Search results

The 2021-2022 Study of Family and Staff Experiences in AIAN Head Start FACES Programs (2021-2022 Study) builds on the American Indian and Alaska Native Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (AIAN FACES), which has been a source of national information on children and families enrolled in Head Start programs operated by federally recognized tribes (known as Region XI AIAN Head Start) since 2015. The motivation and goals of the Study of Family and Staff Experiences in AIAN FACES Programs (the 2021-2022 study) came from a need that arose as the COVID-19 pandemic continued into another year of affecting Region XI Head Start families' and staff's lives--and from recognizing the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on AIAN communities.

The 2021-2022 study included a nonrepresentative sample of Region XI Head Start programs and the children and families they serve. Although a nationally representative sample of Region XI Head Start programs, centers, teachers, and children were selected, fewer of them participated than expected, despite an extension of the planned parental consent collection and data collection windows.

The 2021-2022 Study of Family and Staff Well-Being in Head Start FACES Programs (2021-2022 study), builds on the Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES), which has been a source of national information about Head Start programs and participants since 1997. The motivation and goals of the Study of Family and Staff Well-Being in Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey Programs (the 2021-2022 study) came from a need that arose as the COVID-19 pandemic continued into another year of affecting Head Start families' and staff's lives.

The 2021-2022 study included two components. Firstly, the Program, Staff, and Family Study, was conducted in 60 programs, and included the collection of parent surveys and Teacher Child Reports (TCRs) in fall 2021 and spring 2022, as well as a teacher survey in fall 2021. Secondly, the Program and Staff Study, conducted in the 60 programs participating in the Program, Staff, and Family Study plus an additional 120 programs, included the collection of program director, center director, and teacher surveys in spring 2022.

The 2021-2022 study aimed to describe the national population of Head Start programs, centers, teachers, classrooms, and children during the 2021-2022 program year. However, the Data Producers were unable to fully meet this goal because of challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic. A nationally representative sample of Head Start programs was selected. However, fewer of the programs participated than expected. Probability samples of centers, teachers, and children within the participating programs were selected. Weights are available for analysis to account for the probability that children and their teachers, centers, and programs were selected for the study. This lessens the risk of bias due to study non-participation and survey nonresponse; and provide results that represent, to the extent possible, all programs, centers, teachers, classrooms, and children in Head Start. The responding sample may not fully represent the population due to higher-than-expected non-response that may not have been adequately addressed with weighting adjustments.

Despite these limitations, the 2021-2022 study sample design supports many analyses for programs and teachers, as well as children. The data from the programs in the Program, Staff, and Family Study can address questions about the children and parents who participate in the program, including about children's development across one year in the Head Start program for both newly entering children and those returning for a second year. The study also supports research questions related to subgroups of interest, such as families with low income and specific racial/ethnic groups, as well as policy issues that emerge during the study. In addition, the research questions investigate the characteristics of Head Start programs, centers, and teachers, and the classrooms they teach. Users can use the same data to answer questions about the relationships between program and classroom characteristics and child and family well-being. The data from the larger sample of programs in the Program and Staff Study are most useful for answering questions about Head Start programs, classrooms, teachers, and program and center directors.

The Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) is a major source of information on Head Start programs and the children and families they serve. Since 1997, FACES has conducted studies in a nationally representative sample of Head Start programs, but has historically not included Region XI (programs operated by federally-recognized tribes), whose programs are designed to serve predominantly American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) children and families. The American Indian and Alaska Native Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey 2015 (AI/AN FACES 2015), the first national study of Region XI AI/AN Head Start children and families, is designed to fill this information gap.

The design of AI/AN FACES 2015 has been informed by members of the AI/AN FACES 2015 Workgroup which includes tribal Head Start directors, researchers with expertise working with tribal communities, Mathematica Policy Research study staff, and federal officials from the Office of Head Start, Region XI, and the Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation. Building on FACES as the foundation, members of the AI/AN FACES 2015 Workgroup have shared insights and information on the kinds of information needed about children and families served by Region XI AI/AN Head Start programs (including children's development and school readiness, parent and family demographics, health, and program engagement, and teacher, classroom, and program characteristics). Members also provided input on recruitment practices and study methods that are responsive to the unique cultural and self-governing contexts of tribal Head Start programs.

Data collection with Region XI children, families, classrooms, and programs took place in the Fall of 2015 and the Spring of 2016. Twenty-one Region XI Head Start programs participated. Procedures for tribal review and approval in each of those 21 communities were followed. Information about this study has been shared broadly with tribal Head Start programs and tribal leaders via OHS tribal consultations, nationally-broadcast webinars, National Indian Head Start Directors' Association Board of Directors (NIHSDA) annual conferences, the 2016 ACF National Research Conference on Early Childhood, and the Secretary's Tribal Advisory Council (STAC) December 2014 and 2016 meetings.

The Carolina Abecedarian (ABC) Project and the Carolina Approach to Responsive Education (CARE) projects consist of two consecutive longitudinal studies on the effectiveness of early childhood educational intervention for children at high risk for developmental delays and school failure. Combined, the two studies test the hypothesis that child care, home visit, and home school resource interventions can enhance cognitive and academic outcomes for children at risk for school failure due to factors such as poverty, low maternal IQ, or low parental education. These studies provide the only experimental data regarding the efficacy of child care interventions that began during early infancy and lasted until the child entered kindergarten. In addition, the data allow for tests of the efficacy of intervention during the primary grades.

Research hypotheses include:

1. Within this high-risk sample, early cumulative risk will be negatively associated with young adult educational outcomes, employment outcomes, avoidance of teen parenthood, and avoidance of criminal behavior.
2. Early intervention will moderate the effects of risk such that the effects of increased risk would be weaker for those who received the intervention than for those who did not.
3. The early home environment would mediate any found effects for early risk and that early educational intervention would moderate the effects of the early home environment such that the effects of a poor-quality home environment would be weaker for those who received treatment compared to those who did not.

Further information can be found on the Carolina Abecedarian Project Web site.

The Carolina Abecedarian (ABC) Project and the Carolina Approach to Responsive Education (CARE) projects consist of two consecutive longitudinal studies on the effectiveness of early childhood educational intervention for children at high risk for developmental delays and school failure. Combined, the two studies test the hypothesis that child care, home visit, and home school resource interventions can enhance cognitive and academic outcomes for children at risk for school failure due to factors such as poverty, low maternal IQ, or low parental education. These studies provide the only experimental data regarding the efficacy of child care interventions that began during early infancy and lasted until the child entered kindergarten. In addition, the data allow for tests of the efficacy of intervention during the primary grades.

Research hypotheses include:

• Within this high-risk sample, early cumulative risk will be negatively associated with young adult educational outcomes, employment outcomes, avoidance of teen parenthood, and avoidance of criminal behavior.
• Early intervention will moderate the effects of risk such that the effects of increased risk would be weaker for those who received the intervention than for those who did not.
• The early home environment would mediate any found effects for early risk and that early educational intervention would moderate the effects of the early home environment such that the effects of a poor-quality home environment would be weaker for those who received treatment compared to those who did not.

Demographic variables included in this collection: gender, age, level of education.

This mixed method, in-depth case study in Colorado examines the degree to which key players in the child welfare, early intervention/preschool special education (EI/Preschool SPED) and early care and education (ECE) systems (e.g. Head Start, preschool, child care centers, family child care homes) collaborate to meet the developmental needs of children ages 0-5 who are involved in the child welfare system. An ecological perspective serves as the conceptual framework to support the goals of the project and to guide the development of this study (Bronfenbrenner, 1979).

This research includes a quantitative analysis of data from the National Survey of Child and Adolescent Wellbeing (NSCAW, a nationally representative sample of children involved in the child welfare system). Additional quantitative research was conducted through two surveys (optional paper or on-line survey) in Colorado between 2005-2006: the Foster Parent Survey, a statewide survey of foster parents drawn from public and private agency lists of licensed families (n=266), and the Child Welfare Caseworker Survey, a statewide survey of child welfare caseworkers and caseworker supervisors drawn from public and private agency lists (n=339).

The qualitative component of this research was conducted through field study interviews, with professionals (Child Welfare, Early Intervention, and Early Care and Education) and foster and biological parents of children under 5 in the child welfare system. These interviews were conducted in Adams, Alamosa, Arapahoe, Conejos, and El Paso counties (n=134).

This study examined a pressing racial equity problem in early childhood education: the disproportionate suspension and expulsion of Black and Brown children and children with disabilities from early learning opportunities. The study centered on the legislative process conducted in Oregon during 2021 and 2022 when a grassroot led bill to eliminate the use of exclusionary practices in preschool setting was introduced to the Oregon legislature.

This dataset contains a complete anonymized dataset for each of the three bills involved in the process Senate Bill 236 (2021), House Bill 2166 (2021), and House Bill 5202 (2022).

In the original study, discourse analysis was used to investigate support and opposition to structural remedies to a systemic racial equity problem.

The Early Care and Education Leadership Study (ExCELS) was funded by the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation within the Administration for Children and Families in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The project team was led by Mathematica and the Institute for Early Education Leadership and Innovation at the University of Massachusetts Boston.

The project included a descriptive study with the following goals: (1) establish a measure of early care and education (ECE) leadership in center-based settings that serve children birth through age five (not yet in kindergarten) that meets standards for reliability and validity to support its intended use and (2) examine empirical support for the associations among key constructs and outcomes in the theory of change of ECE leadership for quality improvement. Research questions focused on understanding the three key elements that define what leadership in center-based ECE settings looks like: (1) who leaders are, (2) what individuals bring to leadership, and (3) what ECE staff do as leaders.

From February through July 2022, the study team recruited 132 ECE centers across four states that served children from birth through age 5 (who are not yet in kindergarten), and that were supported by Head Start grants or Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) subsidies. From March through August 2022, the study team conducted phone interviews to collect center characteristics and learn about the center's staffing structure and leadership positions, and distributed surveys to center managers and teaching staff in recruited centers.

The User's Guide for this study can be obtained by selecting "Documentation Only" from the Download tab on this study homepage. The User's Guide and all ExCELS documentation will download in one zip file.

The Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998-1999 (ECLS-K) focuses on children's early school experiences beginning with kindergarten through fifth grade. It is a nationally representative sample that collects information from children, their families, their teachers, and their schools. ECLS-K provides data about the effects of a wide range of family, school, community, and individual variables on children's cognitive, social, emotional, and physical development, their early learning and early performance in school, as well as their home environment, home educational practices, school environment, classroom environment, classroom curriculum, and teacher qualifications.

With a few exceptions, the fifth grade data file contains all data collected from parents, children, teachers, or schools in the base year (fall and spring), first grade (fall and spring), third grade (spring), and fifth grade (spring) data collections. To streamline the file, however, the data from the household rosters that listed all household members, their relationship to the sampled child, and selected other characteristics are not included in the file. The composite variables describing critical household roster-based information, such as the children's family structure and selected characteristics of the family members, have been retained on the file.

Specific subjects covered by the variables in this data file include parent/child gender, parent/child race, family background, socioeconomic status, household income, parents' education level, and parents' employment and marital status. Other variables include type of childcare and childcare arrangements, the child's math, science, and reading scores, the child's learning problems and autism, as well as the child's diet issues, food security, and school food service. Variables about teachers include age, race, background, qualifications, job satisfaction, their level of impact on curriculum and policy, and time spent on classroom activities and specific subjects. Other variables include diversity of classroom students, parent-teacher discussions, family participation in school events and fundraising, whether the child's school has bars on the windows and doors, fire alarms, sprinklers, and fire extinguishers, the presence of school graffiti, as well as bus/transportation issues.

The Early Childhood Longitudinal Study Kindergarten Class of 1998-1999, Kindergarten-Eighth Grade Full Sample includes the kindergarten, first, third, fifth, and eighth grade data collections for the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998-1999 (ECLS-K). Unlike the public-use longitudinal files released in previous rounds, this file contains all data for all ECLS-K sample cases that have been publicly released in any of the rounds. Thus, it can be used for within-year (cross-sectional) analyses of any round of data collection and cross-year (longitudinal) analyses of combinations of rounds. It focuses on children's early school experiences beginning with kindergarten through eighth grade. It is a nationally representative sample that collects information from children, their families, their teachers, and their schools. ECLS-K provides data about the effects of a wide range of family, school, community, and individual variables on children's cognitive, social, emotional, and physical development, their early learning and early performance in school, as well as their home environment, home educational practices, school environment, classroom environment, classroom curriculum, and teacher qualifications. The list below summarizes each wave of this study.

• 1998-1999 (the Kindergarten year-Rounds 1 and 2): The ECLS-K child assessments, parent interviews, and teacher questionnaires were conducted in the fall. Children, parents, and teachers participated again in the spring, along with school administrators.

• 1999-2000 (the First grade year-Rounds 3 and 4): The ECLS-K conducted child assessments and parent interviews for a 30 percent sub-sample in the fall. The full sample of children, parents, teachers, and school administrators participated in the spring.

• 2002 (the Third grade year-Round 5): The ECLS-K conducted child assessments and parent interviews in the spring. Teachers and school administrators completed questionnaires.

• 2004 (the Fifth grade year-Round 6): The ECLS-K conducted child assessments and parent interviews in the spring. Teachers and school administrators completed questionnaires.

• 2007 (the Eighth grade year-Round 7): The ECLS-K followed the children into middle school. Information was collected from the children, their parents, teachers, and school administrators.

For more detailed information about this data collection, please refer to the user guide.

The Early Head Start-Child Care Partnerships (EHS-CCP) datasets contains data from two studies: (1) the 2016 National Descriptive Study (the NDS), which collected information about the 2015 EHS-CC Partnerships grantees and their child care partners (including child care centers and family child care providers) and the activities they engaged in to develop and maintain partnerships and meet the Head Start Program Performance Standards, assess their quality improvement needs, and support high quality caregiving and learning environments for infants and toddlers; and (2) the 2022 EHS-CCP Sustainability Study (the Sustainability Study), a follow-up study of the 2016 NDS, which collected information about how partnerships from the first round of grants had fared as of 2022 and factors that supported or impeded partnership sustainability. Both studies were conducted by Mathematica.

The NDS collected data through web-based surveys of grantee directors and a sample of child care directors and family child care providers. The Sustainability Study collected data using web-based surveys of EHS program directors and child care providers in sustained and dissolved partnerships. It also collected qualitative data using semi-structured interviews to provide more in-depth information from purposively selected providers in sustained and dissolved partnerships. (Both NDS and Sustainability Study analyses of EHS programs are conducted at the grant level, with information about partnerships between providers and any delegate agencies rolled up to the level of the EHS-CCP grant. The term "program" is used in the Sustainability Study. Previously, in the NDS, "grantee" was used to refer to the same level of analysis.)

The responses to the survey of grantees and their delegate agencies produced three NDS datasets. The first dataset, Partnership Grantee and Delegate Agency Director Survey, contains data from a survey of Early Head Start grantees and their delegate agencies. This dataset contains questions answered by the grantee or delegate agencies about themselves and contains one observation per grantee. Datasets two and three are also associated with the grantee and delegate agency survey. The second dataset, Grantee and Delegate Agencies Partner Characteristics, contains responses to the initial survey from the grantee or delegate regarding characteristics of all of their child care partners. This dataset was used to create a random sampling of approximately 20 percent of the child care partners for additional questions as well as a separate Child Care Partner survey, which were used to create both datasets three and four. Dataset three, Grantee and Delegate Agencies Randomly Sampled Partner Characteristics, contains responses from grantee and delegate agencies regarding the partners identified by the random sampling created from dataset two. The second survey conducted by Mathematica was of these selected child care partners, and dataset four, Child Care Partner Survey, is comprised of responses to questions asked of the child care partners about themselves. Demographic information contained in these datasets includes education level, degree field, length of occupation, and occupation.

The Sustainability Study examined how partnerships from the first round of grants had fared as of 2022 and factors that supported or impeded partnership sustainability. The Sustainability Study also looks at features of sustained partnerships (partnerships from the NDS that were still in place at the time of the Sustainability Study) as well as active partnerships (which include sustained partnerships as well as those that are new since the NDS, and regardless of whether they are funded through an EHS-CC Partnerships grant).

There are four Sustainability Study data files. Two program director survey files (one at the program level, and one at the provider level, for information about individual child care providers reported by the program director), one child care provider survey file, and one file containing transcripts of semi-structured interviews with dissolved and sustained partnership providers.

Citation

Skidmore, S., Clochard, A., Carlson, B., Doran, E., Cannon, J., Bernstein, S., Albanese, S., Del Grosso, P., and Xue, Y. (2023). Early Head Start-Child Care Partnerships Sustainability Study Data Documentation. Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Early Head Start (EHS) programs are comprehensive, two-generation programs that focus on enhancing children's development while strengthening families. Designed for low-income pregnant women and families with infants and toddlers up to age 3, Early Head Start programs strive to achieve their goals by designing program options based on family and community needs. Programs may offer one or more options to families, including a home-based option, a center-based option, a combination option in which families receive a prescribed number of home visits and center-based experiences, and locally designed options, which in some communities include family child care.

The Early Head Start Research and Evaluation (EHSRE) Study was conducted by Mathematica Policy Research (MPR) and included five major components: (1) an implementation study; (2) an impact evaluation, using an experimental design; (3) local research studies to learn about pathways to desired outcomes; (4) policy studies to respond to information needs in areas of emerging policy-relevant issues; and (5) continuous program improvement. The study involved 3,001 children and families in 17 sites representing diverse program models, racial/ethnic makeup, urban-rural location, program auspice, and program experience in serving infants and toddlers. Three phases comprise the collection: Birth to Three ("0-3"), Pre-Kindergarten ("PreK") Follow-up and the Elementary School ("G5") Follow-up. A brief description of each phase is provided below:

• Birth to Three Phase (1996-2001): included a cross-site national study that encompassed an Impact Evaluation and Implementation Study that investigated program impacts on children and families through their time in the program as well as site-specific research conducted by local research projects.
• Pre-Kindergarten Follow-up Phase (2001-2005) : built upon the earlier research and followed the children and families who were in the original study from the time they left the Early Head Start program until they entered kindergarten. It was designed to document the long-term consequences of receiving either Early Head Start services or other community services up until age 3 combined with subsequent Head Start or other formal early care and education programs on children's school readiness and parent functioning.
• Elementary School Follow-up Phase (2005-2010): assessed children and families when the children were fifth graders or attending their sixth year of formal schooling. The study included direct assessments of children's cognitive, socio-emotional, and physical development; parent interviews; teacher questionnaires; and videotaping of maternal-child interactions.

The Early Head Start findings are based on a mixture of direct child assessments, observations of children's behavior by in-person interviewers, ratings of videotaped parent-child interactions in standardized ways, ratings of children's behaviors by their parents, and parents' self-reports of their own behaviors, attitudes, and circumstances. Data in this collection were constructed by the Mathematica Policy Research (MPR) researchers for use in their analyses. Very few of the original source variables are present in this public-use file. The constructs came from several data sources:

1. Baseline data, which were collected from the Head Start Family Information System (HSFIS) program application and enrollment forms and the MPR Tracking System. These data contain information on the program status of each case, characteristics of the applicant, mother, and focus child from the MPR Tracking System, summary variables pertaining to all family members, and information on the father, on family circumstances, on the mother's pregnancy, and on the focus child.

2. Parent services follow-up interviews (PSI) targeted for 6, 15, and 26 months after random assignment. These data contain information on use of services both in and outside of Early Head Start, progress toward economic self-sufficiency, family health, and children's health.

3. Parent interviews (BPI) targeted for completion when children were 14, 24, and 36 months old. These interviews obtained a large amount of information from the primary caregivers about their child's development and family functioning. Specific questions asked of parents in the parent interview included items about raising a baby, child's health, household composition, child care, mother figure, father figure, family routines, parents' and parent-child activities, child behavior, and stressful events.

4. Child and family assessments targeted for administration when children were 14, 24, and 36 months old. Field interviewers recorded information from their observations of children's behavior and home environments. Direct child assessments included Bayley Assessments, Peabody Picture Vocabulary Tests (PPVTs), and videotaped semi-structured parent-child interactions.

5. Child care provider interviews and observations targeted for administration when children were 14, 24, and 36 months old. Interview and observation data were collected from child care providers for children who were in child care arrangements that met particular criteria when they were approximately 14, 24 and 36 months old. Different data collection instruments were used for children in child care centers and children cared for by family child care providers or relatives. Data from both types of providers may be used together for some types of analyses.

6. Father interviews targeted for collection when children were 24 and 36 months old. In addition to asking mothers about their child's father, biological fathers and father figures in 12 sites were interviewed directly about fathering issues at the time of the 24- and 36-month birthday-related interviews (but not when children were 14 months old).

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act authorizes states to create early intervention (EI) programming to provide developmental and therapeutic services to infants and toddlers with a developmental condition; EI programs are mandated to report on child and family outcomes for purposes of accountability and quality improvement. For both purposes, there is critical need for research evidence on the adequacy of EI services. The researchers for this study partnered with a large urban EI program in Colorado that had recently transitioned to electronic data capture and was implementing a statewide initiative to facilitate function-focused care with individual families and paired collected electronic patient-reported outcomes (e-PRO) data with EI administrative data on child and family characteristics and service use to more fully examine EI service adequacy relative to patient-important outcomes.

This study collected information from Young Children's Participation and Environment Measure (YC-PEM e-PRO) on home, environment, and community participation, involvement, and desired change. Measurements were also collected from the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory Computer Adaptive Test (PEDI-CAT e-PRO) on mobility, social cognitive, and daily activities domains. The Child Outcomes Summary (COS) was used to capture functional performance related to having positive social relationships, acquiring and using knowledge and skills, and taking appropriate action to meet needs. Early Intervention Service Use measured EI intensity, whether child received specific services including physical therapy (PT), occupational therapy (OT), speech therapy (ST), psychology, or developmental intervention (DI), and the total number of service hours received within each discipline. Demographic variables include reasons child received EI services, number of developmental delay conditions, age, race, and ethnicity; as well as caregiver's education, employment, number of children at home, income, and insurance type.

The ELMC Study collected data to describe the objectives, activities, approaches, strategies, and other aspects of the Early Learning Mentor Coach (ELMC) initiative from the perspectives of Head Start grantees, coaches, and staff. In October 2010, the funds to support the ELMC initiative were distributed to 130 Head Start grantees in 42 states and the District of Columbia for a seventeen month period. Grantees used the funds to hire coaches to provide on-the-job guidance, training, mentoring and technical assistance to Head Start staff. The grant recipients reflected the diversity of Head Start programs, including Migrant and Seasonal Head Start and American Indian and Alaskan Native Head Start grantees. Data was collected using a mixed-methods design (qualitative and quantitative) and the following data collection instruments: a grantee census survey; a coach census survey; coach telephone interviews; and staff telephone interviews with staff who received coaching. At this time, only the quantitative data are available via ICPSR.

The Massachusetts Family Child Care study is a two-year evaluation, conducted by Abt Associates Inc, the Manpower Development Research Corporation (MDRC) and the National Center for Children in Poverty (NCCP), of the impacts of the LearningGames program on providers and children in family child care. LearningGames is designed to train caregivers to stimulate children's cognitive, language, and social-emotional development through a set of 200 simple games that encourage intensive, one-on-one interactions as a platform that allows the adult to engage the child in meaningful conversation, to listen to the child and respond to the child's questions and actions, and to scaffold and build on the child's growing skills at using and understanding language. The goal of LearningGames is to increase the frequency of rich language interactions between caregivers and children due to the importance of oral language development in children's understanding of words and concepts, in their ability to become competent readers, and in their long-term academic success and of the role played by rich language stimulation in promoting children's development. This evaluation of LearningGames examines the effectiveness of the program in changing the behavior of the family child care providers and the developmental outcomes for the children who are cared for by providers trained on LearningGames.

Baseline data were collected in the summer of 2005 with follow up observations taking place in the fall of 2006 and again in the winter of 2007. Of the 55 family child care provider networks in Massachusetts, 16 were sampled, resulting in 1,250 children enrolled in 353 study homes, though the study suffered a heavy overall attrition rate of 58 percent.

The data are provided in four data sets, one file containing data on the providers, a baseline observations file and two annual follow ups. The provider file (2005 Provider Data), includes data on: the provider's years of experience in family child care, their reasons for working as a family child care provider, what they would change about their job, what they believe is their responsibility for the children, their educational background, their age, sex, and race, the languages that they speak at home, the languages that they speak with the children in their care, and the types of materials that they read. Due to the descriptive sensitivity of the variables, this dataset requires a signed user agreement to access. All other datasets are publically available. The observation files include data from several measures: the QUEST Caregiver Rating Scale (subset of items), the Arnett Caregiver Interaction Scale, the revised Snapshot of Activities (from the OMLIT), the Read-Aloud Profile (from the OMLIT), and the TALK.The data include: the amount of time the provider shows interest in what children say or do, whether or not the provider seems to enjoy children, the average number of activities observed, the amount of read-alouds where the provider relates the book to group activities prior to reading the book, and whether or not the provider encourages children to do activities on their own.

The Expanding Children's Early Learning (ExCEL) Quality Study: Improving Preschool and Early Care and Education (ECE) Instruction through Curricula, Coaching, and Training was funded by Arnold Ventures and conducted by MDRC and its subcontractors, MEF Associates and RTI International. The study consisted of two phases: ExCEL Quality (EQ; 2019-2020) and ExCEL Quality Continuation (EQC; 2020-2021). This collection contains analysis datasets with calculated measures at the child (DS2) and classroom (DS3) levels, a samples dataset for each phase (EQ = DS1, EQC = DS20), and raw data organized by study phase and data source.

ExCEL Quality

In the EQ study, the research team conducted an experimental study testing two interventions that consisted of curricular and professional development support and that targeted different dimensions of classroom quality, namely:

• A whole-child intervention that targets structural and interactional aspects of classroom quality, using The Creative Curriculum for Preschool, 6th Edition
• A domain-specific intervention with a specific scope and sequence that targets instructional aspects of classroom quality, using Connect4Learning, 1st Edition

ECE centers were selected across four U.S. localities in Head Start and community-based child care settings and were randomly assigned to one of three research conditions (Creative Curriculum, Connect4Learning, or preschool-as-usual). The project was originally designed to assess the impacts of each of the interventions on the content of instruction, teacher practices, classroom quality, and child outcomes, as well as to collect program implementation data. However, because of the COVID-19 pandemic that began in March of the 2019-2020 school year, adjustments were made to the guiding questions and research aims, data sources, and analysis.

ExCEL Quality Continuation

The EQC Study was a non-experimental study, aiming to understand ECE teachers' and administrators' experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2021 school year). The sample was a subset of the centers that participated in EQ in the 2019-2020 school year (n=26), plus five newly recruited centers. EQC provided stress management workshops and curricular support (Creative Curriculum or Connect4Learning) to participating centers regardless of their original research condition in EQ.

Low-income preschool children experience greater risks to their social and emotional development than their more affluent peers. These gaps are observed before children begin their formal schooling, and they remain or increase during the elementary school years. Since social and emotional risks may compromise children's future mental health and peer relationships, addressing them is important in its own right. In addition, social-emotional competence may aid learning: children who have difficulty regulating their emotions and behaviors have been found to receive less instruction, to be less engaged in and less positive about their role as learners, and to have fewer opportunities for learning from peers.

The Head Start CARES (Classroom-based Approaches and Resources for Emotion and Social skill promotion) demonstration tests three distinct approaches to enhancing children's social-emotional development on a large scale within the Head Start system - the largest federally funded early-childhood education program in the United States. Conceived and sponsored by the Office of Head Start and the Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation in the Administration for Children and Families within the United States Department of Health and Human Services, the Head Start CARES demonstration was conducted by MDRC, a nonprofit, nonpartisan education and social policy research organization, in collaboration with MEF Associates and several academic partners.

The three evidence-based social-emotional interventions selected for the Head Start CARES evaluation included: The Incredible Years Teacher Training Program (IY), Preschool PATHS (PATHS), and a one-year version of Tools of the Mind- Play (Tools). The interventions are referred to as "enhancements" because they enriched and complemented existing practices and curricula used in Head Start classrooms. These enhancements represent three "types" of social-emotional programming. That is, while all three were aimed at children's social-emotional development, they varied in their approach to changing this set of child outcomes by targeting somewhat different teacher practices, because they were built on differing theories about how social and emotional skills develop.

Baseline and Follow-up Class-level Impact Analysis Data Files

Data included in class-level data files were collected from external observers and teachers through two sources: Classroom Observations and Teacher Self-Surveys.

Classroom Observations were conducted by observers blind to treatment status who observed the classrooms participating in the study in four different sessions at Spring Baseline and Pre-K Follow-up. This source includes the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS) scores and the Adapted Teaching Style Rating Scale (Adapted-TSRS) scores.

Teacher Self-Surveys were collected from lead teachers at Spring Baseline and Pre-K Follow-up. This data source includes information on classroom composition as well as teacher demographics, teaching experience, level of stress and depression, and professional relationship with peers and supervisors.

Child-level Impact Analysis Data File

Data included in this file were collected at Fall Baseline, Pre-K Follow-up and K Follow-up from teachers, children and their parents through three sources: Teacher Reports on Individual Children, Direct Child Assessments and Parent Surveys.

Teacher Reports on Individual Children (Teacher Reports) were collected at Fall Baseline, Pre-K Follow-up and K Follow-up. Lead teachers filled out surveys for each child separately, including questions about the child's social skills and behavior, the child's specific knowledge and skills, and the teacher's relationship with the child. Teacher reports were collected for both 4-year-olds and 3-year-olds at Fall Baseline and Pre-K Follow-up, but were not collected for 3-year-olds at K Follow-up. As a cover page to the Teacher Report, a shortened version of the Teacher Self-Survey was collected at K Follow-up and those data are included in this dataset.

Direct Child Assessments were conducted at Fall Baseline and Pre-K Follow-up. The dataset comprises data on a set of tasks measuring different skills for each child separately, including social and emotional skills, self-regulation skills and academic skills. Direct Child Assessments were collected for 4-year- olds only.

Parent Surveys were collected at Fall Baseline and K Follow-up. The survey was administered by phone and includes information on family demographics, parent-teacher involvement, parent's perception of school safety, child's social skills and behavior problems, parental level of stress and depression, and household composition and income. Parent Surveys were collected for 4-year-olds only.

Class-level Implementation Analysis Data File

This data file includes data collected from coaches, trainers and teachers on teacher training, classroom-based coaching, and classroom implementation. The data included in this dataset were collected through five separate instruments: (1) Teacher Training Attendance Forms, (2) Coach Weekly Logs, (3) Coach Monthly Fidelity Logs, (4) Trainer Fidelity Logs, and (5) Teacher's View of the Enhancement. Data collected from the first four data sources were collected multiple times during the implementation year while the fifth was collected once at the beginning of the implementation year. The instruments were administered through the Head Start CARES management information system (MIS) with the exception of the Teacher Training Attendance Forms, which were collected on paper. The file also includes some Teacher Self-Survey variables. Data were collected for program group classrooms only.

Coach-level Implementation Analysis Data File

This data file includes data collected from coaches and trainers on classroom-based coaching. The data included in this dataset were collected through five separate instruments: (1) Teacher Training Attendance Forms, (2) Trainer Supervision Logs, (3) Trainer Logs of Coach Quality, (4) Coach Demographics Survey, and (5) Coach End-of-Year Reflections. The instruments were administered through the Head Start CARES management information system (MIS) with the exception of the Teacher Training Attendance Forms, which were collected on paper.

Audiotape Analysis Data File

The audiotape data file includes data created using qualitative information (audiotape transcripts of coach-teacher meetings) that can be used to conduct analyses on one of the two components of the professional development model for the Head Start CARES demonstration: classroom-based coaching.

Child-level Tracking Data File

The child-level tracking data file includes parent-reported data collected in elementary school for children from the Head Start CARES sample. It includes information from parents about children's location and grade, social skills and problem behaviors at home, and receipt of special services.

The Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) has been a source of information on the Head Start program and the children and families it serves. The 2019 Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey, or FACES 2019, is the seventh in a series of national studies of Head Start, with earlier studies conducted in 1997, 2000, 2003, 2006, 2009, and 2014. It includes nationally representative samples of Head Start programs and centers, classrooms, and children and their families during the 2019-2020 program year. Data from surveys of Head Start program and center directors and classroom teachers provide descriptive information about program policies and practices, classroom activities, and the background of Head Start staff. These data compromise the Classroom Study. A sample of these programs also provides data from parent surveys, teacher child reports, and direct child assessments as part of the Classroom + Child Outcomes Study. FACES 2019 is designed to help policymakers address current policy questions and to support programs and practitioners working with Head Start families.

According to the study design, FACES would have assessed children's readiness for school, surveyed parents, and asked teachers to provide information on children in both fall 2019 and spring 2020. In response to the COVID-19 (for coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic, however, FACES 2019 cancelled the first piece--the in-person data collection of child assessments in spring 2020. In-person classroom observations as part of the Classroom Study were also cancelled in spring 2020.

FACES is designed so that researchers can answer a wide range of research questions that are crucial for aiding program directors and policymakers. FACES 2019 data may be used to describe (1) the quality and characteristics of Head Start programs, teachers, and classrooms; (2) the changes or trends in the quality and characteristics of the classrooms, programs, and staff over time; (3) the school readiness skills and family characteristics of the children who participate in Head Start; (4) the factors or characteristics that predict differences in classroom quality; (5) the changes or trends in the children's outcomes and family characteristics over time; and (6) the factors or characteristics at multiple levels that predict differences in the children's outcomes. The study also supports research questions related to subgroups of interest, such as children with identified disabilities and children who are dual-language learners (DLLs), as well as policy issues that emerge during the study. The study addresses changes in children's outcomes and experiences as well as changes in the characteristics of Head Start classrooms over time and across the rounds of FACES. Some of the questions that are central to FACES include:

1. What are the characteristics of Head Start programs, including structural characteristics and program policies and practices?
2. What are the characteristics and observed quality of Head Start classrooms?
3. What are the characteristics and qualifications of Head Start teachers and management staff?
4. Are the characteristics of programs, classrooms, and staff changing over time?
5. What are the demographic characteristics and home environments of children and families who participate in Head Start?
6. Are family demographic characteristics and aspects of home environments changing over time?
7. How do families make early care and education decisions?
8. What are the experiences of families and children in Head Start?
9. What are the average school readiness skills and developmental outcomes of the population of Head Start children in fall and spring of the Head Start year?
10. What gains do children make during a year of Head Start?
11. Are children's school readiness skills (average skills or average gains in skills) improving over time?
12. Does classroom quality vary by characteristics of classrooms, teachers, or programs?
13. What characteristics of programs, teachers, or classrooms are associated with aspects of classroom quality?
14. Do the school readiness skills of children in fall and spring and their gains in skills vary by child, family, program, and classroom characteristics?
15. What is the association between observed classroom quality and children's school readiness skills? Between child and family characteristics and children's school readiness skills?

The User Guide provides detailed information about the FACES 2019 study design, execution, and data to inform and assist researchers who may be interested in using the data for future analyses. The following items are provided in the User Guide as appendices.

• Appendix A. Elements of the FACES Design and Key Instruments Used (and Child Outcomes Captured): FACES 1997-FACES 2019
• Appendix B. Copyright Permissions
• Appendix C. Instrument Content Matrices
• Appendix D. Instruments
• Appendix E. Spring 2020 Center/Program Codebook
• Appendix F. Spring 2020 Classroom/Teacher Codebook
• Appendix G. Fall 2019-Spring 2020 Child Codebook
• Appendix H. Descriptions of Composite Variables

The Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) is an ongoing national longitudinal study of the cognitive, social, emotional, and physical development of Head Start children. It examines the characteristics, well-being, and accomplishments of families, the observed quality of Head Start classrooms, and the characteristics and opinions of Head Start teachers and other program staff. FACES was designed to address four central questions related to program performance objectives:

1. Does Head Start enhance children's development and school readiness?
2. Does Head Start strengthen families as the primary nurturers of their children?
3. Does Head Start provide children with high quality educational, health, and nutritional services?
4. How is classroom quality related to child outcomes?

The FACES 1997 Cohort involved a nationally representative sample of children and families in Head Start programs in the United States who were studied at entry into the program in the fall of 1997, assessed in the spring at the completion of one or two years of Head Start, and followed up in the spring of the kindergarten and first grade years. During these visits, the research team completed individual interviews with staff and parents, child and classroom observations, direct child assessments through one-on-one interviews, and indirect assessments of children by their teachers and parents.

The data collection instruments used in FACES were designed to measure several different types of skills, accomplishments, and behaviors that are relevant to a child's school readiness and social competence:

1. The parent interview was designed to collect up-to-date information about current Head Start families while being sensitive to differences based on the background of the respondents. The interview provided descriptive information about the parents (education, work status, health, nativity, depression, social support, use of discipline and rules, exposure to violence), the household (income, housing, activities with children, use of child care), and the children (gender, ethnicity, health, behavior, literacy skills, disabilities, exposure to violence). Additionally, parents reported how their families came to Head Start and how they perceived their Head Start experiences.
2. The staff interview was designed to provide a profile of the background, qualifications, and training of Head start personnel as well as an understanding of classroom activities, family activities, services, local programs offered to families, and staff perspectives on their programs and the families they served.
3. The child and classroom observations were designed to record information from the observations of children's behavior and home environments. Some of the assessments used included Peabody Picture Vocabulary Tests (PPVTs), Woodcock-Johnson Revised Tests of Achievement, Norm Referenced Cognitive Tests, Story and Print Concepts, and McCarthy Scales of Children's Abilities.

The Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) is an ongoing national longitudinal study of the cognitive, social, emotional, and physical development of Head Start children. It examines the characteristics, well-being, and accomplishments of families, the observed quality of Head Start classrooms, and the characteristics and opinions of Head Start teachers and other program staff. FACES was designed to address four central questions related to program performance objectives:

1. Does Head Start enhance children's development and school readiness?
2. Does Head Start strengthen families as the primary nurturers of their children?
3. Does head Start provide children with high quality educational, health, and nutritional services?
4. How is classroom quality related to child outcomes?

The FACES 2000 Cohort involved a nationally representative sample of children and families in Head Start programs in the United States who were studied at entry into the program in the fall of 2000, assessed at the completion of one or two years of program experience, and followed up in the spring of the kindergarten year. The FACES 2000-2003 battery has four main components: the child assessment, parent interview, teacher and staff interviews, and classroom observations.

1. The child assessments included the major components of school readiness, and were collected through direct child assessments and rating scales completed by parents and teachers. Direct child assessments included the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test Third Edition-Revised (PPVT-III), Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery-Revised, McCarthy Scales of Children's Abilities, story and print concepts, social awareness, color names and one-to-one counting, Leiter International Performance Scale-Revised, interview ratings, and follow-up Early Childhood Longitudinal Study-Kindergarten (ECLS-K) measures.

2. The parent interview was designed to provide Head Start with a comprehensive understanding of the families that they serve, including the characteristics of households and household members, levels and types of participation in the program and in other community services, involvement with their children, and an understanding of their children's development. In addition to this, parents were asked to rate each child on a set of behaviors that assessed the child's basic social skills and behavior problems.

3. The teacher and staff interview was designed to provide information on Head Start personnel experience, education, and training as well as knowledge and beliefs about child development, and educational activities with children and parents.

4. The classroom observations were designed to measure peer interactions, friendships of children, and the extent to which Head Start programs employed skilled teachers and provided developmentally appropriate environments and curricula for their children. Some of the assessments used included the Assessment Profile, Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale-Revised (ECERS-R), classroom observation of teacher-directed activities, and the Arnett Caregiver Interaction Scale.

The Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) is an ongoing national longitudinal study of the cognitive, social, emotional, and physical development of Head Start children. It examines the characteristics, well-being, and accomplishments of families, the observed quality of Head Start classrooms, and the characteristics and opinions of Head Start teachers and other program staff. FACES was designed to address four central questions related to program performance objectives:

1. Does Head Start enhance children's development and school readiness?
2. Does Head Start strengthen families as the primary nurturers of their children?
3. Does head Start provide children with high quality educational, health, and nutritional services?
4. How is classroom quality related to child outcomes?

The FACES 2003 Cohort involved a nationally representative sample of children and families in Head Start programs in the United States who were studied at entry into the program in the fall of 2003, assessed at the completion of their program experience, and followed up at the end of their kindergarten year. The FACES 2003 battery has five main components: the child assessment, parent interview, teacher and staff interviews, classroom observations and teacher-child reports.

1. The child assessments included the major components of school readiness, and were collected through direct child assessments and rating scales completed by parents and teachers. Some of the direct child assessments included the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test Third Edition-Revised (PPVT-III), Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery-Revised, McCarthy Scales of Children's Abilities, story and print concepts, social awareness, color names and one-to-one counting and assessor ratings.

2. The parent interview was designed to provide Head Start with a comprehensive understanding of the families that they serve, including the characteristics of households and household members, levels and types of participation in the program and in other community services, involvement with their children, and an understanding of their children's development. In addition to this, parents were asked to rate each child on a set of behaviors that assessed the child's basic social skills and behavior problems.

3. The teacher and staff interview was designed to provide information on Head Start personnel experience, education, and training as well as knowledge and beliefs about child development, and educational activities with children and parents.

4. The classroom observations were designed to measure peer interactions, friendships of children, and the extent to which Head Start programs employed skilled teachers and provided developmentally appropriate environments and curricula for their children. Some of the assessments used included the Assessment Profile, Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale-Revised (ECERS-R), classroom observation of teacher-directed activities, and the Arnett Caregiver Interaction Scale.

5. The teacher-child report was designed to capture important sources of information about children's learning and behavior through the use of the Teacher-Child Report (TCR), social skills ratings, the Behavior Problems scale and the Preschool Learning Behavior Scale (PLBS).

The Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) is a periodic, ongoing longitudinal study of program performance. Successive nationally representative samples of Head Start children, their families, classrooms, and programs provide descriptive information on the population of children and families served; staff qualifications, credentials, and opinions; Head Start classroom practices and quality measures; and child and family outcomes. FACES includes a battery of child assessments across multiple developmental domains (cognitive, social, emotional, and physical).

For nearly a decade, the Office of Head Start, the Administration for Children and Families, other federal agencies, local programs, and the public have depended on FACES for valid and reliable national information on (1) the skills and abilities of Head Start children, (2) how Head Start children's skills and abilities compare with preschool children nationally, (3) Head Start children's readiness for and subsequent performance in kindergarten, and (4) the characteristics of the children's home and classroom environments. The FACES study is designed to enable researchers to answer a wide range of research questions that are crucial for aiding program managers and policymakers. Some of the questions that are central to FACES include:

1. What are the demographic characteristics of the population of children and families served by Head Start? How has the population served by Head Start changed?
2. What are the experiences of families and children in the Head Start program? How have they changed?
3. What are the cognitive and social skills of Head Start children at the beginning and end of their first year in the program? Has Head Start program performance improved over time?
4. Do the gains in cognitive and social skills that Head Start children achieve carry over into kindergarten? Do larger gains (or greater declines in problem behavior) translate into higher achievement at the end of kindergarten?
5. What are the qualifications of Head Start teachers in terms of education, experience, and credentials? Are average teacher education levels rising in Head Start?
6. What is the observed quality of Head Start classrooms as early learning environments, including the level and range of teaching and interactions, provisions for learning, emotional and instructional support, and classroom organization? How has quality changed over time? What program- and classroom-level factors are related to observed classroom quality? How is observed quality related to children's outcomes and developmental gains?

FACES also supports analyses of subgroups of interest, such as children with disabilities, dual language learners, and children who are performing above or below average on standardized assessments. Its design changes in response to emerging policy and research questions. For example, in response to the growing concern about childhood obesity, measures of children's height and weight were introduced in FACES 2006.

Measures for FACES 2006 were selected to balance the need to support comparisons to previous cohorts of FACES (particularly with respect to program performance measures) against the need to update the measurement battery and address emerging policy issues and benefits from progress in the assessment field. Many of the measures used in FACES 2006 were included in previous cohorts and they are presented below by the five major measurement sources in FACES: (1) child direct assessments; (2) parent interviews; (3) teacher interviews and survey; (4) classroom observations; and (5) program director, center director, and education coordinator interviews.

1. The child direct assessments included the major components of school readiness. They included a language screener, the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Fourth Edition/Test de Vocabulario de Imagines Peabody, subtests from the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Achievement Third Edition/Bateria III Woodcock-Munoz (letter word identification, applied problems, spelling, and word attack), a measure of early math literacy based on items from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Birth and Kindergarten Cohorts math assessments (geometry, patterns, and measurement), story and print concepts, and physical measurements (height and weight). At the end of the direct child assessment, interviewers rate the child's attention, organization/impulse control, activity level, and sociability using items from the Leiter-R scales.
2. The parent interview was designed to provide Head Start with a comprehensive understanding of the families that they serve, including the demographic characteristics of households and household members, parent-child relationships and the quality of the child's home life, and parent ratings of the child's behavior problems, social skills, and competencies, levels and types of participation in the program and in other community services.
3. The Head Start teacher interview was designed to collect information about classroom and teacher characteristics related to the quality of care provided by Head Start programs. Teachers were asked about their classroom activities and use of curricula, as well as their demographic and educational background and professional experience. They also used a Web survey to rate the social skills, problem behaviors, and competencies of each FACES child in their classroom. Kindergarten teachers provided information about schools attended by Head Start children, their classrooms and school experiences using a Web survey. They also completed ratings of each FACES child's social skills, behavior problems and competencies.
4. The classroom observations were designed to measure peer interactions and the extent to which Head Start programs employed skilled teachers and provided developmentally appropriate environments and curricula for their children. The measures used included the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale-Revised (ECERS-R), the Arnett Scale of Lead Teacher Behavior, and the Instructional Support scale from the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS). Counts of children and adults were also taken to calculate group size and child-adult ratios.
5. The Program Director, Center Director, and Education Coordinator Interviews gathered information about staffing and recruitment, teacher education initiatives and training, waiting lists and program expansion, classroom activities, curriculum, overview of program management, and parent involvement.

The User Guide provides detailed information about the FACES 2006 study design, execution, and data to inform and assist researchers who may be interested in using the data for future analyses. The following items are provided in the User Guide as appendices.

• Appendix A -- Copyright Statements
• Appendix B -- Instrument Content Matrices
• Appendix C -- Questionnaires
• Appendix D -- Center/Program Codebook
• Appendix E -- Classroom/Teacher Codebook
• Appendix F -- Child Codebook
• Appendix G -- Description of Constructed/Derived Variables

The Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) is a periodic, ongoing longitudinal study of program performance. Successive nationally representative samples of Head Start children, their families, classrooms, and programs provide descriptive information on the population of children and families served; staff qualifications, credentials, and opinions; Head Start classroom practices and quality measures; and child and family outcomes. FACES includes a battery of child assessments across multiple developmental domains (cognitive, social, emotional, and physical). FACES 2009 is the latest FACES cohort study and followed children from Head Start entry in fall 2009 through one or two years of program participation and to kindergarten.

For nearly a decade, the Office of Head Start, the Administration for Children and Families, other federal agencies, local programs, and the public have depended on FACES for valid and reliable national information on (1) the skills and abilities of Head Start children, (2) how Head Start children's skills and abilities compare with preschool children nationally, (3) Head Start children's readiness for and subsequent performance in kindergarten, and (4) the characteristics of the children's home and classroom environments. The FACES study is designed to enable researchers to answer a wide range of research questions that are crucial for aiding program managers and policymakers. Some of the questions that are central to FACES include:

1. What are the demographic characteristics of the population of children and families served by Head Start? How has the population served by Head Start changed?
2. What are the experiences of families and children in the Head Start program? How have they changed?
3. What are the cognitive and social skills of Head Start children at the beginning and end of their first year in the program? Has Head Start program performance improved over time?
4. Do the gains in cognitive and social skills that Head Start children achieve carry over into kindergarten? Do larger gains (or greater declines in problem behavior) translate into higher achievement at the end of kindergarten?
5. What are the qualifications of Head Start teachers in terms of education, experience, and credentials? Are average teacher education levels rising in Head Start?
6. What is the observed quality of Head Start classrooms as early learning environments, including the level and range of teaching and interactions, provisions for learning, emotional and instructional support, and classroom organization? How has quality changed over time? What program- and classroom-level factors are related to observed classroom quality? How is observed quality related to children's outcomes and developmental gains?

In response to recent trends and mandates, FACES 2009 expanded the information collected on families and children who speak a primary language other than English and the information collected on children who are homeless. Earlier cohorts of FACES gathered information on the languages spoken in the home and used for classroom instruction. Given the growth in the population of Hispanic/Latino preschoolers (Hernandez 2006), FACES 2009 placed additional emphasis on Dual Language Learners (DLLs). In addition, given the 2007 Head Start Act's focus on children and families who are homeless, FACES 2009 expanded coverage on the enrollment of such children, how the program ensures that they enroll in Head Start, and the special services available to such children and their families.

FACES 2009 carefully balanced the need for consistent measurement of outcomes against the need for improvements in instrumentation and techniques. In some instances, new instruments were added to obtain more comprehensive information on Head Start children. For example, the Expressive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test was added to assess children's expressive language, which is related to later reading achievement even more so than receptive language (National Early Literacy Panel 2008). A measure of phonemic awareness from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study-Birth Cohort (ECLS-B) preschool wave was also added to assess children's knowledge of beginning and ending sounds in words. Further, FACES 2009 included a direct assessment of executive functioning-a pencil tapping task to examine children's inhibitory control, working memory, and attention-which has been shown to relate to young children's development in mathematics, vocabulary, and literacy (Blair and Razza 2007; Espy et al. 2004; McClelland et al. 2007).

The User Guide provides detailed information about the FACES 2009 study design, execution, and data to inform and assist researchers who may be interested in using the data for future analyses. The following items are provided in the User Guide as appendices.

• Appendix A - Copyright statements
• Appendix B - Instrument Content Matrices
• Appendix C - Questionnaires
• Appendix D - Center/Program Codebook
• Appendix E - Classroom/Teacher Codebook
• Appendix F - Child Codebook
• Appendix G - Description of Constructed/Derived Variables

The 2014 Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey, or FACES 2014, is the sixth in a series of national studies of Head Start, with earlier studies conducted in 1997, 2000, 2003, 2006, and 2009. FACES 2014 used a new study design that differs from earlier rounds of FACES in several important ways: (1) it included larger program and classroom samples, (2) all data were collected in a single program year, (3) the baseline sample of children included both children enrolled in their first and second year of Head Start, and (4) several special studies were conducted along with the main (Classroom + Child Outcomes Core and Classroom Core) study to collect more detailed information about a given topic, to study new populations of Head Start programs and participants, and to evaluate measures for possible use in future rounds of FACES. For example, the Family Engagement Plus study collected information from parents and staff (teachers and family services staff) on family engagement efforts and service provision in Head Start programs.

The FACES 2014 Family Engagement Plus study took place in spring 2015 within the 60 programs that participated in the child-level data collection in the Classroom + Child Outcomes Core study. This Plus study describes family engagement practices in Head Start from the perspectives of parents and Head Start staff. It examines how practices align with the Head Start Parent, Family, and Community Engagement (PFCE) Framework and targeted family outcomes. It also explores how programs engage with community partners to provide comprehensive services to families and how parents and staff characterize their relationships with one another. It includes semi-structured interviews with parents and family services staff (FSS) as well as supplemental content added to the Core parent and teacher surveys. This release includes open-ended qualitative data from the semi-structured interviews included in the Family Engagement Plus study.

The primary research questions for the Family Engagement Plus study are as follows:

1. What do family engagement efforts look like in Head Start?
2. How are families engaged in Head Start and in their children's learning and development at home and in the community?
3. What staff are involved in family engagement efforts, and in what ways are they involved in those efforts?
4. How are comprehensive family services provided in Head Start?
5. How do parents and staff characterize their relationships and interactions with one another?
6. How do family engagement efforts and service provisions align with the Head Start Parent, Family, and Community Engagement (PFCE) Framework?

The User's Manual provides detailed information about the Family Engagement Plus study design, execution, and data to inform and assist researchers who may be interested in using the data for future analyses or pairing the Family Engagement qualitative data collection sources with other FACES 2014 sources.

The 2014 Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey, or FACES 2014, is the sixth in a series of national studies of Head Start, with earlier studies conducted in 1997, 2000, 2003, 2006, and 2009. This release includes nationally representative samples of Head Start programs and centers, classrooms, children and their families through spring of 2017. Data from surveys of Head Start program and center directors, classroom teachers, and parents provided descriptive information about program policies and practices, classroom activities, and the background and experiences of Head Start staff and families. Classroom observations were used to assess the quality of Head Start classrooms. Children in the study participated in a direct assessment that provided a picture of their school readiness skills at different time points.

FACES 2014 used a new study design that differs from earlier rounds of FACES in several important ways: (1) it included larger program and classroom samples, (2) all data were collected in a single program year, (3) the baseline sample of children included both children enrolled in their first and second year of Head Start, and (4) several special studies were conducted along with the main (Core) study to collect more detailed information about a given topic, to study new populations of Head Start programs and participants, and to evaluate measures for possible use in future rounds of FACES. For example, the Family Engagement Plus study collected information from parents and staff (teachers and family services staff) on family engagement efforts and service provision in Head Start programs.

The Office of Head Start, the Administration for Children and Families, other federal agencies, local programs, and the public have depended on FACES for valid and reliable national information on (1) the skills and abilities of Head Start children, (2) how Head Start children's skills and abilities compare with preschool children nationally, (3) Head Start children's readiness for and subsequent performance in kindergarten, and (4) the characteristics of the children's home and classroom environments. The FACES study was designed to enable researchers to answer a wide range of research questions that are crucial for aiding program managers and policymakers. Some of the questions that are central to FACES include:

1. What are the demographic characteristics of the population of children and families served by Head Start? How has the population served by Head Start changed?
2. What are the experiences of families and children in the Head Start program? How have they changed?
3. What are the cognitive and social skills of Head Start children at the beginning and end of the program year? Has Head Start program performance improved over time?
4. What are the qualifications of Head Start teachers in terms of education, experience, and credentials? Are average teacher education levels rising in Head Start?
5. What is the observed quality of Head Start classrooms as early learning environments, including the level and range of teaching and interactions, provisions for learning, emotional and instructional support, and classroom organization? How has quality changed over time?
6. What program- and classroom-level factors are related to observed classroom quality?
7. How is observed quality related to children's outcomes and developmental gains?

The User Guide provides detailed information about the FACES 2014 study design, execution, and data to inform and assist researchers who may be interested in using the data for future analyses. The following items are provided in the User Guide as appendices.

• Appendix A - Elements Of The FACES Design And Key Measures Used (And Child Outcomes Captured): FACES 1997 - FACES 2014
• Appendix B - Copyright Permissions
• Appendix C - Instrument Content Matrices
• Appendix D - Instruments
• Appendix E - Spring 2015 Center/Program Codebook
• Appendix F - Spring 2015 Classroom/Teacher Codebook
• Appendix G - 2014-2015 Child Codebook
• Appendix H - Spring 2015 Family Engagement Family Service Staff Interview Codebook
• Appendix I - Spring 2015 Family Engagement Parent Interview Codebook
• Appendix J - Spring 2017 Center/Program Codebook
• Appendix K - Spring 2017 Classroom/Teacher Codebook
• Appendix L - Descriptions of Constructed/Derived Variables
• Appendix M - Synthetic Estimation for Child Growth Across Two Years

Since its beginning in 1965 as a part of the War on Poverty, Head Start's goal has been to boost the school readiness of low income children. Based on a "whole child" model, the program provides comprehensive services that include preschool education; medical, dental, and mental health care; nutrition services; and efforts to help parents foster their child's development. Head Start services are designed to be responsive to each child's and family's ethnic, cultural, and linguistic heritage.

In the 1998 reauthorization of Head Start, Congress mandated that the United States Department of Health and Human Services determine, on a national level, the impact of Head Start on the children it serves. This legislative mandate required that the impact study address two main research questions:

1. What difference does Head Start make to key outcomes of development and learning (and in particular, the multiple domains of school readiness) for low-income children? What difference does Head Start make to parental practices that contribute to children's school readiness?
2. Under what circumstances does Head Start achieve the greatest impact? What works for which children? What Head Start services are most related to impact?

The Head Start Impact Study addresses these questions by reporting on the impacts of Head Start on children and families during the children's preschool, kindergarten, and first grade years. It was conducted with a nationally representative sample of nearly 5,000 three- and four-year old preschool children across 84 nationally representative grantee/delegate agencies in communities where there are more eligible children and families than can be served by the program. The children participating were randomly assigned to either a treatment group (which had access to Head Start services) or a comparison group (which did not have access to Head Start services, but could receive other community resources). Data collection began in the fall of 2002 and ended in spring 2006, following children through the spring of their first grade year. Baseline data were collected through parent interviews and child assessments in fall 2002. The annual spring data collection included child assessments, parent interviews, teacher surveys, and teacher-child ratings. In addition, during the preschool years only, data collection included classroom and family day care observations, center director interviews, care provider interviews, and care provider-child ratings.

The study examined differences in outcomes in several domains related to school readiness: children's cognitive, social-emotional, health, and parenting outcomes (e.g., reading to the child, use of spanking and time out, exposing children to cultural enrichment activities, safety practices, parent-child relationships). It also examined whether impacts differed based on characteristics of the children and their families, including the child's pre-academic skills at the beginning of the study; the child's primary language; whether the child has special needs; the mother's race/ethnicity; the primary caregiver's level of depressive symptoms; household risk; and urban or rural location.

The Head Start Impact Study differs from other evaluations of early childhood programs in that it:

• represents children from the majority of Head Start programs,
• represents a scaled-up federal program,
• represents the full range of quality within the national program,
• employs a randomized control design, the strongest design for testing impacts,
• examines all domains of children's school readiness, as well as parenting outcomes,
• follows children through their early years of elementary school, and
• compares children who have access to Head Start to a control group that includes many children in center-based and other forms of early childhood education programs.

Since its beginning in 1965 as a part of the War on Poverty, Head Start's goal has been to boost the school readiness of low income children. Based on a "whole child" model, the program provides comprehensive services that include preschool education; medical, dental, and mental health care; nutrition services; and efforts to help parents foster their child's development. Head Start services are designed to be responsive to each child's and family's ethnic, cultural, and linguistic heritage.

In the 1998 reauthorization of Head Start, Congress mandated that the United States Department of Health and Human Services determine, on a national level, the impact of Head Start on the children it serves. This legislative mandate required that the impact study address two main research questions:

1. What difference does Head Start make to key outcomes of development and learning (and in particular, the multiple domains of school readiness) for low-income children? What difference does Head Start make to parental practices that contribute to children's school readiness?
2. Under what circumstances does Head Start achieve the greatest impact? What works for which children? What Head Start services are most related to impact?

The Head Start Impact Study addresses these questions by reporting on the impacts of Head Start on children and families during the children's preschool, kindergarten, and first grade years. It was conducted with a nationally representative sample of nearly 5,000 three- and four-year old preschool children across 84 nationally representative grantee/delegate agencies in communities where there are more eligible children and families than can be served by the program. The children participating were randomly assigned to either a treatment group (which had access to Head Start services) or a comparison group (which did not have access to Head Start services, but could receive other community resources). Data collection began in the fall of 2002 and ended in spring 2006, following children through the spring of their first grade year. Baseline data were collected through parent interviews and child assessments in fall 2002. The annual spring data collection included child assessments, parent interviews, teacher surveys, and teacher-child ratings. In addition, during the preschool years only, data collection included classroom and family day care observations, center director interviews, care provider interviews, and care provider-child ratings.

The study examined differences in outcomes in several domains related to school readiness: children's cognitive, social-emotional, health, and parenting outcomes (e.g., reading to the child, use of spanking and time out, exposing children to cultural enrichment activities, safety practices, parent-child relationships). It also examined whether impacts differed based on characteristics of the children and their families, including the child's pre-academic skills at the beginning of the study; the child's primary language; whether the child has special needs; the mother's race/ethnicity; the primary caregiver's level of depressive symptoms; household risk; and urban or rural location.

The Head Start Impact Study differs from other evaluations of early childhood programs in that it:

• represents children from the majority of Head Start programs,
• represents a scaled-up federal program,
• represents the full range of quality within the national program,
• employs a randomized control design, the strongest design for testing impacts,
• examines all domains of children's school readiness, as well as parenting outcomes,
• follows children through their early years of elementary school, and
• compares children who have access to Head Start to a control group that includes many children in center-based and other forms of early childhood education programs.

The Third Grade Follow-up to the Head Start Impact Study builds upon the existing randomized control design in the Head Start Impact Study (HSIS) in order to determine the longer-term impact of the Head Start program on the well-being of children and families through the end of third grade. The data collection for the Third Grade Follow-up to the Head Start Impact Study was conducted during the spring of the children's third grade year (2007 and 2008). In addition to the child assessments, parent interviews, teacher surveys, and teacher-child-ratings used for the Head Start Impact Study (HSIS) data collection, a principal survey was added to collect school data, including school demographics, and characteristics and quality indicators for schools, teachers and classrooms. As part of the third grade child assessment, self-reported data also was collected on the child's perception of his/her academic and social skills.

Both studies, for different grade levels, examined differences in outcomes in several domains related to school readiness: children's cognitive, social-emotional, health, and parenting outcomes (e.g., use of spanking, exposing children to cultural enrichment activities, and parenting styles). It also examined whether impacts differed based on characteristics of the children and their families, including the child's pre-academic skills at the beginning of the study; the child's primary language; whether the child has special needs; the mother's race/ethnicity; the primary caregiver's level of depressive symptoms; household risk; and urban or rural location.

This collection also includes the Center Analysis file, which contains data from a variety of publicly available data sources and provides information about the HSIS centers' communities, including population and household characteristics, crime statistics, labor, and housing data. The Center Analysis file is a new file for the collection to be accessed only through the VDE.

Home-based child care (HBCC) is a vital part of the nation's child care supply and the most common form of non-parental care (Datta et al. 2021a; Datta et al. 2021b). Yet HBCC providers have fewer resources and supports than providers in child care centers have, and many HBCC providers face challenges providing care (Henly and Adams 2018; NCECQA 2020; Bromer et al. 2021a, 2021b). The supply of licensed and subsidized family child care has also declined dramatically over the past decade (Datta et al. 2021a; NCECQA 2020). The Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation within the Administration for Children and Families in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services contracted with Mathematica and Erikson Institute to study (1) gaps in our understanding of HBCC supply and availability and (2) challenges defining and measuring quality in HBCC settings through the Home-Based Child Care Supply and Quality (HBCCSQ) project.

The HBCCSQ project conducted two studies. The Home-Based Child Care Practices and Experiences Study (HBCC P&E Study) was a qualitative study of family, friend, and neighbor (FFN) providers across four sites in the United States. The HBCC P&E Study's objective was to learn about the experiences, strengths, resources, and strategies used by FFN providers and how these experiences intersect with their cultural, racial, ethnic, and linguistic identities and geographic locations.

The Home-Based Child Care Toolkit for Nurturing School-Age Children (HBCC-NSAC Toolkit) Study was a validation study of the HBCC-NSAC Toolkit, a new measure designed to assess and strengthen the quality of care for school-age children in home-based child care. The HBCC-NSAC Toolkit Study's objective was to examine the reliability and validity evidence of the English version of the HBCC-NSAC Toolkit provider questionnaire and understand if the HBCC-NSAC Toolkit provider questionnaire can support home-based providers to identify and reflect on their caregiving strengths and areas for growth.

For more information, visit the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation HBCCSQ website.

The Infant Health and Development Program (IHDP) was a multisite, randomized, controlled trial of an educational intervention until three years of age for low birth weight preterm infants born in 1984-1985. There were three components to the intervention: (1) an educational program delivered through home visits (weekly during the first year and every other week during the second and third years of life), (2) a daily center-based program beginning at 12 months corrected for duration of gestation, and (3) parent support groups coinciding with the start of the center-based program. Previously, the subjects were assessed at baseline up to age 3 (Phase I), age 5 (Phase II), and age 8 (Phase III). Phase IV assessed them at age 18.

This data collection contains selected variables from all four phases that were used in analyses reported in two articles by the principal investigators and others:

• McCormick, Marie C., Jeanne Brooks-Gunn, Stephen L. Buka, Julie Goldman, Jennifer Yu, Mikhail Salganik, David T. Scott, Forrest C. Bennett, Libby L. Kay, Judy C. Bernbaum, Charles R. Bauer, Camilia Martin, Elizabeth R. Woods, Anne Martin, and Patrick H. Casey. "Early Intervention in Low Birth Weight Premature Infants: Results at 18 Years of Age for the Infant Health and Development Program." Pediatrics 117.3 (2006): 771-780.
• Martin, Anne, Jeanne Brooks-Gunn, Pamela Klebanov, Stephen L. Buka, and Marie C. McCormick. "Long-term maternal effects of early childhood intervention: Findings from the Infant Health and Development Program (IHDP)." Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 29 (2008): 101-117.

As such, the collection comprises only some of the variables that were collected for Phase IV and the other phases.

The collection contains information about the children and their mothers/caregivers. Data on the children include treatment group, sex, birth weight group, and an index of neonatal health, plus indices of receptive vocabulary, intelligence, and adult-child activities at age 5, indices of intelligence, receptive vocabulary, reading ability, math ability, and behavioural problems and competencies at ages 8 and 18, and indices of risk behaviors, physical health, future expectations, and engagement towards school at age 18. Information about the mothers/caregivers includes maternal age and mother's race, as well as educational achievement at baseline and ages 5, 8, and 18; smoking at ages 5 and 18; measures of employment, physical health, and mental health at ages 5, 8, and 18; indices of parenting style, educational aspirations for the child, and yelling frequency at the child at ages 8 and 18; and indices of connectedness to the community and involvement with the child's school at age 18. Other variables include measures of home literacy and the presence of televisions in the household at age 5, and indices of family cohesion and conflict at ages 8 and 18.

The Kidsteps II Project tested the efficacy of the Second Step Early Learning (SSEL) curriculum in improving children's social-emotional skills (SE), executive functioning (EF), and school readiness skills in preschool relative to usual curricular frameworks, and the predictive power of the intervention on kindergarten readiness and kindergarten success. Kidsteps II, a 4-year study funded by the U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, included 67 classrooms randomly assigned to one of two, two-year cohorts. In each cohort, half of the classrooms were randomly assigned to receive the SSEL curriculum (intervention condition), and half continued usual practices (control/comparison condition). Teachers in intervention classrooms were provided with training and implementation support for two years. Teachers in both conditions completed social skills rating scales on participating children at the beginning and end of the year (n=1497). Parent reports of children's social skills were also obtained for 725 children. Four-year-old children entering kindergarten the following year (n=978) were individually tested on social skills, executive functioning, and academic skills at the beginning and end of their pre-k year. Additional classroom observation and coded lesson plans documented fidelity, implementation, classroom climate, and classroom quality. Intervention teachers also completed weekly measures of curriculum implementation. Pre-k children from the first three years of the study were followed into kindergarten, and kindergarten teachers completed social skills rating scales and academic readiness mid-year, and school records were obtained for kindergarten screening scores, special services received during kindergarten, and promotion to first grade. The study addressed the following questions:

• Does SSEL improve children's social emotional skills, executive functioning, and school readiness skills as measured by teachers and independent assessors in preschool compared to classrooms not using SSEL?
• Do children participating in SSEL classrooms have stronger school system administered kindergarten readiness screenings, better kindergarten teacher-rated social skills and academic competency, and higher 1st grade promotion compared to children entering from comparison classrooms?
• To what extent are kindergarten readiness screenings and kindergarten teacher's ratings of social skills and academic competence mediated by preschool children's social emotional skills and executive functioning?
• Is there an effect of SSEL on preschool classroom climate?