DCYF evaluation: most subsidy recipients remain enrolled about three years; new analysis will probe instability and equity

Adassa Bedraga Tryon, senior evaluator for the Fair Start for Kids Act (FSKA) at DCYF’s Office of Innovation, Alignment and Accountability (OIAA), presented preliminary findings and the agency’s next analytic steps on April 1.

FSKA evaluation findings and next steps

Tryon said the evaluation team’s analytical dataset follows children who received Working Connections Child Care subsidy payments from January 2018 through October 2024 and measures continuous participation as “spans” defined by uninterrupted monthly payments. Using that approach, the team found an average span length of about 12 months and an average total time in care for children in the sample of roughly 37 months.

“We did see that following FSKA in 2022 there was a lot of providers that were opening licenses and especially for homes,” Tryon said when summarizing earlier results; she added the new work will focus on subsidy stability after FSKA and how policy and grant investments relate to continuous participation.

Why it matters: Stability in subsidy receipt matters because national research shows interrupted subsidy receipt can be associated with worse economic and developmental outcomes for children and families. OIAA’s analysis will test whether children who attend providers that received FSKA‑funded grants (for example, equity grants, trauma‑informed care, or facility grants) show different stability metrics than children who did not.

Preliminary demographic findings

- Age: The dataset’s first‑seen payment suggests children typically enter subsidy at about 2.8 years old. The proportion of infants and toddlers served increased in recent years compared with pre‑pandemic levels; infants remain the smallest share of subsidy recipients.

- Race/ethnicity and language: Children of color represented roughly two‑thirds of the sample (66%). The proportion of children identified as Black/African American, Hispanic/Latino, and multiracial increased over the 2018–2024 period; Spanish and other non‑English languages represented a growing share of spoken languages on file.

Stability metrics and planned analyses

Tryon and supervisor Kara Lothian described analytic options: measure most‑recent span, first span, or longest span per child; create flags when a child attended a provider that received any FSKA grant; and test whether grant‑exposed providers are associated with longer spans, fewer interruptions, or different total months in care. Tryon noted limitations: the analytic dataset captures children whose first observed payment occurs within the study window, and many pandemic‑era policies and federal stabilization grants overlap FSKA implementation, complicating causal attribution.

Questions from providers and council members

Providers asked whether interruption records include reasons (job loss, move, provider closure). Tryon said the dataset does not directly record the reason for interruptions but team members have explored proxies such as ZIP code change; she invited suggestions about useful covariates (housing instability, employment history, school‑age transitions) and said the team will try to incorporate them when feasible.

What OIAA will deliver

Tryon said the next FSKA report is due in fall 2025 and will include the subsidy stability analyses. OIAA will post the report and supplemental materials on its FSKA evaluation website and welcomes feedback on variables and analytic approaches.

Ending: OIAA asked ELAC members and providers to suggest additional covariates and flags (for example, provider grant exposure, rural/urban classification, provider type, and housing instability proxies) to strengthen forthcoming analyses and policy interpretation.