mmo Blogworthy

Now in MMO: The Mothers' Movement in the United States

2008-05-25T22:30:12Z

The new issue of the Mothers Movement Online is live at last! This edition offers expanded coverage of the MMO's central topic: the objectives and progress of the mothers' movement in the United States. New content includes a moving essay by Gretchen Hunt on why Immigration is a Mother's Issue, a non-nonsense piece by Lisa Frack (of Portland, Oregon Activistas fame) on the mothers' movement's strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities, and an informative article by social work professor Arthur Emlen on working mothers' need for flexibility in multiple domains of daily life (Solving the Flexibility Puzzle). In my report and commentary, Power in a Movement, I describe recent developments in the middle-class "motherhood movement" and critique structural and conceptual gaps in the movement's expression -- and the expression of the progressive movement in general -- which are inconsistent with organizing mothers and others for effective change work. (As I explain in my Editor's Notes, I have a reputation in the mother's movement community as the person most likely to pose irritating and uncomfortable questions about the movement's organizational activities and goals. It's an unpopular job -- but someone's got to do it.)

In the Essays section, Kathleen Furin writes about the "Hot Moms" movement. While it's something of a relief to discover that moms are finally considered fuckable in the eyes of popular culture, Furin asks whether claiming our right to pursue hotness is truly a liberating trend for mothers, or simply adds a new twist to the culture of judgment and self-doubt that mothers are already subjected to (MILF: Is the Hot Moms Movement Really a Sign of Progress?). Also in Essays, returning contributor Jampa Williams offers an intensely personal account of the awakening of her opposition to the war in Iraq. Readers will also find short summaries of new resources on public policy, breastfeeding and the workplace; the real rate of economic insecurity among U.S. working families; and gender disparities in American's reports of anxiety about facing economic hardship (in Noteworthy). There are also new listings for several upcoming conferences on the Get Active page. Read and enjoy!

Now in MMO: The Mothers' Movement in the United States

2008-05-25T22:30:12Z

Another Mother's Day

2008-05-11T16:28:53Z

With all eyes on the high drama of the Democratic primary race, Mother's Day has taken a back seat in the news cycle this spring. And that's just fine with me, since I've truly come to dread the mainstream media's perverse fascination with reviving the mommy wars every year. In any case, I'm here to liberate motherhood, not to celebrate it -- and while touching human interest stories about mothers heroically overcoming overwhelming setbacks are, well, incredibly touching, the profiles in maternal courage that predictably surface in the month of May do more to idealize the magical power of maternal stamina than to highlight the reality that every mother in the United States needs and deserves more support from our society than she's getting -- and far too many of us are falling through the cracks.

]]> Mother's Day 2008 may be remembered as the first year out of many in which no big fat controversial motherhood books were published. The book drawing the most attention and criticism, Meg Wolitzer's novel, The Ten-Year Nap, seems fairly benign compared to recent non-fiction treatments of high-achieving-career-women-turned-stay-at-home-moms (see: Leslie Bennetts and Linda Hirshman). Amy Richards' new book, Opting In, looks interesting (cool cover art!) and is likely to appeal to MMO fans -- I'm looking forward to reading it when time allows. There are a number of well-intentioned books written by and for moms about how to reconcile work and family (yes! It can be done!) hitting the shelves, plus a few well-crafted motherhood memoirs, if that's your cup of tea.

The next full edition of the Mothers Movement Online -- which covers the progress of the mothers' movement in the United States -- will go live sometime next week. Meanwhile, here are a few timely links to new resources on mothering and Mother's Day.

The Save the Children Foundation released its annual report on the State of the World's Mothers. The 2008 study focuses on children's access to basic health care services and reducing mortality rates of children under 5. Among developing countries -- which account for 83 percent of child deaths -- more than 30 percent of children do not get basic health care when they need it, resulting in high death rates from treatable illnesses, particularly diarrhea and pneumonia. The report includes a must-read section on inequalities in infant survival in the industrialized world, including disproportionate rates of infant and maternal mortality among African American, America-Indian and Alaska-Native populations in the United States (don't miss the shocking graph illustrating the survival gap between African American and white infants in most of the 50 states). As in past years, the U.S. failed to place in the top-ten of the best countries for mothers and babies (the United States ranked 27th, well below Australia, New Zealand, and most EU countries). The complete report is available in .pdf; a multi-media presentation of highlights from the study is also available on the Save the Children web site.

No newsflash here for regular MMO readers: the Economic Policy Institute posted a an online fact sheet comparing paid and unpaid maternity leave benefits in wealthy countries -- and guess who comes up short? (Paid maternity leave still on the wishlist for many U.S. mothers, 7 May 08) "The United States falls two weeks short of the International Labor Organization's basic minimum standard of at least 14 weeks general leave," the authors note. The U.S. is also the only country that does not guarantee some duration of job-protected leave with income.

From the your-tax-dollars-at-work department, the U.S. Census Bureau's 2008 "Facts for Features" series offers bullet points on selected trends related to motherhood and Mother's Day in America. Mostly for entertainment value -- such as the factoid that 12,473 Americans are employed in the greeting card industry.

The Council on Contemporary Families has a new Mother's Day Fact Sheet on Day Care -- but if you've seen recent MMO summaries of the Census Bureau analysis of employment patterns of first-time mothers and the rising cost of child care, there are no big surprises here, either.

The crew over at MomsRising is recycling last year's Mother's Day eCard with the trademark Infant Aerial Stunt Team animation. It's cute and funny (if you're into cute-and-funny stuff). But given the prevalence of mother-unfriendly policies and employer practices in the United States, a condolence card might be more appropriate.

Working While Mother: Brandeis University Women’s Studies Research Center’s Mother’s Day event to focus on discrimination in the workplace

2008-04-29T16:00:36Z

The mainstream media loves to talk about "work-family balance." It tells personal stories about how hard it is to juggle deadlines and suppertimes, but rarely asks why that balance is so hard, and how it can be changed. Often, motherhood is when today’s young women first face serious job discrimination and the biases against mothers that are built into American culture, family policy and many marriages.

This inter-generational panel discussion seeks to shed light on discrimination against mothers in the workplace and focus on what can be done to change things for the better. The discussion is moderated by E.J. Graff, WSRC Resident Scholar, and participants include Dana Gershengorn, Neena Pathak (’08) and Mothers Movement Online editor Judith Stadtman Tucker.

Working While Mother: What they don’t tell you…and should
May 8, 2008, 12:30-2:00 PM
Brandeis University
Epstein Building, 515 South Street
Waltham, MA

For information, please contact Lisa Lynch, 781.736.8102 or llynch@brandeis.edu

New Jersey Senate passes family leave insurance bill

2008-04-08T18:37:16Z

After more than a decade of fierce opposition split largely along party lines, the New Jersey Senate passed a bill yesterday to provide state workers with partial wage replacement for up to six weeks of family and medical leave. Governor Jon Corzine has promised to sign the bill, which was passed by the state Assembly on March 14, making New Jersey the third state in the nation to enact paid leave legislation (California was the first, with Washington State following suit in 2007). The legislation was sponsored and tirelessly championed by State Senate Majority Leader Steve Sweeney (D-Gloucester) with grassroots support from a broad coalition of social justice, labor, and family & caregiver advocacy organizations, including New Jersey Citizen Action, ACORN, NOW NJ, National Family Caregivers Association, Mothers & More, and MomsRising. The final version of the bill passed by a 21-15 vote.

]]> The Family Leave Insurance Act will be funded by a mandatory payroll contribution from workers (average estimated cost to employees will be $33/year), and will provide up to two-thirds of weekly pay to a maximum payment of $524 a week. Family Leave Insurance funds will be administered through New Jersey's existing Temporary Disability Insurance program.

Congratulations to MMO's hard-working friends at NOW NJ, particularly Laurie Pettine, former chair of the NOW Mothers & Caregivers Economic Rights Committee, and NOW NJ President Maretta Short, who gave personal testimony in support of the bill. Kudos also to members of NJ chapters of Mothers & More who mobilized to support the legislation, and to leaders of MomsRising for organizing an email letter-writing campaign and sending their Power-of-ONEsie display to New Jersey supporters.

Now live: MMO Pregnancy & Childbirth issue

2008-03-30T18:33:43Z

The February/March edition of the Mothers Movement Online is now live and ready for your reading pleasure. In addition to my editor's notes -- in which I own up to the distractions of grassroots activism and the impact it's had on the web site's publication schedule -- the current issue features an interview with Judy Norsigian of the Boston Women's Health Book Collective on the concept for the new Our Bodies, Ourselves: Pregnancy and Birth Book, Sarah Werthan Buttenwieser's interview with childbirth educator and author Lisa Gould Rubin (who explains why it's problematic to "normalize" one particular childbirth model), and several outstanding essays, including Unforgettable, Cater-Ann Mahdavi's lucid and compassionate account of the life-altering impact of traumatic childbirth.

In the Noteworthy section, you'll find summaries of research and reports on recent fertility trends in the United States, employed mothers' child care arrangements and expenditures, American children's living arrangements in families, and a recent study from the US Census series on maternity leave and employment patterns of first-time mothers from 1961-2003. An unsurprising finding from the maternity leave report is that today's first-time mothers are older, more educated, and more likely to be employed before and during pregnancy than new mothers thirty years ago.

Also in Noteworthy, my report on the latest attempt to meddle with the Family & Medical Leave Act to give employers more control over when and how eligible workers are allowed to take FMLA leave, and a summary of a research analysis by two social scientists from the Council on Contemporary Families, who propose that rather than pointing to evidence of a stalled revolution, the slow but steady rise in men's contribution to housework and child care over the last twenty-five years should be acknowledged as significant progress toward gender equality. Yeah, I'll get right on that -- as soon as I remind my husband (again) to throw in a load of laundry while he's watching the basketball game.

The topic of the April/May issue is The Mothers Movement in the United States; submissions in all content categories are welcome -- deadline for copy is April 25. (For more information about upcoming issue topics and submission deadlines, download the 2008 Editorial Calendar).

After the dust-up over my endorsement of Barack Obama on the MMO web site, I received a supportive letter from a reader in Sydney, Australia on why electoral and local politics really do matter to the future of women and families, and why mothers need to get more involved (in Letters).

Read and enjoy.

-- JST

New policy brief on time as a resource for working families

2008-03-25T16:40:55Z

The Sloan Work and Family Research Network has released Providing Working Families with an Important Resource: Time, the latest briefing paper in a continuing series on work-life policy issues. The four-page issue brief highlights state legislative activity from 2005-2007 that enables workers to manage their work and family needs without sacrificing their mental and physical health, work responsibilities, salary, or familial responsibilities and summarizes research on how providing such resources impacts workers, businesses, and states. Although the Work and Family Research Network Policy Briefing Series was developed to educate state legislators about current social research on the benefits of implementing work-life reconciliation policies at the state level, the briefs are also an excellent source of information for advocates for caregivers and working families.

The Work and Family Research Network has also published a new compilation of state profiles on work-family policy action covering legislative activity during the 2007 session for all 50 states. The one-page profiles provide a snapshot of state workforce demographics and how each state addresses issues facing working families. All 50 Work and Family State Profiles can be accessed from an interactive, online map.

The Nation's tribute to The New Deal

2008-03-21T21:30:41Z

Progressive writers and pundits -- myself included -- have fallen into the habit of defining the suite of comprehensive health care, labor, and social insurance policies necessary to promote shared prosperity and social inclusion in America as the "Next New Deal." First and foremost, this rubric refers to the dire need to restore a collective commitment to public spending in the United States in order to foster economic and social conditions that support a functional democracy. But it also draws on the understanding that real progress demands political courage and "new" thinking -- a conscious, if not complete, rejection of political beliefs and practices that have historically exacerbated disparities in wellbeing and opportunity between the nation's haves and have-nots.

]]> FDR's New Deal was not perfect -- even for its time, New Deal policies and programs did not do nearly enough to relieve racial inequalities in economic opportunity and access to basic services, and ultimately hindered the advancement of women by institutionalizing the male family wage. But it was no less visionary for its flaws, and to date The New Deal is the first, best example of how innovative public policy can rapidly improve the quality of life for a majority of Americans.

This week, The Nation magazine offers a tribute to the New Deal on its 75th anniversary (Toward a New New Deal, published online on March 20). The forum offers perspectives from a round-up of progressive luminaries, including Bill McKibben, Howard Zinn, Andy Stern, and the Rev. Jesse Jackson. I was especially struck by the essay by Frances Moore Lappé, who writes:

"Given the New Deal's powerful grounding in freedom and the striking advances it ushered in for most Americans, why was the right able to reverse the New Deal in just one generation? Perhaps the answer is that the New Deal failed to instill an understanding of democracy as more than a particular structure of government, more than a set of laws protecting our freedoms. Enduring, effective democracy isn't something we have that's finished; it's what we do that's always unfolding. Democracy is a particular culture, a system of values--fairness, inclusion and mutual accountability--that empowered citizens learn to infuse in all dimensions of our common life…In other words, to save the democracy we thought we had, we must now take democracy to where it's never been."

That sounds about right. Did I ever mention that one of my great woman heroes is Frances Perkins? If you don't know who she was and what she accomplished, it might be a good Women's History Month project to look her up.

NWLC: Proposed FY'09 budget shortchanges women and children

2008-02-16T18:09:40Z

An analysis by the National Women's Law Center of spending cuts included in the Bush administration's proposed FY'09 budget finds that "The President’s budget seeks to cut health care, nutrition and energy assistance for low-income families, violence against women programs, and social services for vulnerable families:"

]]> It under funds child care, Head Start, and children’s health insurance. At the same time, the budget proposes to expand and make permanent tax cuts for the very wealthy, at a cost the Administration puts at $2.1 trillion over ten years (but the Congressional Budget Office estimates at $4.3 trillion). The Administration’s focus on cutting programs and expanding tax cuts comes even though the worsening economy has exposed the precarious position of millions of Americans.

Although not mentioned in the NWLC press release, the President's budget also allocates a $28.1 million increase for abstinence education spending, while cutting $80.65 million in funding to USAID Child Survival and Maternal Health Programs which have aided "significant reductions" in maternal and infant mortality in developing countries.

WPI reports on Senate FMLA hearing

2008-02-16T18:03:30Z

On February 13, the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Subcommittee on Children and Families held a hearing on the past success and future challenges of the Family and Medical Leave Act. A report from The Source newsletter (published by Women's Policy, Inc., a non-profit organization that tracks women's issues in Congress) highlights testimony by Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT), Victoria Lipnic of the Department of Labor, Deborah Ness of the National Partnership for Women and Families, and Katheryn Elliot on behalf of the Society for Human Resources Management, a business-friendly professional association.

]]> Proposed changes to current FMLA regulations were a topic of discussion at the hearing (although the hearing was not scheduled specifically to debate the merits of regulatory changes -- the Labor Department only released full details of its proposal on February 11, and policy analysts from the National Partnership are currently reviewing the text). The day's testimony both confirmed and reflected the concerns of advocates for working families that the new regulations would further limit the ability of workers to take FMLA leave when they need it. As Deborah Ness remarked:

"While the anniversary and expansion of the FMLA are cause for celebration, we are also very concerned for the vitality of the law given that the Department of Labor is proposing new FMLA regulations…the FMLA is working well. It does not need any significant regulatory changes. Rather, we should be looking at how we can expand it so more workers can realize its promise of job-protected leave in times of need...The Department has devoted a great deal of its 2007 report to the use of intermittent unscheduled leave and the problems employers claim to have with this part of the FMLA, and we fully expect that this will be an issue in the Department’s proposed regulatory changes. But because it has not surveyed employers or employees on this issue since 2000, the Department’s analysis was based heavily on anecdotes and self-reporting from employers regarding the use of unscheduled intermittent leave. The data, however, shows that unscheduled intermittent leave is a very small part of the leave taken under the FMLA and that the vast majority of FMLA-covered establishments do not have any problem with unscheduled intermittent leave.”

The full story is available on the WPI web site. Subscription to The Source newsletter is free, and highly recommended for activists and advocates interested in federal action on issues affecting women, children, and families.

Only in the US: The perplexing case of missing maternity coverage

2008-02-14T17:09:11Z

There's an important story from Newhouse News Service out today which reports on the common practice among private insurers to exclude maternity coverage from individual policies. "Large group plans generally include maternity coverage as a matter of course. But small group plans and individual policyholders may not because it adds too much to the monthly premiums," Regina McEnery reports. This is dismal news for single mothers-to-be by choice or chance who are self-insured or covered by a group policy that excludes maternity coverage for individual policy holders.

]]> What generally happens when women face barriers to getting affordable prenatal care is that they try to do without. Have I mentioned lately that the United States has one of the highest rates of maternal mortality, and the highest rate of infant mortality, among industrialized nations? Or that there are significant racial disparities in the percentage of mothers who receive early prenatal care? And that in 2006, the Save the Children Foundation ranked the US the worst place to be a mother among wealthy Western nations based on health, economic, and social indicators? Are you really surprised?

Maternity Coverage Often Missing From Insurance Policies
Newhouse News, Feb 14 2008

In a single day, US domestic violence programs served 53,304

2008-02-08T19:26:20Z

The 2007 National Census of Domestic Violence Services -- which collected reports on the delivery and demand for services in a single 24-hour period from 69 percent of identified domestic violence programs in the US -- found that in one day, 53,303 domestic violence victims received services from local programs, while over 7,000 requests for services were not met due to staff and funding shortages. Approximately 61 percent of unmet requests were for emergency shelter and transitional housing.

]]> Of the individuals receiving services, more than 25,000 adults and children were housed in emergency shelters or transitional housing, and nearly 28,000 adults and children received non-residential services, including individual counseling, legal advocacy, and children’s support groups. Domestic violence hotlines across the country answered a total of 20,528 calls -- an average of 14 calls a minute.

"Given the dangerous and potentially lethal nature of many victims' circumstances," the report concludes

…insufficient funding of domestic violence programs and services should be acknowledged as a serious barrier to those seeking help and safety. Domestic violence programs across the country struggle every day to serve victims who contact them. However, the reality is that with limited resources, funding and staffing, these programs are unable to meet the needs of every victim who calls or comes to their doors seeking help.

The Bush administration's proposed FY'09 Federal Budget includes a $120 million funding cut from the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), and maintains the Family Violence Prevention Services Act at the current level of $122.6 million -- $52 million less than the authorized amount.

Now in its second year, the national domestic violence services census is a project of the National Network to End Domestic Violence. More results from the 2007 survey are available in the national summary and full report. A chart of service delivery and demand for each state and territory is also available on the NNEDV web site.

Feminism, women, and the vote

2008-02-06T17:16:15Z

AlterNet posted a series of interesting and intelligent perspectives on feminism, women, and the vote yesterday -- and I'm not saying that just because I wrote one of the pieces. (For the record, the original headline I submitted was "Trust Women?: What If We Elect the First Woman President of the United States, and She Sucks?) What's enlightening about the articles -- which include commentaries from Laura Flanders of The Nation and Kimberle Williams Crenshaw with Eve Ensler, plus an excellent overview of the points of conflict by Jill Filipovic -- is that each writer questions the feminist "mandate" to vote for Hillary from a different angle, but all call for a more nuanced understanding of feminist values and goals.

]]> Flanders offers a particularly unsparing account of Clinton's actual record on promoting the welfare of women and families, criticizing the candidate's support for trade policies which encourage "a global sweatshop economy that has all but eradicated the right to unionize in most of the world," and her endorsement of the 1996 Personal Responsibility Act (aka "Welfare-to-Work"). "Clinton writes in her autobiography 'Living History' that she would have opposed her husband over welfare reform if she thought it would hurt young children," Flanders writes. "One wonders what she thinks happens to kids in poor working and over-working families." Flanders adds that welfare reform -- and Hillary's failure to push back on legislation opposed by child welfare advocates -- was more about assuring Bill Clinton's re-election than meeting the needs of the poor, leading to her most damning observation:

And that's the saddening, shaming part of Clinton's record -- and the part that reminds me just how often white middle class women have advanced our own fortunes at the expense of other women.

Crenshaw and Ensler go after the camp they describe as "either/or" feminists:

In seeking to corral wayward souls into the Hillary Clinton camp, the new players of this troubling game are no longer the hawkish Republicans but 'either/or' feminists determined to see to it that a woman occupies the Oval Office. Drawing their feminist boundaries in the sand, they interrogate, chastise, second-guess and even denounce those who escape their encampment and find themselves on Obama terrain. In their hands feminism, like patriotism, is the all-encompassing prism that eliminates discussion, doubt and difference about whom to vote for and why. Armed with indignant exasperation, this 'either/or' camp converts the undeniable misogyny of the media into an imperative to vote for Clinton. The balanced reflections and gentle warnings that were voiced months ago have been jettisoned for a one-sided brief about why voting for Clinton is the only sensible thing for women to do.

"For us, the choice at hand is actually quite simple," Crenshaw and Ensler conclude. "It is not about the woman candidate vs. the Black male candidate. It is about the candidate who works to dismantle the bomb, rather than drop it; the candidate who works to abolish the old paradigm of power, rather than covet and rise to its highest point; the candidate who seeks solutions and dialogue rather than retaliation and punishment."

Also concurrent on the AlterNet site is Robin Morgan's nearly incomprehensible, stream of consciousness diatribe echoing Gloria Steinem's sentiment that sexism matters more than racism in the oppression of people -- at least if they happen to be presidential material -- because the media and public consistently overlook bald-faced sexism but overt racism evokes moral outrage. In her opening paragraphs, Morgan implies that JFK was directly responsible for Marilyn Monroe's suicide (so Ted Kennedy's endorsement of Obama doesn't really count, but Kathleen Kennedy Townsend's endorsement of Clinton is evidence of better judgment) and extrapolates that tasteless humor at Clinton's expense (she cites "If only Hillary had married OJ instead" t-shirts and an episode of the perennially sophomoric "Southpark" in which Clinton's vagina had a leading role) is not merely "Hillary-Hating," but "sociopathic woman-hating." In this, Morgan seems to forget that unlike Hillary Clinton, most women are not public figures who have attracted an equal share of sycophantic supporters and vicious detractors. I submit that those who live to revile Hillary do so mostly because of who she is and her position in the political limelight, not mainly because of her sex; if Clinton had the kind of anonymous life that most American wives and mothers lead, it's doubtful she would be a target for anything more offensive than the low-grade misogyny that most women experience every day. And I'm not proposing that any level of misogyny or violence against women is acceptable -- it's not. But most women will go through life without attracting the kind of high-intensity negative scrutiny that Clinton has.

Morgan further decries a political climate in which the candidates have to "pass as white" (Obama) or "pass as male" (Clinton) because "both men and women demanded it of her." We did? Well, OK…but, WTF? And let me say that I've had it with the lame suggestion that women who support Obama aren't voting for Hillary because they don't find her "likeable" -- although it's entirely possible that some women won't vote Hillary because they don't like her, in the same way that some women don't like George W. Bush (and perhaps for some of the same reasons).

But the thing that really has me steamed about Morgan's essay was her mindless dismissal of younger women's values and politics, and the suggestion that women's progress has stalled because younger women are fearful of claiming their own power. Excuse me, but if Morgan's intention is to enumerate negative stereotypes about gender and power, let's start by addressing the sick fiction that Generation Y is overpopulated with "young women eager to win male approval by showing they're not feminists (at least not the kind who actually threaten the status quo), who can't identify with a woman candidate because she actually is unafraid of eeueweeeu yucky power, who fear their boyfriends might look at them funny if they say something good about her." (If that's what rooting for the "sisterhood" looks like, count me out.)

Here's another possibility: perhaps young women are hesitant to self-identify as feminists because they don't relate to the unintelligible dogma churned out by folks like Morgan. Indeed, Morgan seems to be feeling the fading power of the narrow-band ideology that galvanized her own generation of feminists four decades ago ("How dare anyone claim to unify while dividing, or think that to rouse U.S. youth from torpor it's useful to triage the single largest demographic in this country's history: the boomer generation -- the majority of which is female?"). In taking a defensive position, she resorts to the same kind of reflexive posturing and bullying tone undermined the women's unity and activism during the Second Wave.

I tend to believe that all this is good for the women's movement (such as it is). At the very least, this contentious debate is likely to draw out some new leaders who fall on the side of what Ellen Bravo defines as "social justice feminism."

Most states fail to protect children in family home day care settings

2008-02-03T17:17:22Z

Child care provided in family home child care settings is one of the largest segments of the child care industry, with nearly two million U.S. children spending time in family home-based care each week. According to a new analysis of state regulations to promote the safety and quality of family home care, most states are dropping the ball on protecting the health and development of young children in home care settings.

]]> A report and state scorecard published in late January by the National Association of Child Care Resource & Referral Agencies (NACCRRA) found that no state met more than 75 percent of optimal standards for regulation and oversight of family home care, with Oklahoma, Washington State, and Massachusetts receiving the highest scores. States were evaluated on 14 separate measures, including frequency and type of monitoring visits, background check requirements, provider education and training, quality of learning environment, group size limitations, and health and safety requirements for family home care settings serving six or fewer children.

The average state score was 59 out of a possible 140 points, and fifteen states -- including Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Ohio, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Virginia -- have no regulations assuring the safety and quality of family home care. Linda K. Smith, Executive Director of NACCRRA, states in a related press release that family home care settings "are really small businesses being run out of homes. With the security of nearly two million children at risk, it is crucial that states revisit and improve their regulations." The report recommends that Congress require comprehensive background checks for all adult child care providers who care for one or more unrelated children, and that the federal government withhold a portion of Child Care Block Grant funds from states with insufficient policies and oversight.

To find out how your state scored or to read the full report, follow the link below:

Leaving Children To Chance:
NACCRRA's Ranking of State Standards and Oversight of Small Family Child Care Homes
January 2008

NACCRRA has also added a fabulous interactive map with up-to-date facts and figures on child care needs and costs in each state -- read it and weep!

NWLC offers new fact sheets on tax credits for working families

2008-02-02T21:48:05Z

Tax credits can provide thousands of dollars to families struggling to make ends meet, but many low-income families don't benefit from child care and family tax credits simply because they don't know the credits exist. The National Women's Law Center has created a set of tax credit fact sheets for child care advocates and family service professionals to distribute in their communities. Online resources for parents are also available. Revised to reflect 2008 tax codes, the latest fact sheets include flyers on state credits in English, Spanish and other languages, information about federal tax credits, and a tool kit to help agencies and advocates develop a community tax credit outreach plan. All materials are available from the NWLC web site's Tax Credits Outreach page.

Find out about the family tax credits available in your state.