to foster and follow this policy. io e e Recommended Policies Need The City of Carlsbad acknowledges the importance of affordal and accessible, quality child care and recognizes the detrimen impact the lack of such care has on the individual, the famil the work place, and the community. The City furtl- recognizes that the number of families seeking affordable, qual child care services greatly exceeds the current supply. 1. - 2. Partnerships The City of Carlsbad, through its officers, departments a officials will take a positive and active role in the developmt and promotion of cooperative relationships among paren employers, child care professionals, employee organizatior businesses, educators, community leaders and governmc officials. The common goal in such partnerships is to incret the availability of accessible and affordable quality child care. Model 3. - The City of Carlsbad will work to become a model employer terms of being an informed source for the delivery of child CI services to its employees. In order to do so, the City 1 aggressively and comprehensively explore all options available meet the child care needs of its employees. The City T actively seek to demonstrate that employer-sponsored child ci support systems are a positive, beneficial and cost-effect influence on the work force. 4. Planning The City of Carlsbad shall integrate the child care needs those who live or work in Carlsbad into the City's land 1 planning process. This shall be accomplished, in part, throx the inclusion of child care objectives and goals, whl appropriate, in the elements of the General Plan and the varic Master Plans and Specific Plans. 5. Facilitation The City of Carlsbad shall institute procedures which 1 expedite the necessary approvals and permits required for construction of child care facilities and of projects which inch the construction of child care facilities. The City shall a determine appropriate incentives for the development of cl care services in Carlsbad. 11 \ - e * IC 6. Property Where appropriate, the City will make available, by lease other suitable arrangement , vacant or under-utilized City-own land or facilities to qualified nonprofit child care providers. 7. Expertise The City of Carlsbad shall ensure that appropriate personnel City departments possess requisite understanding of, a familiarity with, all legal, regulatory and procedu requirements for quality child care programs. 8. Resource The City of Carlsbad shall utilize all services available throu Federal, State and County funded agencies, in order to enhar the availability of affordable, quality child care in Carlsbad. 9. Legislation The City of Carlsbad's State and Federal Legislative Prop shall include support of legislation consistent with the intent this policy and which assist the City in successfully pursui the goals of this policy. In particular, the City of Carlsbad P continue to support State and/or Federal legislation which: see to reduce the present regulatory complexities relating to ch care services; seeks to reduce the burden of insurance costs other funding for child care programs, and funding for t construction, renovation and/or maintenance of child CE facilities ; provides reasonable tax incentives for employers w offer child care services. 10. Policies The City of Carlsbad shall encourage all employers in Carlsk to address the issue of child care. In particular, business will be encouraged to adopt a stated policy on child care. 11. Review To determine their effectiveness, the City of Carlsbad v annually review all activities, programs and services it 1 undertaken to promote and encourage the expansion of child cz services. 12 . e 0 It V. SPECIFIC PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS A. Child Cape Commission The Task Force believes that through the adoption of a Ch Care Policy, a new level of visibility and acknowledgment will assured. However, as a means of augmenting and reinforcj this recommendation, a second major action is warranted - 1 establishment of a Child Care Commission. The Commission would provide support, advice and assistanc as well as be the vehicle to monitor and evaluate child care Carlsbad on an ongoing basis. The Commission would work furthering the Child Care Policy. The proposed Child Care Policy calls for the City to act as facilitator, encouraging the private and public sectors to becc partners in child care services. Furthermore, there is continuing need for a forum to enable all interested parties address the universe of child care needs and to consic appropriate actions. All these are roles the Child Ct Commission can and should play. In order to give initial structure to the Commission, yc Committee proposes the following: The Commission shall consist of seven members. St members shall be appointed by the Mayor and City Counc The Committee recommends the Commission be comprised a representative from the Chamber of Commerce, representative of the School Board, one child ci professional, a representative from the Plannj Commission, two representatives from major employers a one representative from the community at large who dc not represent any of the above categories. The term of office for each member of the Commission sk be four years. The Commission shall elect a chairpers and vice-chairperson from its members, which officers sl- hold office one year until their successors are elected. All members of the Commission shall be entitled to vo . Four members shall constitute a quorum for purposes conducting a meeting. The decisions of the Commiss shall be determined by a majority vote of the membc present. The Commission shall prepare its own workj rules in accordance with City policies. City staff sl- provide support services, as necessary. 13 0 0 ,% B. Child Care Coordhator The Task Force believes the very best way to monitor a: evaluate child care in Carlsbad and to implement the Child Ca Policy would be to provide a Child Care Coordinato Therefore, the Task Force recommends that the City Coun establish the position of Child Care Coordinator to accomplish t following : The coordinator position shall pursue the goals and objectiv set forth in the Child Care Policy. This position shall provide wide range of assistance to City departments, child ea providers, developers, and other parties interested in t expansion of child care services in the City of Carlsbad. One the prime goals of this new position is to bring focus a coordination to the City's ongoing and future child ca activities. Assistance provided should include, but not limited to, the following: 1. in the delivery of child care services. 2. Review current efforts in the preparation of city-k "Community Child Care Needs Assessment .I' 3. Review and update a comprehensive facilities check list assist developers and providers of child care services in th compliance with local/ State building, safety, parking a planning. 4. Assist the Building Department to develop within the Cit Development Processing Services the capability of integrating - one location expertise in local and State building, safe1 zoning, fire, parking and handicap requirements and regulatic applicable to the construction and rehabilitation of facilit designed for child care use. 5. Review the range of funding sources for child ci services. 6. Prepare guidelines and criteria regarding requests for 1 of vacant or under-utilized City-owned property or facilities qualified nonprofit child care providers. Guidelines to inch definition of "qualified nonprofit child care provider. " 7. Review State licensing requirements and make sugges amendments: include in the City's State Child Care Legislat Program. 8. Explore the feasibility of utilizing expediting services assist developers who incorporate child care facilities in tk development plans. Explore the potential range of options available to the C 14 0 0 I' 9. Select and/or develop child care information for parent providers and developers. 10. Serve as staff to the Child Care Commission. It is the belief of the Task Force that the coordinator functil should report to the City Manager. There are many diver components which comprise a child care delivery system, but its core it is a human, land use and economic resource problei The Task Force is confident that the City Manager's office c provide the necessary infrastructure and organizational supporl The Child Care Coordinator shall report quarterly to the Cj Council and Child Care Commission on the progress of wo described above. C. Land Use & Community Development Process Revisions Throughout the Task Force's consideration of this mattc comments both written and oral have attested to the importar of integrating the City's land use planning activities with child care concerns. Therefore, the Task Force recommen that the City Council revise the zoning ordinance and t community development process, with the assistance of a ch care coordinator, in the following ways: 1. Ordinance Revisions a) Revise existing Master and Specific Plans to designate ch care areas as they are scheduled for review (every thi years). b) Recommend that all future Master and Specific Ple designate child care areas. c) Recommend that child care centers be allowed in PM ZOI with an approved Specific or Master Plan which has designai areas set aside for child care facilities. d) Recommend that child care facilities be allowed in all zo' with a conditional use permit (CUP). e) child care center, and other day care facilities. Clarify and revise, as necessary, the definitions of schoc 2. Community Development Process Revisions a) Review and suggest revisions, where appropriate, to Zoning Ordinance, the elements of the General Plan, and individual Master and Specific Plans, to reflect the City's cl care policy. 15 0 e I' b) Review the current application process as it relates to d care providers and the operators of child care facilities, in orc to determine what steps may be taken to accelerate lo discretionary approvals for such use. c) Explore the feasibility of utilizing expediting services assist developers who incorporate child care facilities in th development plans. d) Develop with the City's Development Processing Servic Department the capability of integrating at one location expert in local and State building, safety, zoning, fire, parking a handicap requirements and regulations applicable to 1 construction and rehabilitation of facilities designed for cl- care use. e) Prepare guidelines and criteria regarding requests for I of vacant or under-utilized city-owned property or facilities qualified nonprofit child care providers. Guidelines sho. include definition of "qualified nonprofit child care provider. '' D. Public Information Packets In an effort to assist the child care provider and the citizens Carlsbad, the Task Force has identified a need to develop pul information packets to be available at the public count1 providing a guide to both potential child care providers z users. E. Legislative Position Much of what affects child care services is controlled at State level. This is especially true with respect to child c licensing and financing. The City of Carlsbad should underti the action to upgrade its visibility on child care issues. 1 City should, therefore, utilize all legislative resources availa to support legislation at both the State and national level. T includes, but is not limited to, the following child care issu insurance costs, supplemented funding for child care progrl for the needy, employer/ employee tax incentives and licens requirements. 16 0 e L' VI. FUNDING OPTIONS The complexities of funding in the child care industry are numerous to mention, but if one is to have a comprehension the subject, one would need to review each aspect individual Obviously, it would serve no purpose to make an attempt cover them all. This report will briefly touch on: Commercial child care facilities Non-profit child care facilities Child care coordinating agencies (including municipalities ) Subsidized care A. Commercial Child Care Facilities This group, for the most part, is made up of priv enterprises, in a variety of sizes, established to serve the nee of child care in the community in the pursuit of a modest reti on investment of capital, talents, and other resources. Individuals, partnerships, joint ventures, and corporatic normally would have studied the industry, surveyed the mark prepared financial projections, and anything else necessary acquiring initial capital. Funding that is directly attributable to program expansion si as special care of children, or supplemental nutrition may available through Federal, State, or Local Agency contacts. Funding for a group of this type is also available by apply for a number of grants that are listed in grant catalogs in pu' libraries or at the San Diego Community Foundation; howev these are not as numerous as those available for nonpr entities. B. Non-Profit Child Care Facilities This group includes such entities as churches and affiliat private schools, family and youth associations, and munic departments such as social and welfare agencies as well recreational. Funding is usually provided by the many grants specific, made available to promote and meet the needs of child care the community. The San Diego Community Foundation, nonprofit fund raising agency, is designed to direct tk agencies to the specific grant sources. The Foundation specifically staffed with the expertise, as it relates to locating of and applying for the grant. They are able to as even the most inexperienced, and have a long list of succesi 17 0 0 I It applicants. On site references and directories are available , well as periodicals that specifically address parties that E interested in acquiring grants, including some that are ch care oriented. Non-profit agencies that qualify with the IRS as tax exen charitable are also able to solicit donations from individuals, a often have "Fund Raisers" on a recurring basis to supplemc their working capital, or for specific building and expansj purposes. Programs offered by these agencies are usually much easier align with Federal, State and Local subsidies. These fundi resources are a regular part of their annual planning. C. Child Care Coordinating Agencies An integral part of the child care industry is the Yo coordinating or referral agency,') without which the child CI providers would not have a central referral service, and 1 parent seeking a qualified child care provider would not havc knowledgeable and sympathetic referral resource. The majority of these agencies are nonprofit in structure; a initiated in a variety of fashions, including family and yo1 agencies, industrial consortiums, municipalities, etc . Most of these agencies are self-supporting and often do I charge for their services. the group initiating the agency. Some of the agencies i supported by the State Department of Education, Ch Development Division. The North County YMCA Resource a Referral Service is one such agency. The following is a brief outline of the services provided by 1 agencies which act as a clearing house, at no cost, for thc seeking care and those who offer care. 1. Assist families in finding child care arrangements 1 children 0-13 years in family home care homes, preschools, a child care centers. 2.. Educate parents as consumers of child care servici enabling them to identify child care arrangements that will m individual needs of both the parent and the child. 3. Provide information to parents, newly licensed, and exist: child care providers on topics such as child developme: positive parenting education , legislation , licensing standarc health, nutrition, and activities for the child. Their funding is usually provided 18 0 0 1' D. Subsidized Care There has been little or no funding for needy working parenl earning basically minimum wages, with large families, tl: include latchkey children that cannot be placed in child ce facilities because of the cost. The State Board of Education Child Development Division dc provide some funding resources indirectly through the vario programs that are offered throughout the State. The Greater Avenue for Independence (GAIN), a State prop that began October 5, 1987, is similar to the old workfe programs but much broader in that it does include funds f child care (the going rate in the ZIP code), and cost transportation (bus pass, parking fees, $.26 mile for own car) 1s 0 0 x' VII. GLOSSARY A. Family Day Care Homes - is small group child care provid by licensed individuals in their homes. Homes are licens through the County Department of Social Services for eith 6 or 12 children. The day care providers must meet heal and safety standards. B. Child Care Centers - offer care in larger group setting Centers must be licensed by the State Department of SOC Services. Facilities must meet health, safety, and spa requirements. Staff must be certified according to St2 laws. Center based care is available for infants throu school age children. Respite Care - is the provision of caring for children whc parents need temporary relief from ongoing child rearj responsibilities. Parents may be abusive and neglectf in a severe crisis situation; incapacitated due to illner surgery or accident; or overburdened with numerc young children. C. 20 0 e ,' VIII. BIBLIOGRAPHY OF INFORMATION REVIEWED 1. Statistical Profile on Child Care and Development Services completed by Child Care Resource Service, 5-1-86. Child Care for Employees' Kids - Harvard Business Revier 4-86. 2. 3. Executive Guilt - Who's Taking Care of the Children? - Fortune 2-16-87. 4. Pre-School Age Group Booming - Blade Tribune 3-13-87. 5. Child Care Costs Hit $11-billion Yearly: Inability to Find Care Often Disrupts Jobs - Blade Tribune 5-17-87. 6. The Child Care Dilemma - Time 6-22-87. 7. Child Care Part of Office Complex - Los Angeles Times 6-28-84. 8. The Child Care Land Use and Legal Support Project - Ch Care Law Center 1987. On the Capitol Doorstep - 3-87 Monthly Report on Leffislation AffectinP Children. Caring for Tomorrow - A Local Government Guide to Chilc Care, prepared by Assembly Office of Research 12-85. Child Care Communique - YMCA Child Care Resource Service 1-88. Child Care Seen as Vital Amenity - San Diego Union 2-88 Child Care Fact Sheet - National Commission on Working Women. Paving the Way for Child Care - Western City 9-87. Santa Monica's Child Care Benefit Plan - Western City 9-t San Diego Child Care Coalition - information. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Insurance for Child Care Project Newsletters - 4-87, 5-87 Non-Profit Organizations and Liability Insurance : Problem Options and Prospects - California Community Foundation Day Care Liability: No Child's Matter - U.S. Chamber of Commerce. 10-87. 18. 19. 21 0 0 20. Choosing Child Care - YMCA Child Care Resource Service 21. Personnel & Labor Relations Committee Report to the Cour of the City of Los Angeles on Child Care Policies. 22. Manual of Policies and Procedures, Family Day Care Homes for Children, State of California 7-85. Updating Day Care - Zoning News 2-87. 23. 24. Child Care Articles on Fort Wayne, Dallas, New York and Boston - Community Faces Fall 1986. 25. Stumbling Block to Building Block: Zoning & Family Day Care - California Planner. Child Care in the City of Los Angeles: Dilemmas in Public Policy - League of Women Voters 1986. California Child Care Initiative - Program Summary 1-87. A PublicjPrivate Partnership - Horace Mann Child Care Center - A Consortium 1-86. 26. 27. 28. 29. Who Will Care for Our Children? - Western City 7-86. 30. N.A.E.Y.C. - National Association for the Education of Young Children - Information Packet. Child Care Seen as Vital Amenity - San Diego Union 2-88< 31. 22 0 0 IX. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS City Council Claude A. "Bud" Lewis, Mayor Ann J. Kulchin, Mayor Pro-Tem Mark V. Pettine John J. Mamaux Eric Larson Child Care Task Force Members Anna Knox, Chairperson Jeanne YcFadden , Co- Chair Jan Groves-Freeman Barbara Hallman Jim Hicks Paula Leard Julianne Nygaard Diane Sparks Barbara Ford Staff Members James C . Hagaman, Research/Analysis Group Manager A1 Capuchino, Finance Department Dee Landers, Planning Department Pauline Killingsworth, Secretary Betty Buckner, Minutes Clerk Special Thanks for input from other City departments, a numerous concerned citizens. 23 LAIIIUI 1 4 I *<’, e e I I I II I I sa1 IXcqo I 1 I I D 1 LOCAL TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CITY OF CARLSBAD 1987 1 CHILD CARE SURVEY 1 NOVEMBER 1987 1 @J A~~socL~I~Ios OF c;< nzRsJ1 ES’IS Security Pacific Plaza, Suite 524 1200 Third Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 I (61 9) 236-5300 Prepared by the San Diego Association of Governments for the City of Carlsbad through the I Local Technical Assistance Program MEMBER AGENCIES Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial Beacl Lemon Grove, National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Diego, San Marcos, Santee, Solana Beach, Vista, and the County of ADVISORY/LIAISON MEMBERS California Department of Transportation, U S Department of Defense and Tijuana/Baja Cz m W e Board of Directors SAN DIEGO ASSOClATlOlY OF GOVERNMENTS The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG)is a voluntary public agency formed by local governments to assure overall areawide planning and coordination for the San Diego region. Voting members include the Incorporated Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove, National City, Oceanside, Poway. San Diego, San Marcos, Santee, Solana Beach, Vista and the County of San Diego. Advisory and Liaison members include CALTRANS, U.S.Department of Defense and TijuandBaja California Norte. CHAIRMAN: Ernie Cowan VICE CHAIR: Lois Ewen SECRETARY-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Kenneth E. Sulzer CITY OF CARLSBAD John Mamaux, Councilmember (A) Ann Kulchin, Mayor Pro Tem CITY OF CHULA VISTA Greg Cox, Mayor (A) Leonard Moore, Mayor Pro Tem CITY OF CORONADO Lois Ewen, Councilmember (A) Robert G. Odiorne, Councilmember CITY OF DEL MAR Scott Barnett, Mayor Pro Tem (A) John Gillies, Councilmember CITY OF EL CAJON Harriet Stockwell, Mayor Pro Tem (A) Richard Smith, Councilmember CITY OF ENClNlTAS Greg Luke, Councilmember (A) Marjorie Gaines, Mayor CITY OF ESCONDIDO Ernie Cowan, Councilmember (A) Doris Thurston, Mayor Pro Tern CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH John Mahoney, Councilmember (A) Henry Smith, Mayor CITY OF LA MESA Art Madrid, Councilmember (A) Fred Nagel, Mayor (A) Ernest W. Ewin, Councilmember CITY OF LEMON GROVE Dan Kunkel, Councilmember (A) James V. Dorman, Mayor (A) Karen O'Rourke, Councilmember CITY OF NATIONAL CITY Jess E. Van Deventer, Councilmember (A) Marion F. Cooper, Vice Mayor CITY OF OCEANSIDE Lawrence M. Bagley, Mayor (A) Sam Williamson, Deputy Mayor CITY OF POWAV Carl Kruse, Councilmember (A) Robert Emery, Deputy Mayor CITY OF SAM DIEGO Ed Struiksma, Councilmember (A) Judy McCarty, Councilmember CITY OF SAM MARCOS Lee Thibadeau, Mayor (A) Mark Loscher, Vice Mayor CITY OF SAMTEE Jack Doyle, Mayor (A) Roy A. Woodward, Councilmember CITY OF SOLANA BEACH Margaret Schlesinger, Mayor (A) Richard Hendlin, Councilmember (A) Marion Dodson, Councilmember CITY OF VISTA Gloria E. McClellan, Mayor (A) Jeanette Smith, Councilmember COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO George Bailey, Vice Chairman (A) Brian Bilbray, Chairman (A) Susan Golding, Supervisor STATE DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION (Advisory Member) Leo Trombatore, Director (A) Bill Dotson, District Director U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (Liaison Member) Captain H. Roger Frauenfelder, U.S.N. C.O., Public Works Center, San Diego TIJUANNBAJA CALIFORNIA NORTE (Advisory Member) Lic. Federico Valdes Martinez, Presidente Municipal de Tijuana Revised August 1987 ii e 0 ,< 1 ..' ' I' a 1 I I I I 1 I 4 u I 1 I I I Abstract 8 TITLE: City of Carlsbad Child Care Survey, 1987 AUTHOR: SUBJECT: Parents of Carlsbad students' attitudes and San Diego Association of Governments opinions on child care issues. 1 DATE: November, 1987 NUMBER OF PAGES: 27 ABSTRACT: The City of Carlsbad conducted a survey of parents of children enrolled in Carlsbad schools. The survey was sent home from school with elementary students and mailed to homes of junior high and high school students. The survey was designed to measure the demand for child care within the jurisdiction. This report provides a description of the survey methodology and a summary of the data collected. m iii 8 ,<A ' 0 0 I" I I 1 I I I 1 I 1 I I I I Table of Contents Introduction 2 ...................................................... Summary of Results ............................................... 5 Summary of Responses 18 I Appendix ........................................................ 24 ............................................. List of Tables Table 1 Household Type by Age of Children 5 ....................... I Table 2 Type of Care by Age of Children ......................... 6 Table 3 Cost of Care by Age of Children ......................... 9 Table 4 Cost of Care by Type of Care ............................ 11 Table 5 I Children .............................................. 12 Table 6 Preferred Location of Care by Age of Children ............. 12 Table 7 Household Type by Days Missed from Work ................ 15 Table 8 Days Missed from Work by Age of Children ................ 15 Level of Satisfaction with Child Care by Age of e List of Figures Figure 1 Care Used and Preferred ................................ 8 Figure 2A Weekly Cost of Structured Child Care 10 Figure 2B Weekly Cost of Non-structured Child Care 10 .................... ................ Figure 3 Preference of Care Location ............................ 13 Figure 4 Importance of Factors in Selecting Child Care 25 ............. iv 0 0 .$ 8 $, ' I' ' I 8 I I 1 # R 1 I 1 D 1 I I I I INTRODUCTION e 0 0 * 1 3' 8' I I 1 1 8 I I I I I I 1 1 8 I I Introduction Demand for child care is growing as more women with young children have entered the work force. The 1980 Census found that over half of all women in the San Diego region with children between the ages of 6 and 17 were in the labor force. Over 2,300 women with children under the age of 18 (54 percent) in the City of Carlsbad reported that they were in the work force at that time. In an effort to study the child care situation within its jurisdiction, the City of Carlsbad appointed a special task force. The Cardsbad Child Care Task Force is performing a variety of functions, including: examining potential land use and zoning changes required to accommodate child care needs; making an inventory of services presently available; and reviewing the insurance aspects related to care. The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) was requested by the City of Carlsbad through the Local Technical Assistance Program to assist in devel- oping, tabulating, and analyzing a survey of residents with children designed to measure the demand for child care within the jurisdiction. The results of the survey, presented here, will be used in the Task Force's analysis of how to meet child care needs. The Task Force provided SANDAG with a draft of the questions to be included in the survey. SANDAG reviewed the questions and made minor changes where appropriate. The final draft of the survey was presented to the Task Force for approval. A total of 5,879 survey forms were distributed in June 1987. The surveys were sent home with all elementary school children in the Carlsbad School District as well as two elementary schools in the Encinitas School District that serve Carlsbad students. In addition, survey forms were mailed to parents of junior high and high school students in Carlsbad. To encourage responses, a cover letter from the Task Force Chairman and a postage-paid return envelope were attached to the surveys. Parents with more than one child were instructed to complete only one survey form. A total of 989 surveys, accounting for 1,962 children, were returned for a 17 percent response rate. This response rate is fairly high (especially considering that a share of the surveys were duplicates at some households) and represents a statistically valid sample of familes with school-age children in the Carlsbad area. a 2 8 ,.. * 0 e 1 I I 8 I I 1 I 8 E 1 8 u I I 4 1 I Approximately 8 percent of the estimated population less than 5 years old and 16 percent of children aged 5 through 18 in the City of Carlsbad were represented in the survey. Because of the survey design, only pre-school aged children with siblings attending the schools surveyed were represented in the survey. This explains why the ratio of children represented under the age of 5 is lower. This report is divided into four categories: the introduction, a summary of the results, a summary of responses to each question, and the appendix containing a copy of the survey questionnaire and cover letter that accompanied it. 3 1 ;. ' a 0 I I I B 8 a I li E I I 8 8 1 1 8 I 8 SUMMARY OF RESULTS 1 \'* ' 0 8 I I I I 1 I 8 1 1 li 8 8 I I I t 1 II Summary of Results This section summarizes the results of the survey for each question asked. Most questions on the survey asked for separate information on each individual child. Information relating to children over the age of 18 was not tabulated in the results. A summary of the survey results for each question is outlined in the next section of this report. Type of Household (Question 1) Forty-six percent of all surveys returned were from two-working-parent families. Thirty-three percent were from two-parent families in which only one parent was employed. A total of 989 families with 1,962 children returned this survey, representing an average household size of 3.9 persons. The median age of the children was 8.2 years. TABLE 1 indicates that nearly 50 percent of all children under 5 lived in homes where one parent did not work. An additional 43 percent were in homes where both parents worked and child care arrangements would be required. Nearly 60 percent of pre-teens (age 5 through 12) were in homes where both parents were employed or with a single parent, indicating a strong need for child care in this age category as well. TABLE 1 HOUSEHOLD TYPE BY AGE OF CHILDREN (Percent) All Under 5 Pre-Teens Teenagers Ages 42.7 42.9 50.2 46.0 Two Parents (both employed) Single Parent, Other 7.7 16.9 19.0 20.7 Two Parents (one employed) 49.6 40.2 30.8 33.3 1oo.o 100.0 100.0 100.0 5 1 +* * e a i Child Care Methods (Question 2) Respondents were asked to identify the type of care they now use for each of their children. Over 25 percent of all respondents reported that their children did not need any outside care. Children may not need care for a variety of reasons: for instance, parents may work different shifts enabling at least one of them to be available for child care or children are in school during the time their parents are away at work. Thirteen percent of the children cared for themselves. Relatives and baby-sitters each provided care for 6 percent of the children. Structured after-school programs provided care for 7 percent of the children. TABLE 2 highlights the difference in structured care (child care centers, struc- tured after-school programs, and licensed family day care centers) and non- structured care (spouse, baby-sitter, relative, child caring for self, older sibling, and no care needed) by age group. The proportion of children using structured care types decreases with age. The majority of children surveyed in each age category were placed in non-struc tured care. 1 I I 8 I I 1 1 TABLE 2 8 (Percent) TYPE OF CARE BY AGE OF CHILDREN All Under 5 Pre-Teens Teenapers Ages Structured Care 13.7 12.7 3.9 12.4 Non-Structured Care 86.3 87.3 96.1 87.6 8 II I 100.0 100.0 100.0 1oo.o Over 30 percent of children under 5 receive care from a parent rather than an outside source. The incidence of care being provided by an older sibling increased for children between the ages of 1 and 14. It is interesting to note that 13 percent of the children took care of themselves, over half of which were younger than 13 m I years old. 8 1 I 6 8 ,'< * e 0 i-' ' Child Care Preference (Question 7) Respondents were asked to identify their preference for child care, regardless of what their care arrangement was at the time. Figure 1 highlights that a larger share of respondents preferred structured child care programs than were using them at the time of the survey (refer to Question 2). The proportion of respon- dents who stated their children needed no care was larger than the proportion who listed that situation as their preference. A large share of respondents (21 percent) indicated that structured after-school programs would be their preference. The share of respondents selecting "spouse" as their child care preference was slightly higher than the share reporting it as their current primary source of care. The share of respondents listing "older sibling," "child cares for self," "baby-sitter," and 'ho care needed" as their preferred type of care was smaller than the share of respondents who rely on these methods. Child Care Costs (Question 5) The median amount of money paid by respondents who pay for child care services was approximately $30 per week per child. Twenty percent of all respondents paying for child care paid more than $50 per week, while less than one percent paid over $100 per week. A Current Population Study conducted by the Bureau of the Census in December 1984 found the median amount paid for child care services at the national level was $39 per week. TABLE 3 shows that the cost of child care is slightly higher for children under 5 than for the other age categories. Nearly 27 percent of households with children under 5 pay more than $50 per week for child care, while only 18 percent of households with children ages 5 to 12 pay more than $50 per week for child care. I R 8 t I J 1 I 8 B II 1 1 a R e m 7 I ,I’ 0 0 I’ E n I u i b C 1 8 I I I t 1 8 I Figure ’ CARE USED AND PREFERRED I 70 r I I I I i 60 1 I l C I Y ? I I n Structured Non- structured No Core Needed I cZ;=J Core Used m Preferred Core 8 s ,* * 0 0 r t 8 I t I Y 1 t I I It 8 1 I t 1 TABLE 3 COST OF CARE BY AGE OF CHILDREN (Percent) All Under 5 Pre-Teens Teenagers Ages $1 to $10 10.7 12.5 16.3 10.5 $11 to $20 15.7 20.9 14.0 19.3 $21 to $30 21.7 19.9 21.7 2 1.6 $31 to $40 9.6 9.0 9.3 9.4 $41 to $50 15.6 18.9 20.1 18.1 $51 to $60 11.0 8.5 6.1 8.4 $61 to $70 7.5 4.4 4.7 5.7 $71 to $80 4.3 2.9 3.1 3.5 $81 to $90 1.1 0.4 0.0 0.6 $91 to $100 1.4 1.9 3.9 2.1 $100 or more 1.4 0.7 0.8 0.8 1oo.o 1oo.0 loo.O 1 om Figures 2A and 2B and TABLE 4 indicate that structured child care programs also tend to cost more. Nearly 17 percent of respondents who used structured day care programs paid over $60 per week, while only 9 percent of respondents using non- structured care types paid that amount. It is interesting to note that over 60 percent of the respondents who specifically reported using child care centers paid more than $40 per week. This is similar to findings from the Census Bureau study that found the median amount paid weekly for organized child care in 1984-85 was $44. Over 50 percent of respondents using non-structured after-school programs, relatives, spouses, and older siblings as their primary source of child care paid under $30 weekly. 9 e a ., . 0 0 ma c I I C c R t t I i 4 # 1 E I 1 8 c Figure 2A WEEKLY COST OF STRUCTURED CHILD CARE Over $80 (4%) Figure 2B WEEKLY COST OF NON-STRUCTURED CHILD CARE Over $80 (2.39.) $41 -60 (28 8%) $21 -40 (29 X) 10 t *" ' 0 0 b P E t I 1 1 1 i 1 8 I 1 1 t TABLE 4 COST OF CARE BY TYPE OF CARE (Percent) All c Non-Struc tured Structured Ages $1 to $10 16.2 4.5 10.5 $11 to $20 16.1 23.4 19.3 $21 to $30 21.4 20.5 21.6 $31 to $40 8.3 7.6 9.4 $41 to $50 19.5 18.2 18.1 $51 to $60 9.3 9.2 8.4 $61 to $70 3.9 8.2 5.7 $71 to $80 3.0 3.9 3.5 $81 to $90 0.6 0.5 0.6 $91 to $100 1.3 2.4 2.1 $100 or more 0.4 1.6 0.8 1oo.o 1oo.o 1 om Satisfaction Level of Existing Child Care (Question 6) The overwhelming majority of respondents (84 percent) reported they were satis- fied with their current arrangements for child care. Those who reported that they were dissatisfied felt more structured and less expensive child care arrangements were needed. Of the 16 percent of the unsatisfied respondents, approximately 7 percent indicated they felt uneasy about the "latch-key'' situation. Other reasons stated for dissatisfaction included the need for more before and after-school care, problems with transporting children between home, school, and child care, the lack of "drop-in" care centers where the children are not enrolled in a program, and that child care programs are too full. TABLE 5 indicates that nearly 90 percent of respondents with children under 5 years old were happy with their existing child care arrangements. The largest proportion of respondents who indicated they were unhappy with their arrange- ments were parents of pre-teenagers, but not significantly lower. I c 11 t 9.' a 0 1' I E P 1 I II I il 1) # I 1 I 1 1 TABLE 5 LEVEL OF SATISFATION WITH CHILD CARE BY AGE OF CHILDREN 1 (Percent) All Under 5 Pre-Teens Teenagers Ages Sat is f ied 89.8 84.3 86.7 84.1 Not Satisfied 10.2 15.7 13.3 15.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 1oo.o Location of Child Care (Question 8) Respondents indicated that they preferred child care be located closer to the child's environment than to their work environment. Nearly 58 percent of respon- dents selected locations at or near their home as their first preference for child care. Over 26 percent reported locations at or near school would be their pref- erence. Ten percent indicated that locations on their way to work or at or near their work would be their preference. TABLE 6 and Figure 3 highlight the preferred location of child care by age group. The largest share of respondents in every age category selected locations at or near home while the second largest selected at or near school. Parents of children under 5 were more likely to select locations at or near work or on their way to work than were parents of children in the other age categories. 5 TABLE 6 PREFERRED LOCATION OF CARE BY AGE OF CHILDREN (Percent) All Under 5 Pre-Teens Teenagers Ages On the way to work 6.5 4.4 5.1 5.0 At or near work 7.2 4.3 3.9 4.9 At or near home 65.7 58.5 62.1 57.8 At or near school 14.5 28.1 17.6 26.1 Other 3.0 1.2 1.3 1.4 No preference 3.1 3.5 10.0 4.8 1oo.o 1oo.o 100.0 1 om 12 s. ,* ’ 0 0 r I i 8 P 1 I! P 1 4 t II k I s # i Figure 3 PREFERENCE OF CARE LOCATION 70 1 I I I I I 60 50 I I I I ; I I I I J I C .d 40 30 a 20 10 0 rlorne School Work Other No Preference Location Preference 8 e7Zi Under 5 m Preteens 0 Teens Figure 4 IMPORTANCE OF FACTORS LN SELECTING CHILD CARE 1 I I I 1oc 7---- I I ezZ; Very lrnportonr m Somewhat Important Not Important 13 v +-I ' 0 0 E 1 1 b I It 3t 1 I I 1 II Jil r J .T 4 Home and Work Location of Respondents (Questions 10 and 11) More than 95 percent of survey respondents lived in the Carlsbad area. Nearly 71 percent worked in Carlsbad or adjacent communities; nearly 44 percent worked in the City of Carlsbad, 14 percent worked in Oceanside, and five percent worked in Encinitas. An additional 8 percent worked in San Marcos and Vista. Child Care Time Needs (Question 12) As would be expected, respondents indicated that they generally need child care to begin between 7:OO and 9:OO a.m. and end between 5:OO and 7:OO p.m. However, the hours required for child care ranged from 2:00 a.m. to 12:30 a.m. Child Care Facilities/Program Needs (Question 13) Figure 4 indicates that dependability of care and the safety and cleanliness of the care environment were very important factors to respondents when they were seeking child care. It is interesting to note that these factors were more impor- tant to them than the cost of care and convenience of the location. Providing child enrichment activities during child care time was considerd very important by 62 percent of all respondents. Over 53 percent of all respondents did not feel that providing hot lunches was an important factor in seeking child care. Loss of Work Due to Child's Illness (Question 14) Forty percent of all respondents reported that they missed more than one day of work during the six months prior to the survey because their child was ill. Nearly 60 percent, however, reported that they did not miss any work in the previous six months. I Over 50 percent of respondents in families where both parents worked and in single parent families were required to miss at least a day's work due to a child's illness. However, less than 12 percent of respondents in families where one spouse did not work were required to miss work because of a sick child. TABLE 7 indi- cates that single parents and two-working parents were likely to take approx- imately the same amount of time off from work because their child was ill. 14 I .- ' 0 0 c' ' 1 I 1y 1oo.o 1oo.o 1oo.o 1 om 8 I I 1 1 k t 1: 1 I 'I 1 TABLE 7 HOUSEHOLD TYPE BY DAYS MISSED FROM WORK (Percent) 2 Parents 2 Parents All (Both Employed) (One Employed) Single Ages None 43.0 88.5 46.4 59.5 1 to 2 days 25.7 5.4 24.3 18.5 3 to 4 days 17.2 2.9 14.9 11.5 5 to 6 days 9.0 2.2 8.3 6.4 7 days or more 5.1 1.0 6.1 4.0 m Parents of pre-teenagers reported missing more time from work than parents of pre-school aged children and teenagers, according to TABLE 8. Over 30 percent of pre-teen parents missed between one and four days work in the six-month period before the survey. TABLE 8 DAYS MISSED FROM WORK BY AGE OF CHILDREN (Percent) All Under 5 Pre-Teens Teenagers Ages None 68.0 56.7 69.7 59.5 1 to 2 days 13.9 19.3 13.9 18.5 3 to 4 days 8.5 12.4 9.2 11.6 5 to 6 days 7.2 6.6 4.4 6.4 7 days or more 2.4 5.0 2.8 4.0 1oo.o 1oo.o 1oo.o 1 om Child Care for Teenagers (Question 15) Parents of teenagers were divided on their preference for after-school supervised programs. Approximately 43 percent of respondents with teenagers indicated they were not interested in such a program. Respondents that were interested indi- cated they would welcome structured sports and recreation programs or a center for academic purposes as well as socializing. s 15 # *fl * * a c I I I P 8 f t f t 5 11 I 1 31 c I General Comments (Question 16) The final question on the survey asked respondents if they had any questions or comments they would like to make on the topic of child care. Nearly 37 percent of respondents took advantage of the opportunity to respond to this question. Twenty percent of respondents to this question (7.4 percent of all respondents) stated they felt there was a need for additional quality, supervisied, and low-cost child care programs in the area. Ten percent (or 3.7 percent of all respondents) favored using school facilities for supervised before and after-school programs and programs during the summer. Four percent of the respondents complimented the City of Carlsbad for its interest in the child care issue. m 16 1 .'' ' 0 e 1' I B t 1 4 8 It I E t t E 1 i 8 I 1 SUMMARY OF RESPONSES e 0 Summary of Responses 5 &L' ' bn i I 100.0 1 U I a I 1. I 100.0 t 1 I T 0 r I 1. Which of the following best describes your household? Percent of I Responses Two-parent family (both employed) 46.0 Single parent 19.2 Other 1.5 Two-parent family (one employed) 33.3 2. What ages are your children? Less than one 1.7 One 3.4 Two 3.4 Three 4.0 Four 4.3 Five 5.2 Six 10.0 Seven 8.5 Eight 8.8 Nine 6.8 Ten 7.1 Eleven 5.0 Twelve 4.6 Thirteen 5.8 Fourteen 5.0 Fifteen 4.3 Sixteen 5.0 Seventeen 4.6 Eighteen 2.5 3. What type of care do you now use for each of these children? If any child j usually cared for in more than one arrangement, mark the one used for the mos hours. No care needed 26.3 Spouse 24.8 12.8 Child cares for self Structured after-school program 6.5 Older sibling 6.2 Re la tiv e 6.1 Babysit ter 6.1 Licensed family day care provider 3.1 Child care center 2.8 Unrelated person in your home 1.8 Other 3.5 100.0 18 P ,'* 0 e B1$ ' .I r I I I Q I I II I f I I Y R P 4. If you have a different arrangement during the summer months, please indicatt which of the methods you use. Percent of Responses No care needed 15.9 Spouse 15.2 Baby sitter 13.0 Relative 12.0 Child care center 7.3 Structured after-school program 6.0 Licensed family day care provider 4.9 Child cares for self 4.6 Older sibling 2.8 Unrelated person in your home 1 .o Other 17.3 100.0 5. How much does your family spend each week per child on child care necessitate1 by work? $1 to $10 10.5 $11 to $20 19.3 $21 to $30 21.6 $31 to $40 9.4 $41 to $50 18.1 $51 to $60 8.4 $61 to $70 5.7 3.5 $71 to $80 $81 to $90 0.6 $91 to $100 2.1 $101 to $150 0.8 100.0 & Median: $29.37 6. Are you satisfied with your current arrangements for each child? Yes 84.1 No 15.9 100.0 6a. If not, please explain. (Responses for those who answered "no" on Questio 6 only) More structured care is needed 4.6 2.2 More before and after school care is needed 0.9 Tramp or t a ti on problem cited 0.9 Care is not always available/drop-in services needed 0.6 Child care programs are too full 0.5 0 ther 5.1 15.9 Less expensive care is needed Uneasy about latch-key arrangement 1.1 19 R ,‘I * 0 0 r-$ c 1 b II E I I I I 1 P 1 I 1 I 1 k 7. What type of child care do you prefer to have for your children? Percent of Responses Spouse 29.7 20.8 Structured after school program No care needed 12.0 Relative 7.8 Child care center 5.3 Babysitter 5.1 Licensed family day care provider 4.6 Child cares for self 4.6 Unrelated person in your home 4.2 Older sibling 1.7 4.2 0 ther - 100.0 8. Where do you prefer your children’s care be located? At or near home 57.8 At or near school 26.1 On the way to work 5.0 At or near work 4.9 Other 1.4 4.8 No preference - 100.0 9. If you do not currently use any form of child care, do you anticipate needing an within the next two years? I Yes 24.3 No 52.5 Already use child care 23.2 1oo.o 10. What is your residence zip code? Carlsbad (92008 and 92009) 95.5 Encinit as (92024) 1.1 Oceanside (92054 and 92056) 3.2 0.2 Vista (92083) - 100.0 20 I ,% - 0 0 E' il r P 1 I 1oo.o s t II T 1' T E 1 1 1 1 11. What is your work zip code? Percent of Responses Carlsbad (92008 and 92009) 43.5 Oceanside (92054 and 92056) 13.7 Encinitas (92024) 5.3 San Marcos (92069) 4.6 Vista (92083) 3.3 Sorrento (92121) 3 .O Solana Beach (92075) 2.4 Downtown San Diego (92101) 2.4 La Jolla (92037) 2.3 Camp Pendleton (92055) 1.4 Esc ondid o (920 2 5) 1.3 16.8 Other 12a. During what hours do you usually need child care to begin? Before 6:OO a.m. 1 .o 6:OO - 7:OO a.m. 11.1 7:OO - 8:OO a.m. 43.2 8:OO - 9:OO a.m. 32.8 9:OO - 1O:OO a.m. 7.6 1O:OO - 11:OO a.m. 2.9 11:OO a.m. - 12:OO p.m. 1.4 100.0 12b. During what hours do you usually need child care to end? Percent of I Responses 12:OO - 1:00 p.m. 0.3 2:Of) - 3:OO p.m. 2.7 3:OO - 4:OO p.m. 7.6 4:OO - 5:OO p.m. 15.0 5:OO - 6:OO p.m. 33.3 6:OO - 7:OO p.m. 30.5 7:OO - 8:OO p.m. 2.3 8:OO - 9:OO p.m. 1 .o 9:OO - 1O:OO p.m. 1.5 1O:OO - 11:OO p.m. 1.4 11:OO p.m. - 12:OO a.m. 0.9 1.5 12:OO - 1:OO a.m. 100.0 1:OO - 2:OO p.m. 2.0 - 21 9 ,+ . 0 0 B' a lr lr 1 6 Q f I D 1 I 1: I( r 1 I t 13. In seeking child care, how important are each of these factors? Not Somewhat Very Important Important Important Dependability of care arrangement 2.4 4.4 93.2 Safety and cleanliness of child 3.9 3.6 92.5 Convenience of location 4.7 54.8 40.5 cost 8.2 44.6 47.2 Child enrichment activities 7.3 30.7 62.0 Flexible hours 11.9 40.5 47.6 Hot lunches 53.6 30.0 16.4 care environment 14. How many days, if any, did you miss from work over the past six months whe your child was ill? None 59.5 1-2 18.6 3 -4 11.7 5-6 6.4 7 or more 3.8 100.0 15. Do you want some form of after-school supervision for your teenagers? Yes 43.2 No 56.7 1oo.o 15a. If so, in what form? (Responses of those who answered "yes" on question I only) Structured sports and recreation program 26.7 Supervised teen center for tutoring, studying, 18.3 Other 11.7 56.7 and socializing 22 5 ,‘a - 0 0 8 I f I 1 T 1oo.o I 0 I‘ 6 B iI r I 1 E T P 16. Are there any additional comments you may wish to make on this subject? Additional, quality, supervised low cost Supervised use of school facilities for before 19.4 9.7 Parents provide the best child care 8.3 Low cost summer program or camp needed 4.6 Compliment made to city - good survey 4.6 Child care for flexible hours is needed 3.4 3.4 Need better transportation for child care 3.1 Need a teen center 2.6 Child care is expensive for single parents 2.3 Parent enjoys being the primary care taker for 1.7 1.1 Other 35.8 child care is needed and after school and during summer is needed Scampers and Scooters program complimented their children Boys & Girls Clubs doing great job 23 t ,>a ' e 0 r' t J I I 0 P t 8 0 Y c I I 1 1 1 1 APPENDIX i ,Y 0 0 APP4 1 B 4 R 1 I 8 t 1' R t T 1 1 II I 1 1200 ELM AVENUE 1 CARLSBAD, CA 92008-2320 ditp of darlie'bab RfSEARCHIANALYSlS GROUP Dear Parents : The City Council of the City of Carlsbad has established a Child Care Task Force to assess the child care needs in our city. In an effort to combine the most accurate data, we are asking you to take just a few moments to fill out the attached question- naire and return it to us in the envelope provided. Should you need more information, please call Jim Hagaman at 434-2847. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. c2L4L.G %cut&,, JkAN N E McFADDEN , Co- Chairper! Child Care Task Force (JAAkdi44 (3p ANNA KNOX, Chairperson Child Care Task Force AK : JCH :pgk 25 LnnL3t)nu L~ILU LAKC 3unvti (Age Group 0-18 years old) 0 1: *Which of the following best describes your household? (check one) 1. - Two-parent family (both employed) 3. - Single parent 2. - Two-parent family (one employed) 4. - Other (please specify) What ages are your children? Child #1 Child #3 Child #5 Child #2 Child #4 Child #6 - Note: Please keep answers to.Child #1, #2, etc. constant throughout questionn; What type of care do you now use for each of these children? If any child is u cared for in more than one arrangement, mark the one used for the most hours. Method: Indicate the letter for each child. Child #1 (a) spouse Child #2 (b) older sibling Child #3 (c) relative Child #4 (d) unrelated person in your home (live-in) Child #5 (e) child cares for self Child #6 (f) baby sitter k ,.I ' II' I c 0 t c I t 1 1 2. - - 3. (g) (h) child care center (i) structured after-school program (j) no care needed (k) other (please specify) licensed family day care provider 4. If you have a different arrangement during the summer months, please indicate below which of the methods listed in Question 3 that you use. Method Met hod Method B Child #1 Child #3 Child #5 Child #2 Child #4 Child #6 I 5. Child #1 $ per week Child #3 $ per week b Child #2 $ per week Child #4 $ How much does your family spend each week on child care necessitated by work Child #S Pel Pel If not, pleas per week Child #6 6. Are you satisfied with your current arrangements for each child? Why : Child #1 Why: Child #2 Why : Child #3 Child #4 Yes: - No: - Why : Child #5 - Yes: - No : - Why: Why : Child #6 What type of child care do you prefer to have for your children? (k) in Question 3) : Child #l Child #3 Child #5 Child #6 Child #2 Child #4 26 - Yes: - No : Yes: - No : Yes: - No : - - - I 1 .I: r I - - - Yes: - No : - 7. (Use (a) thr * 1 . '#' 8. Where do you prefer 0 your children's care be located? (In a icate a letter (a) thru 3 [f) for each child): Prefer Prefer Prefer Child #1 Child #3 Child #5 Child #2 Child #4 Child #6 (a) on the way to work (d) at or near school. Indicate (b) at or near work (c) at or near home 1' E E 5 I 1 I ! I I d I e d I a I school zip code (e) other (describe) If) no preference 9. If you do not currently use any form of child care, do you anticipate needing ar within the next 2 years? 1. Yes: 2. No: 3. Already use child care: What is your residence zip code: What is your work zip code? (If you do not know, write the name of the city in which you work) : During what hours do you usually need child care? circle a.m. or p.m.): 10. 11. 12. (Please write in hours and To - To From - From Child #1 am/pm amlpm Child #4 am/pm amlpm Child #2 am/pm arn/pm Child #5 am/pm amlpm Child #3 amlpm am/pm Child #6 amlpm am/pm 13. In seeking child care, how important are each of these factors, using scale belo Very Important = 3 Somewhat lmprotant = 2 dependability of care arrangement safety and cleanliness of child care environment Not Important = 1 - (a) (b) - (c) convenience of location - (d) cost (e) child enrichment activities (f) flexible hours (9) hot lunches - - - - - (h) other (please specify) 14. How much time, if any, did you miss from work over the past six months when child was ill? Days : Hours : Do you want some form of after-school supervision for your teenagers? Yes : No : No teenagers in household : If yes, in what form: 15. 16. Any additional comments you may wish to make on this subject: 1 27 -__... I_. . I a a< I 1 I 1 I LOCAL TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CITY OF CARLSBAD CHILD CARE SURVEY,, 1987 I (INDUSTRIAL) 1 MARCH 1988 I San mcgo m 1 1 I I I I I 1 I ASSOCLITIOS OF c;<>\l-r-:rcs?brEs’I’s Security Pacific Plaza, Suite 524 1200 Third Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 (61 9) 236-5300 Prepared by the San Diego Association of Governments for the City of Carlsbad through the Local Technical Assistance Program MEMBER AGENCIES Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Lemon Grove, National City Oceanside, Poway, San Diego, San Marcos, Santee, Solana Beach, Vista, and County of San D ADVISORY/LIAISON MEMBERS California Department of Transportation, U S Department of Defense, and TljuandBaja Califor 0 e oard of ireetors SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) is a voluntary public agency formed by local governments to assure overall areawide planning and coordination for the San Diego region. Voting members include the Incorporated Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove, National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Diego, San Marcos, Santee, Solana Beach, Vista and the County of San Diego. Advisory and Liaison members include CALTRANS, U.S. Department of Defense and TijuandBaja California Norte. CHAIRMAN: Ernie Cowan VICE-CHAIR: Lois Ewen SECRETARY-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Kenneth E. Sulzer CITY OF CARLSBAD John Mamaux, Councilmember (A) Ann Kulchin, Mayor Pro Tern CITY OF CHULA VISTA Greg Cox, Mayor (A) Leonard Moore, Mayor Pro Tern CITY OF CORONADO Lois Ewen, Councilmember (A) Robert G. Odiorne, Councilmember CITY OF DEL MAR Scott Barnett, Deputy Mayor (A) John Gillies, Councilmember CITY OF EL CAJON Harriet Stockwell, Mayor Pro Tern (A) Richard Smith, Councilmember CITY OF ENClNlTAS Greg Luke, Councilmember (A) Marjorie Gaines, Councilmember CITY OF ESCONDIDO Ernie Cowan, Councilmember (A) Doris Thurston, Mayor Pro Tern CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH John Mahoney, Councilmember (A) Henry Smith, Mayor CITY OF LA MESA Art Madrid, Councilmember (A) Fred Nagel, Mayor (A) Ernest W. Ewin, Councilmember CITY OF LEMON GROVE Dan Kunkel, Councilmember (A) James V. Dorman, Mayor (A) Karen O'Rourke, Councilmember CITY OF NATIONAL CITY Jess E. Van Deventer, Councilmember (A) Marion F. Cooper, Vice Mayor CITY OF OCEANSIDE Lawrence M. Bagley, Mayor (A) Sam Williamson, Deputy Mayor CITY OF POWAY Carl Kruse, Deputy Mayor (A) Robert Emery, Mayor CiTY OF SAN DIEGO Ed Struiksma, Councilmember (A) Judy McCarty, Councilmember CITY OF SAN MARCOS Lee Thibadeau, Mayor (A) Mark Loscher, Vice Mayor CITY OF SANTEE Jack Doyle, Mayor (A) Roy A. Woodward, Councilmember CITY OF SOLANA BEACH Margaret Schlesinger, Mayor (A) Richard Hendlin, Councilmember (A) Marion Dodson, Councilmember CITY OF VISTA Gloria E. McClellan, Mayor (A) Jeanette Smith, Councilmember COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO Brian Bilbray, Supervisor (A) Susan Golding, Vice-Chair STATE DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION (Advisory Member) Robert Best, Director (A) Bill Dotson, District Director U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (Liaison Member) Captain H. Roger Frauenfelder, U.S.N. C.O., Public Works Center, San Diego TIJUANNBAJA CALIFORNIA NORTE (Advisory Member) Lic. Federico Valdes Martinez Presidente Municipal de Tijuana Revised February 1988 ii 1 ,'* - 0 0 I II 1 1 i I I I 1 I I 1 I I 1 1 I 1 Abstract TITLE: AUTHOR: SUBJECT: City of Carlsbad industrial employees' City of Carlsbad Child Care Survey, 1987 San Diego Association of Governments attitudes and opinions on child care issues. DATE: March, 1988 NUMBER OF PAGES: 30 ABSTRACT: The City of Carlsbad conducted a survey of persons employed in its jurisdiction. The survey was distributed to ten major employers and was designed to measure the demand this population segment has for child care. This report provides a descrip- tion of the survey and a summary of the r esu 1 t s. iii I ,'* ' e e I< 8 t 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I I I I 1: I Table of Contents INTRODUCTION .................................................. 3 1 SUMMARY OF RESULTS .......................................... 7 SURVEY RESPONSES ............................................. 17 APPENDIX ....................................................... 27 1 List of Figures FIGURE 1 CARE NEEDED DURING SUMMER ONLY . .. . .. .... ... . 9 FIGURE 2 WEEKLY COST OF CHILD CARE FOR ALL CHILDREN . 9 FIGURE 3 13 FIGURE 4 HOUSEHOLD TYPE ......... ... ... ... ... ... ......... 13 COST OF WEEKLY CHILD CARE BY AGE GROUPS . . . . . V I so, ' a 0 I' I 8 1 I I 1 1 1 I I 1 I R I 1 li I INTRODUCTION I ..r e e I II 8 8 8 8 1 E li 1 I I I 5 1 I I 8 Introduction During 1987, the City of Carlsbad established a Child Care Task Force to examine the child care situation within its jurisdiction. As a portion of the overall project, a survey of persons employed in the Carlsbad area was conducted. The results of the survey are presented in this report. The survey was designed to elicit responses from a representative sample of the population. Therefore, the data collected from the persons who responded to the survey can be applied to the total industrial p opula t ion o f Car lsb ad. A survey questionnaire was designed by the Task Force and distributed to employers in the Carlsbad area. Appendix A contains a copy of the survey ques- tionnaire. Appendix B contains a listing of the number of questionnaires dis- tributed at each company surveyed. Approximately 2,960 surveys were distributed to persons employed in the City of Carlsbad and 501 were returned for a response rate of nearly 17 percent. The completed surveys were forwarded to the San Diego Association of Governments for tabulation. Some discrepancies in the survey distribution procedure should be noted. Employees at the City of Carlsbad were requested to complete the survey whether or not they had children. Employees at the industrial firms surveyed were requested to complete the survey only if they were a parent or anticipated having children in the future. Approximately 20 percent of all surveys returned were from City employees. Many of the questions on the industrial survey were similar to those asked on a separate survey conducted by the Task Force earlier in the year of parents of children enrolled in Carlsbad schools. (The results of this survey are contained in the report City of Carlsbad Child Care Survey, 1987.) The industrial survey was significantly shorter in length. 3 3 *-J e e I 1 8 1 It I 1 I 1 I I 1 I R I t 1 8 SUMMARY OF RESULTS m Summary of Results 1 *-, * I' 8 I 1 8 I I I 3 1 m I a t B Respondents to the survey had a combined total of 603 children. The median age of the children was 6.5 years. Twenty-five percent of all children were one year old or less. Less than 11 percent were age 15 or older. Responses to some questions were tabulated by age group. This enables more specific analysis of the needs of parents with children of different ages. Nearly half of all parents with children under the age of five reported they anticipated needing child care within the next two years. Ten percent of respondents with children in this age category were cptain they would not need care within that time period. As the age of children increased, anticipated need for care de- creased. Approximately 35 percent of parents of pre-teenagers (ages 5 through 12) and 17 percent of teenagers (ages 13 to 18) reported they anticipated a need for care. The number of respondents who were certain they would not need child care in the next two years jumped to 74 percent in the teenager category. Question 3 on the survey asked respondents if they would use child care services located within five minutes from their place of employment if they had children under five years old. Over 47 percent of all respondents indicated they would use such a service were it available. Nearly 60 percent of parents with children under five only expressed they would use a child care service near their work if it were available. An additional 30 percent indicated they would consider it, while only 12 percent rejected the idea completely. It is interesting to note that respondents to the industrial survey were more likely to express interest in using child care services near their work than were respon- dents in the school survey. In the earlier survey, parents of school-age children in the Carlsbad area indicated they preferred child care be located closer to the child's environment than to their work environment. Less than five percent of parents of children of all ages in the school survey cited care service near their work would be their first preference. Twenty-five percent of all respondents reported that their child care needs were not confined to the summer months. The remaining 75 percent includes respon- dents who need care year-round as well as those who do not use child care at any time. Figure 1 highlights that parents of pre-teenagers reported they needed care e B 8 7 28 - 26 - 24 - 22 - 20 - 18 - C 16 - 14 - P 12 - 10 - s 1 I I c a, a, a I .-I = 0 e I' I B t I I I I 1; I if I I R i 1 1 only during the summer much more frequently than did parents of children in the other age groups. The majority of parents responding to this survey reported they were not required to take any time off work in the previous six months due to their child's illness. Less than 24 percent took between one and two days off. A very small share (1.2 percent) were required to take over ten days to care for their children. Figure 2 identifies that the majority of respondents who reported they paid for child care necessitated by work spent between $40 and $79 per week. The median amount spent weekly was approximately $53 among all respondents, while the median paid by parents with children under five was $61. Figure 3 highlights that parents with children under five spent the most money on child care. It is inter- esting to note that the median amount for teenagers ($50) is higher than that for pte-teenagers ($38). (The sample size of respondents with teenagers who paid for. child care was much smaller than the other groups.) Fifty-four percent of parents responding to this survey typically need child care to begin between 7:OO and 8:OO in the morning. Seventeen percent reported they needed care to begin between 6:OO and 7:OO a.m. and 16 percent preferred it begin between 8:OO and 9:OO a.m. Over 58 percent typically need care to end between 5:OO and 6:OO in the evening. Nearly 20 percent of respondents indicated they needed child care to continue past 6:OO in the evening. Nearly 70 percent of all respondents reported their household was comprised of two working parents, as illustrated in Figure 4. Less than 15 percent reported they were from households where one parent did not work. Eleven percent of respondents were single parents. These figures tended to remain fairly constant among a11 age groups of children. Nearly all respondents to the survey were employed full time (95 percent). Respondents to the survey lived relatively close to their place of employment. Nearly 30 percent of respondents lived and worked in Carlsbad. An additional 54 percent lived in communities adjoining Carlsbad (Oceanside, Vista, San Marcos, Encinitas). Less than ten percent lived in other areas throughout the San Diego region, and two percent lived outside of the County. m 11 1 **< 0 e I" a c 1 ll I I 5 I 1 I li 1 c ff li 1 I Fi ure 3 COST OF WEEIYLY CHILD CARE BY AGE CATEGORY 40 35 B 30 25 & C 0, Q, CL 20 2 15 10 0 Under $20 $20-39 $40-59 $60-79 $80-99 $100-149 $150 plus # B Under 5 lZE3 Preteens N Teenagers Figure 4 HOUSEHOLD TYPE 13 1 ,*? ' 0 0 1'' a e E I u I II I u II I B 1 P i rn I 1 SURVEYRESPONSES 0 1 ..a - e Survey Responses Q1. What ages are your children? I" t 1 i 1 Y I 100.0% I. 1 I I 1 I I I r. I Percent of Responses One 14.9 Two 9.3 Three 8.0 Four 7.3 Five 7.6 Six 6.5 Seven 6.8 Eight 6.6 Nine 4.8 Ten 3.3 Eleven 3.5 Twelve 3.2 Thirteen 4.8 Fourteen 2.8 Fifteen 3.0 Sixteen 3.6 Seventeen 1.7 Eighteen 2.3 e Median Age = 6.46 years Q2. Do you anticipate needing any child care within the next two years? All Under 5 Preteens Teenagers Respondents Yes 49.1 34.5 17.3 40.5 No 10.1 29.0 73.6 32.4 Maybe 40.8 73.5 9.1 27.1 - 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 43. If a child care center for children ages 0-5 was available within five minutes from work, would you use its services? Yes 47.2 No 27.9 Maybe 24.9 100.0% 17 I .., * 0 0 I'' * c 1 100.0% 100.0% loO.o% 100.0% 1 I ! I 1 I I R 1oo.o% 1oo.o% 1oo.o% 1oo.o% 1 E 1 E a R 44. Do you have a need for child care during the summer only? All Under 5 Preteens Teenagers Respondents Yes 8.5 24.9 8.2 12.7 No 80.5 52.6 83.6 73.7 Maybe 11.0 22.5 8.2 13.6 Q5. How many days, if any, did you miss from work over the past six months when t your child was ill? None 54.9 1-2 23.4 3-4 11.8 5 -6 5.4 7 or more 4.5 1 053% Q6. How much does your family spend each week on child care necessitated by work? All Under $10 3.2 10.3 8.4 5.8 $11 - 20 1.2 19.0 13.9 9.1 $21 - 30 10.9 17.9 5.6 12.7 $31 -40 8.9 15.5 16.7 12.1 $41 -50 17.0 14.2 16.7 15.2 $51 -60 19.0 9.0 8.4 15.5 $61 - 70 15.8 3.8 0.0 10.9 $71 -80 13.4 6.2 27.8 10.9 $81 - 90 3.2 1.0 0.0 2.7 $91 - 100 2.4 0.7 0.0 2.1 $101 - 150 4.6 2.4 2.8 2.4 $150 or more 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.6 Under 5 Preteens Teenapers Respondents Median $61.29 $38.11 $49.99 $53.23 19 R ,-I * e e 8' 1 1 1 s li 1 E 1 1 I I I 3 6 D 1E R Q7. During what hours do you usually need child care: 0.9 17.2 54.0 16.5 0.9 0.9 1.2 0.9 3.2 4.3 100.0% Begin 5:OO - 6:OO a.m. 6:OO - 7:OO a.m. 7:OO - 8:OO a.m. 8:OO - 9:OO a.m. 9:OO - 1O:OO a.m. 11:OO a.m. - 12:OO p.m. 12:OO - 1:OO p.m. 1:00 - 2:OO p.m. 2:OO - 3:OO p.m. 3:OO - 4:OO p.m. - End Before 1:OO p.m. 1.3 1.5 1:OO - 2:OO p.m. 2:OO - 3:OO p.m. 0.4 4.4 3:OO - 4:OO p.m. 14.6 4:OO - 5:OO p.m. 58.3 5:OO - 6:OO p.m. 18.0 6:OO - 7:OO p.m. 0.9 7:OO - 8:00 p.m. 0.6 8:OO - 1O:OO p.m. 100.0% - Q8. Which of the following best describes your household? All Under 5 Preteens Teenapers Respondents Two parent family - Two parent family - Single parent 69.6 66.1 65.1 68.2 22.4 18.1 16.0 14.6 7.2 14.6 17.0 11.4 5.8 both employed one employed - 1.9 - 1.2 - Other 0.8 1oo.o% 100.0% 10 0.070 100.0% Q9. What is your work zip code? 85.2 14.8 92008 92009 1oo.o% 21 I ..* ’ e 0 I’ YI I 1 100.0% I I 100.0% J c I I E 1 I I a & 1E 1 QlO. What is your home zip code? Carlsbad (9 20 0 8,920 0 9) 29.3 Oceanside (92054, 92056) 24.4 Vista (92083, 92084) 17.2 San Marcos (92069) 6.6 Encini t as (9 20 24) 5.6 City of San Diego 4.8 Other zip codes in San Diego County 4.6 Outside San Diego County 1.6 Escondido (92025, 92026, 92027) 5.9 Qll. What is your employment status Full-time employee 94.7 Part-time employee 5.3 23 I +xl * e 0 1,' ' 1 E f I & 5 1 i a IH 8 S I B E t I APPENDIX - -rr - 1. .*/ - 8, CARLSBAD @ ILD CARE SURVEY FOR INDU 9 RIAL PARK ' Dear Parents/Future Parents: The City Council of the City of Carlsbad has established a Child Care Task For assess child care needs in our city. As part of this assessment, Hughes Aircri Company has volunteered to survey the need for child care in the industrial ari Carlrbad. Please take a few moments to fill out this questionnaire and return i the receptionist in your building or Human Resources, Mail Station tZOA, Buildi Thank you for your assistance in this matter. I. I B What ages are your children: Child Il: X2: x3: w: r5 : Do you anticipate needing any child care within the next two years? a a1 yes: b) no: c) already use child care: ]E - 16: - - 2. Ik 3. If a child care center for children ages 0-5 was available within five minut from work, would you use its services? a) yes: b) no: - c) maybe: Do you have need for child care during the summer only? a1 yes: b) no: c) maybe: - How much time, if any, did you miss from work over the past six months your child was it!? Days: Hours: How much does your family spend each week on child care necessitated by Child I1 '$ per week Child 13 $ per week Child t5 $ Child X2 $ per week Child #4 $ per week Child 16 $ During what hours do you usually need child care? From a.m./p.m. To a.m./p.m. Which of the following best describes your household? (check one1 1- - Two-parent family (both employed) 3. - Single parent 2. - Two-parent family (one employed) 4. - Other (please specify What is your work zip code? (If you do not know, write in the nai the city in which you work.) U, I 1 8 P E P 1 B 10. Home zip code: B B It 5. 6. t. 7. 8. 9. It , Part-time employee Full-time employee PLEASE RETURN THIS QUESTIONNAIRE BY NOVEMBER 6, 1987 bate Completed 27 1 .'a ' e e Appenc v I II. P 1 1 I I I Y a I I E 1 f I Companies Surveyed Distributed Air Resorts Airlines 75 Allenbach Industries 50 Beckman Instruments 200 Cablevision Communication Center 100 Dyna Industries 180 Hughes 1,500 Kaiser Electro Optics 75 W a tkins Manufacturing Corp or at ion Fierr ac in-M agnadyne 180 200 City of Carlsbad 400 c 29 I I I I I I 1 CITY OF CARLSBAD CHILD CARE SURVEY 1987 CHILD CARE PROVIDER SURVEY I *’* ‘ 0 0 1 I 1 ABSTRACT I TITLE: City of Carlsbad Child Care Survey SUBJECT : Operators of Carlsbad Family Home Care and Day Care Centers’ response to inqui concerning existing services provided t families within the City of Carlsbad. E 6 E I c 1 1 6 t 1 I I I I DATE: May 22, 1987 NUMBER OF PAGES: 19 ABSTRACT : The City of Carlsbad conducted a survej of operators of existing Family Home C: and Day Care Centers within the City 01 Carlsbad. The survey was designed to measure the extent and types of servicc presently being offered the residents ( Carlsbad. This report provides a briel description of the survey methodology and a summary of the data collected. 0 * I .'a - 1 I I 1 8 I 11 I I 1 8 I I 1 1 I 1 1 TabIe of Contents 1 Summary of Results .......... Summary of Responses: 6 11 Family Home Care ......... Day Care Center ......... 16 Appendix .................... 1Ic L'* .. ,e 0 1 I I I 1 a I IC II I I 1 B 1 I !! SUMMARY OF RESULTS This section summarizes the results of the survey for each question aske Most questions on the survey asked for separate information on each fami home care and each day care center. question is outlined in the next section of this report. Survey questionnaires mailed to 57 1 icensed home care providers resulted 38.6% response. In addition, 10 day care centers were interviewed, 8 wi- the city limits, and 2 regional centers in Oceanside that provide care fc handicapped, and (b) battered children. CHILDREN IN DAY CARE: There are 116 Carlsbad children and 22 out of town children receiving lic care from the family home care providers. In addition there are 347 othe Carlsbad children, and 159 out of town children from the day care centers A summary of the results for each TABLE 1 RESIDENCE OF CHILDREN BY TYPE OF CARE I (Percent) Fami 7y Day Care Home Care Center Combined Children 1 iving in Carlsbad 0.8406 0.6858 0.7632 Children living out of town 0.1594 0.3142 0.2368 lo 0000 1.0000 1.0000 Two Montessori schools in Carlsbad provide day care in connection with thc school program, and will pick up a limited number of public school childrc bring to their facility after school. The following programs for school i children are recreational in nature, and are not required to be licensed i Day Care facilities at this time. The Girls' Club picks up children, and transports them to their facility. The Boys' & Girls' Club is open after school for activities. They also coordinate on-site recreational programs "Scampers" at many of the elementary schools in Carlsbad. CARE FOR SPECIAL NEEDS: In the matter of sick children, many providers will take a "sniffle or twc but nothing contagious. As one provider put it, I*... the child would have be isolated with full time adult care, and that gets too expensive." Handicapped children can go to Ivy Ranch Park in Oceanside, or to one of f centers in Carlsbad. The latter require that the handicapped child 'I ... b able to fit in with the program." Additionally, four of the family home c providers stated they are willing to take handicapped. A second facility, North River Road Children's Center, of the Casa de Ampa program will accept Carlsbad children, and their parent(s). 1 1 t \'* - * * 1 'I I 1 I i 1 II TABLE 2 AVAILABILITY OF SPECIAL CARE BY TYPE OF CARE (Percent) Sick children: Family Home Care 0.250 0.750 Day Care Center 1.000 0.000 Handicapped children: Family Home Care 0.200 0.800 Day Care Center 0.500 0.500 Respite chi 1 dren: Family Home Care 0.150 0.800 Day Care Center 0.600 0.400 INSURANCE: 65% of the combined family home care and day care centers that responded the question of difficulties experienced with insurance expressed extrem increases, as well as unreasonable demands and excessive restrictions pl on their operations. Comments made by the providers included: - a Insurance subsidies are needed if costs are to be kept at an afford level for the user of child care services. Forced to discontinue insurance coverage, with parents willing to s waiver to keep children in attendance. Over half the providers that responded to the survey who are no lon business, blame the cost of insurance. Insurance restrictions and/or standards are higher than the State licensing, such as the adult ratio to children, and disallowance of Revised legislation was suggested as a possible solution to some of probl ems. ID 1 - - - II I t 1 I Ili 1 I trips. - CHILD CARE HOURS: The survey did not reflect a wide variance of operating hours, nor days opened , i ncl udi ng hol idays . 2 c ;. I e 0 II I’ I 1 E I I I I Jt i I b I E 1 I figure 1 WEEKLY COST OF FAMILY HOME CARE no response 109, 1 $70.00 10% 1 figure 2 WEEKLY. COST OF DAY CARE CENTER $62.00 309, no response 1OZ $85.00 109, c 'a 0 0 I IT I E 1 I I I i I t E I t I 8 TABLE 3 OPERATING HOURS BY TYPE OF CARE (Percent) Fami 1 y Day Care Home Care Center Open : 6 - 7 a.m. 0.050 0.200 8 - 9 a.m. 0.100 0.100 5 - 6 p.m. 0.550 0.200 Open Monday to Friday only 1.000 0.900 7 - 8 a.m. 0.850 0.700 C1 osed: 0.050 0.100 4 - 5 p.m. 6 - 7 p.m. 0 e 400 0.700 1 C1 osed on National hol i days 0.650 0.400 COST OF CHILD CARE: The cost of child care to families varied between the family home care an day care center; the greatest contributor being the higher cost of infant where family home care provided this service in greater proportion and th Js care center almost none. TABLE 4 COST OF CARE BY TYPE OF CARE (Percent) Fami 1 y Day Care Home Care Center Ii Weekly Child Care Charges: Under $65 0.150 0.600 $75 - $85 0.450 0.300 $90 - $100 0.250 0.100 Over $100 0.150 0.000 Policies regarding the charging for absences due to sickness, vacation: holidays varied between the two types of provider. In this instance, larger facilities with more established policies had a tendency to chargc these occasions. 3 I '. 0 0 II I' B 1 I 8 I 1 1 I E I c T I i c TABLE 5 SPECIAL CHARGES BY TYPE OF CARE (Percent) Fami 1 y Day Care Home Care Center Providers that charge for: Vacation time 0.300 0.650 Holiday time 0.300 0.650 Sickness 0.400 0.550 AGES OF CHILDREN UNDER CARE: Pre-school children represent the 1 argest percentage of children recei vin care. There is a concern among the child care providers that the need foi additional infant care, as well as care for children with special needs, . not being met. None of the providers indicated that they lack children tc care for. Inquiries are made on an ongoing basis, with particular emphas. 1 infant care. TABLE 6 TYPES OF CARE BY AGE OF CHILDREN (Percent) Family Day Care Home Care Center Infants 0.2786 0.0252 0.9591 Pr e - school 0.5429 School age 0.1786 0.0157 FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL ASSISTANCE: Assistance with funding varied according to the size of the provider which indicative of the type of service offered; family home care only participa in nutrition assistance, whereas the day care centers participated in prog associated with the State Department of Education, and the regional center addition to the nutrition assistance. t 4 a 'J 0 0 1! I- b 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I li 8 SUGGESTIONS MADE BY CHILD CARE PROVIDERS: The following suggestions were offered in response to the survey, inquir for other ideas: Eliminate the "red tape" in order to facilitate additional child cai providers. Publish a document that would assist in the process of filing the necessary permits and licenses. Waive or reduce restrictions on child care signs and fences in order give more visibility to care facilities. Inform all City staff of Council mandates concerning task forces SUC Child Care, in order to properly respond to the public when inquiric made. Support groups, such as a task force, advisory board, or board of commissioners, should have a permanent existence. Underprivileged, who are not able to afford existing child care, shc have access to special child care subsidies. Tax and/or business incentives should be offered to parties interest opening new child care facilities. The State should be encouraged to review existing licensing requirem with special attention focused on the uniformity of Federal, State a Muni ci pal regul at i ons . Initiate training for child care volunteers, workers, operators,, as as parent information classes in conjunction with County parenting cl asses. 5 I 'I 0 0 I '( 1E .I 8 1 1 20 1.0000 I I I 9 I 20 1.0000 I c I I B 1 SUMMARY OF RESPONSES FAMILY HOME CARE RESOURCE ASSESSMENT Percent c 0 Response: 1. How many children are you caring for that - Live in Carlsbad 116 0. a148 Live out of town 22 0.1852 - 138 1.0000 2. Do you take children on respite care basis? Yes 3 0.1500 No response 1 0.0500 No 16 o a aooo - If yes, how many have you had in the last six months? One facility with 1-3 incidents One facility with over 3 incidents 2 4 - 6 3. Do you take handicapped children? 4 0.2000 Yes No 16 0.8000 No response 0 0.0000 - If yes, how many have you had in the last six months? One facility with 1-3 incidents Any limitations? 'yes' . 3 One of the 4 responded 6 ll ’7 0 0 I‘ u I I 20 1. I I I 1 I I No response 0.1000 1 I 1 8 8 0 Percent o Responses 4. Do you have bi-lingual staff members? Yes 1 0.0500 No 19 0.9500 0 0.0000 No response - 1.0000 If yes, what 1 anguage? I Spanish 1 1.0000 5. Do you take sick children? Yes 5 0.2500 15 0.7500 No No response 0 0.0000 - 20 1 .oooo If yes, how many have you had in the last six months? One facility with 1-3 incidents 4 Any limitations? All of the 5 responded ‘yes’ 6. What recent difficulties have you had with insurance? 0.3500 0 n 0500 0.0500 0.4500 Extreme rate increases Forced out of business Not insured (with parents signing waivers) None 1 .oooo 7. What recommendations do you have concerning the insurance issue? 0.1500 Subsidized insurance 0.0500 Revised standards Nat’l. Assoc. Day Care Group rates 0.0500 0.0500 S.D. County Day Care Assoc. Group rates Lower rates 0.3000 Insurance referral service 0.0500 7 I' e 0 I li t I 1 .oooo I 8 I I I ii I li I[ 1.0000 B 8 I Percent of Responses 8. What are your operating hours? Open: 6:OO a.m. 1 0 - 0500 7:OO a.m. 10 0.5000 7:15 a.m. 1 0.0500 7:30 a.m. 6 0.3000 8:OO a.m. 2 0.1000 Close: 4:OO p.m. 1 0.0500 5:OO p.m. 1 0.0500 5:45 p.m. 1 0.0500 5:30 p.m. 9 0.4500 6:OO p.m. 7 0 e 3500 7:OO p.m. 1 0 e 0500 1.0000 Number of hours: 9 1 0.0500 9 1/2 1 0 e 0500 10 8 0.4000 10 1/2 1 0 a 0500 10 3/4 2 0.1000 11 5 0 e 2500 11 1/2 1 0.0500 12 1 0.0500 1 .oooo I 9. What days do you operate? Monday to Friday only 1.0000 10. What hol idays are you closed? 7 0.3500 I National holidays only 13 0.6500 Most of them 8 eL e 0 1’ I I I 9 1 No response 1 I i 1 SI 1: 1 I li 4 1 I Percent o Responses 11. What are your fees? $1.10 per hour 1 0.0500 $1.20 per hour 1 0.0500 $1.30 per hour 1 0.0500 $1.50 per hour 3 0.1500 0.1500 3 0.1500 $1.70 per hour 0.1000 $2.00 per hour 3 0.1500 $2.50 per hour 1 0.0500 $3.00 per hour 1 0.0500 0.0500 $1.60 per hour 3 $1.80 per hour 2 1.0000 12. What are your policies in regard to fees for: Hol i days - Charge 6 0 - 3000 - No charge 13 0.6500 - No response 1 0.0500 1.0000 0.4000 0.5500 0.0500 Sick leave - Charge 8 - No charge 11 - No response 1 1.0000 0 e 3000 0.6500 0.0500 Vacat i on - Charge 6 - No charge 13 - No response 1 1.0000 13. What ages do you serve? 0.6500 0.2500 Youngest: under 6 months 6 mos. to 1 1/2 years over 1 1/2 years 0.1000 9 e 4% a 0 I B i E 1 8 - No response 2 0.1000 1 1 - No response 2 0.1000 1 s I 8 8 II 8 B I Percent 0' Responses l 01 dest : Under preschool 0.3000 5 years 0.2500 6 years 0.2500 10 years 0.1500 12 years 0.0500 1.0000 14. What is your license capacity? Total by facilities responding: Infants - Yes 15 0.7500 3 0.1500 - None . 1.0000 0.8500 - None 1 0.0500 Preschool - Yes 17 1.0000 3 0.1500 15 0.7500 0.1000 School Age - Yes - None - No response 2 1.0000 Total by attendance: Infants 42 0.2877 Preschool 79 0.5411 School Age 25 0.1712 1.0000 - 146 Percent c 10 1% 0 0 I' 4 S I I 1 u n I I 1. U 8 I 8 n I Percent of Responses 15. Do you receive, or have received, State or- Federal subsidies? Yes 9 0.4500 No 10 0.5000 No response 1 0 e 0500 1.0000 Types? Child Nutrition Programs 1 .oooo SUMMARY OF RESPONSES DAY CARE CENTER RESOURCE ASSESSMENT Percent 01 Responses 1. How many children are you caring for that: Live in Carlsbad 347 0.6858 1 Live out of town 159 0.3142 1.0000 2. Do you take children on respite care basis? 6 0.6000 Yes No 4 0.4000 - 1 .oooo 10 If yes, how many have you had in the last six months? Do you take handicapped children? One facility with 1 to 3 incidents each 3 3. Yes 5 0.5000 No 5 0.5000 10 1.0000 - 11 1. 0 0 I li 1 1 8 II I I I U 4 I I I I , Percent 0' I' Responses If yes, how many have you had in the last six months? One facility with 1 to 3 incidents each 2 Any limitations? All 5 responded yes. 4. Do you have bi-lingual staff members? Yes 8 0.8000 No 2 0.2000 1.0000 - 1 If yes , what 1 anguages 7 0.7000 2 0.2000 1 0.1000 Spanish French Spanish & French - 1.0000 Percent o Res pon se s 1 1 5. Do you take sick children? 0.0000 1.0000 Yes 0 No 10 10 - 1.0000 If yes, how many have you had in the last six months? II None reported any incidents. Any limitations? No responses. 6. What recent difficulties have you had with insurance? 0.2000 Extreme rate increase 0.1000 Extreme restrictions 0.1000 Threat of cancelling None 0.6000 1 .oooo 12 II- I e e Percent of Responses I' 1 I I B I I 1 I U 1 I I Monday - Saturday 0.1000 I 1 4 7. What recommendations do you have concerning the insurance 1 issue? Legislative changes in City, State and Federal Lower rates No response 0.1000 0.1000 0.6000 regul ati ons Revised standards 0.2000 1.0000 8. What are your operating hours? 2 0.2000 6 0.6000 7:15 a.m. 1 0.1000 8:45 a.m. 1 0.1000 1.0000 Open : 6:30 a.m. 7:OO a.m. Close: 4:OO p.m. 1 0.1000 5:30 p.m. 1 0.1000 5:45 p.m. 1 0.1000 6:30 p.m. 1 0.6000 0.1000 6:OO p.m. 6 1.0000 7 3/4 1 0 0 1000 10 1/2 2 0 e 2000 11 11 1/2 1 0.1000 12 1 0.1000 1.0000 Number of hours: 5 0.5000 e 9. What days do you operate? Monday - Friday only 0.9000 25.6000 13 L e 0 I II I 8 I I No response 1 0.1000 I I 1 I I I 1 I I 1 1 I Percent o Responses 10. What holidays are you closed? Most of them 6 0.6000 National only 4 0.4000 1.0000 11. What are your fees? $l.lO/hour 1 0.1000 $1.20/hour 2 0.2000 $1.25/hour 2 0.2000 $1.3O/hour 1 0.1000 $1.35/hour 1 0.1000 $1.4O/hour 1 0.1000 $1.55/hour 1 0.1000 1.0000 12. What are your policies in regard to fees for: Hol i days - Charge 8 0 e 8000 - No charge 0 0.0000 - No response 2 0.2000 1.0000 Sick leave - Charge 8 0.8000 - No charge 0 0.0000 - No response 2 0.2000 1.0000 Vacati on - Charge 7 0.7000 - No charge 1 0.1000 - No response 2 0.2000 1 * 0000 13. What ages do you serve? Youngest: Under 6 months 0.2000 0.3000 6 months to 2 years 2 yrs. to 3 yrs. 0.5000 1.0000 14 1- e 0 I 1 I I I I 8 I I I I 1 1 4 Percent 01 I Res pon s es 01 dest : Under preschool 0.0000 5 years 0.3000 6 years 0.4000 12 years 0.2000 18 years 0.1000 1.0000 14. What is your license capacity? Total by facility responding: Infants - Yes 1 0.1000 - None 8 0.8000 - No response 1 0.1000 1.0000 Preschool - Yes 9 0.9000 - None 0 0 * 0000 - No response 1 0 e 1000 1 * 0000 School Age - Yes 9 0.9000 - None 0 0.0000 - No response 1 0 a 1000 1.0000 Total by attendance: Infant 8 0.0196 Preschool 396 0.9682 School Ages 5 0.0122 409 1 0 0000 - 15. Do you receive, or have you received, State or Federal subsidies? CCFP lunch 1 0.1000 Regional Center 1 0.1000 State Dept. Education 5 0.5000 1 None 3 0.3000 1.0000 15 a 1 8 1- e 0 I II I 1 ! I 1 1 I I 1 I i I I- 1 I I , APPEND' e * FAMILY HOME CARE . < SURVEY QUESTIONAIRE u- 1 I 1 I 1 1 I I I I 1 I I I 8 The City of Carlsbad has designated a Child Care Task Forre to pqsess expand funding, and recommend specific programs. We are writing to ask your assistance in our assessment. 1. How many children are you caring for that: Live in Carlsbad: Live out of town: - No : - 2. Do you take children on respite care basis? Yes: If yes, how many have you had in the past six months? - No - 3. Do you take handicapped children? Yes If yes, how many have you had in the last six months? Any limitations? n - No - 4. Do you have bi-lingual staff members? Yes If yes, what languages? - No - 1 5. Do you take sick children? Yes If yes, how many have Any limi tations? you had in the last six months? 6. What recent difficulties have you had with insurance? 7. What recommendations do you have concerning the insurance issue? B 8. What are your operating hours? 9. What days .do you operate? 10. What holidays are you closed? 16 0 * 1- *. 11. What are your fees? For full-time care: Hours : For part-time care: Hours : I I I 4 8 I 1 I 1 II I t 1 U I 12. What are your holiday, sick leave and vacation policies in regard to f 13. What ages do you serve? 14. What is your licensed capacity’ Infants: Pre-school : School age: 15. Do you receive, or have you ever received, State or Federal subsidieg No : - Yes : If yes, from what agency? Do you have other ideas or suggestions for the Task Force? a 16. 4 4 Enclosed please find a self-addressed, stamped envelope. Please return by 22, 1987. Your assistance in completing this form will help us all to meet the needs of community. If you have questions, please feel free to call either of the folll Sincerely, L $?J PAULA LEARD 940- 8506 M hdLt-4 b- BARBARA HALLMAN 729-6592 I -17- DAY CARE CENTER 0 r SURVEY QUESTIONAIRE The City of Carlsbad has designated a Child Care Task Force to assess the expand funding, and recommend specific programs. We are writing to ask your assistance in our assessment. 1. I' e 1 II I I I 8 I 4) i How many children are you caring for that: Live in Carisbad: Live out of town: - No : 2. Do you take children on respite care basis? Yes: - If yes, how many have you had in the past six months? - No 3. Do you take handicapped children? Yes - I If yes, how many have you had in the last six months? Any limitations? 4. Do you have bi-lingual staff members? Yes - No - If yes, what languages? No - 5. Do you take sick children? Yes - If yes, how many have you had in the last six months? 1 Any limitations? 8 6. What recent difficulties have you had with insurance? 7. What recommendations do you have concerning the insurance issue? I I B 1 I 1 B II 8. What are your operating hours? 9. What days do you operate? 10. What holidays are you closed? -18- @ '+ 11. What are your fa e -7 For full-time care: Hours : I For part-time care: Hours : I 12. What are your holiday, sick leave and vacation policies in regard to fee: 1 1 8 1 I I I 13. 14. What ages do you serve? What is your licensed capacity? I Infants: Pre-school : School age: Do you receive, or have you ever received, State or Federal subsidies? Yes: No: If yes, from what agency? Do you have other ideas or suggestions for the Task Force! IS. I 16. One of the following will be calling you for an appointment the week of May 11 1987 to discuss the above issues. We would appreciate having any printed in1 mation you may have, including your rates. Your assistance in meeting with us will help us all to meet the need in our co muni ty . If you have questions, please feel free to call either one of us. . I Sincerely, L $iLJ PAULA LEARD 940-8506 i &ILL BARBARA HALLMAN I 729-6592 I I I I -19- * NORTH COAST OFFICE 6120 PASEO DEL NORTE, STE. N-1 CARLSBAD, CA 92009 (619 Area Dii Judy Leshefi APRIL 19, I AM SPEAKING AS PRESIDENT OF THE ADVISORY BOARD OF FAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATIONi FAMILY SERVICE IS A PRIVATE, NON-PROFIT FAMIL) COUNSELING AGENCY LOCATED IN CARLSBADS IT HAS SERVED THE NORTH COA: FOR OVER 30 YEARS, IT RECEIVES PARTIAL FUNDING FROM UNITED WAY AND THUS IS ABLE TO OFFER CLIENTS FEES BASED ON THEIR ABILITY TO PAY. FAMILIES SEEK HELP FOR A BROAD RANGE OF PROBLEMS INCLUDING CHILD AB1 PARENT-CHILD DIFFICULTIESi MARITAL ISSUES, DIVORCE, SINGLE PARENTINC SUBSTANCE ABUSE, SCHOOL AND CAREER PROBLEMS, DEPRESSION, ANXIETY, El AT LEAST 70-807, OF OUR CLIENTELE AT ANY GIVEN TIME HAVE CHILDREN LIVING IN THE HOMES AFFORDABLE, ADEQUATE CHILD CARE IS A PERSISTENT CONCERN OF THESE FAMILIES1 IT IS A DIFFICULT ISSUE AT AL ENDS OF THE INCOME SPRECTUM. THOSE AT POVERTY LEVEL FIND IT DIFFICL TO WORK AT ALL SINCE CHILDCARE FEES TAKE UP MOST OF THEIR MINIMUM INCOMESi MIDDLE INCOME FAMILIES ALSO ARE HARD HIT FINANCIALLY AND ARE TEMPTED TO LET THE CHILDREN FEND FOR THEMSELVES1 COUNSELORS FREGUENTLY SEE PROBLEMS RELATED TO LATCH KEY CHILDREN LEFT TO THEIR OWN DEVICES, SOME DO VERY WELL ON THEIR OWN1 HOWEVER, OTHERS DO NOT HAVE THE MATURITY TO HANDLE IT; WE SEE MANY KIDS DO NOT KNOW HOW TO USE UNSTRUCTURED TIME WELL1 MANY GET INTO TROUBLE, SUCH AS EXPERIMENTING WITH ALCOHOL AND DRUGS, SEXUAL ACTIVI AND DELIQUENT BEHAVIORSi OTHERS GET VERY UNMOTIVATED AND MILDLY SUCH CHILDREN RANGING FROM 9 TO 14 YEARS AND THEIR FAMILIES. THE DEPRESSED; THEY WON'T DO HOMEWORK, CHORES, ETC, THE PARENTS FEEL VE GUILTY AND FRUSTRATED1 IN ACTUALITY, THIS IS A SOCIETAL PROBLEM AS WELL AS A FAMILY PROBLEM1 WE APPLAUD THE PROGRESSIVE THINKING AND VISION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD IN LOOKING AT THE NEED FOR QUALITYJ AFFORDABLE CHILDCARE AND WAYS THAT THE NEED CAN BE MET. CHILD CARE POLICY SET FORTH BY 1 WAY TO SEE THAT ONGOING ATTENTION IS GIVEN TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF TASK FORCE IS SOLIDI HAVING A CHILDCARE COORDINATOR WOULD BE A VIAE THE POLICY1 OFFICE LOCATIONS: 7645 Family Circle, SAN DIEGO 92111 279 0400 - 7373 University Avenue, Ste 222, LA MESA 92041 698 1601 6120 Paseo Del Norte, CARLSBAD 92009 931 0286 1002 East Grand Avenue, ESCONDIDO 92025 745-3811 1070 South Santa Fe, Ste 27A, VISTA 92083 726-0960 304 East Mission Road, Ste E, FALLBROOK 9; SENIOR CENTER: 890 B Balour Drive, ENClNlTA! Member of United Way of San Diego County and Family Service America. Accredited by the Council on Accreditation of Services for Families & Child 13422 Community Road, POWAY 92064 486 1190