V. Public Dilemma: Who Needs Child Care? Who Needs Support?Table V–3. <strong>Children</strong> With All Present Parents <strong>in</strong> Labor Force, 2000 CensusN & NW West S & SWN & NW C & W S & SW Suburban Suburban Suburban<strong>Children</strong> Chicago Chicago Chicago Cook Cook Cook<strong>Children</strong> Under 6 Years 41,778 26,678 56,394 51,614 23,105 38,38653% 49% 56% 55% 53% 61%Table V-4. Estimate of Unserved <strong>Children</strong><strong>Children</strong> Eligible <strong>for</strong> Child Care Assistance But Not Receiv<strong>in</strong>g ItCalculated from 2000 Census and Ill<strong>in</strong>ois Child Care Assistance Program June 2009 dataN & NW West S & SWN & NW C & W S & SW Suburban Suburban Suburban<strong>Children</strong> Chicago Chicago Chicago Cook Cook CookUnder 3 Years 6,761 5,687 7,975 3,135 1,562 1,099Ages 3-5 5,645 5,016 7,804 3,052 1,560 926Ages 6-12 18,103 19,255 34,245 11,402 6,504 9,758Total: 30,509 29,958 50,023 17,589 9,626 11,783Cook County Total: 149,489C. CHILDREN ELIGIBLEFOR BUT WITHOUT CHILDCARE ASSISTANCEFor a family to be eligible <strong>for</strong> CCAP,every parent present <strong>in</strong> the homeneeds to be work<strong>in</strong>g, 19 and family<strong>in</strong>come can be no higher than 200percent of the federal poverty level<strong>for</strong> a family of its size. We havelooked at <strong>child</strong>ren <strong>in</strong> families thatare <strong>in</strong>come-eligible <strong>in</strong> Tables V-1and V-2 above, as well as <strong>child</strong>renunder age 6 with all present parents<strong>in</strong> the labor <strong>for</strong>ce <strong>in</strong> Table V-3 above.This section takes the analysis to itslogical next step: comb<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g the twoto estimate the number of <strong>child</strong>ren<strong>in</strong> the six regions of Cook Countywho are eligible <strong>for</strong> CCAP but donot receive it. 20Table V-4 presents these estimates<strong>for</strong> the different age groups andregions. We estimate that <strong>in</strong> anygiven month, 14 percent of CookCounty <strong>child</strong>ren ages 12 and under(149,489 <strong>child</strong>ren) live <strong>in</strong> familiesthat are eligible <strong>for</strong> but do notreceive CCAP support. About20 percent of Chicago <strong>child</strong>ren are<strong>in</strong> this group of unserved <strong>child</strong>ren,while the suburban Cook Countyportion is 8 percent.Do all of these <strong>child</strong>ren have anunmet need <strong>for</strong> <strong>child</strong> <strong>care</strong>? Wecannot suppose that the parents ofevery eligible <strong>child</strong> would chooseto use CCAP even if it were offeredto them. Some parents might preferto have a relative <strong>care</strong> <strong>for</strong> the <strong>child</strong>(with little or no payment); someparents might not be able to f<strong>in</strong>d a<strong>child</strong> <strong>care</strong> provider to match theiroff-hour or chang<strong>in</strong>g work schedules;others might not be able toaf<strong>for</strong>d to pay a provider even if theyreceive Assistance; some parentsmay stagger their work schedules<strong>in</strong> order to share car<strong>in</strong>g <strong>for</strong> their<strong>child</strong>ren; and yet others may haveenrolled <strong>child</strong>ren <strong>in</strong> an educationalprogram such as Head Start orIll<strong>in</strong>ois Preschool <strong>for</strong> All and aresatisfied with those hours of <strong>care</strong>.The figures <strong>in</strong> Table V-4, then,should be seen as an upper endof a range rather than an on-targetestimate of unmet need <strong>for</strong> CCAPsupport. 21 We can say that asmany as 149,489 <strong>child</strong>ren <strong>in</strong> CookCounty eligible <strong>for</strong> CCA are notus<strong>in</strong>g it.We should note that this estimatehas important limitations. The estimateis based on 2000 Censusdata on families and <strong>child</strong>ren. Itdoes not capture changes <strong>in</strong> <strong>child</strong>population and family <strong>in</strong>come (thatis, changes <strong>in</strong> eligibility <strong>for</strong> CCAP)over the last n<strong>in</strong>e years.27
The 2010 Report of Child Care <strong>in</strong> Cook CountyPUBLIC DILEMMASThe work<strong>in</strong>g mother of three <strong>child</strong>ren <strong>in</strong>troduced earlier <strong>in</strong> this report, Candace Thomas, rema<strong>in</strong>s <strong>in</strong>eligible <strong>for</strong>CCAP. If she earned just $200 less, she would be eligible. Yet, the State of Ill<strong>in</strong>ois recently expanded thenumber of families eligible <strong>for</strong> CCAP and has room to expand further under the federal <strong>child</strong> <strong>care</strong> block grant.Should the state do this?Candace pays about $12,700 of her $44,800 annual salary <strong>for</strong> <strong>child</strong> <strong>care</strong> <strong>in</strong> a licensed home, more than28 percent of her <strong>in</strong>come, while the national average spent on <strong>child</strong> <strong>care</strong> is about 7 percent.* Do Candaceand her <strong>child</strong>ren deserve <strong>child</strong> <strong>care</strong> support? If so, does she deserve as much as the $9,564 <strong>in</strong> CCAPsupport that would reduce her <strong>child</strong> <strong>care</strong> expenditure to 7 percent of her <strong>in</strong>come? Does she deserve theadditional $22,000 that would put her <strong>child</strong>ren <strong>in</strong> high quality educational sett<strong>in</strong>gs?Should the only realistic option available to the couple <strong>in</strong>troduced earlier, Gabrielle and Shawn Harris, belicense-exempt <strong>care</strong>?Ill<strong>in</strong>ois policy makers, of course, face a dilemma <strong>in</strong> balanc<strong>in</strong>g fund<strong>in</strong>g <strong>for</strong> Child Care Assistance with fund<strong>in</strong>g<strong>for</strong> other items, such as improv<strong>in</strong>g education and health <strong>in</strong>surance <strong>for</strong> <strong>child</strong>ren. And with<strong>in</strong> CCAP itself, theState must also balance two goals: <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g the number of families that receive CCAP support and <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>gthe amount of assistance that goes to <strong>in</strong>dividual families already <strong>in</strong> the program.**While others may disagree, most <strong>child</strong> <strong>care</strong> advocates believe that the State of Ill<strong>in</strong>ois can contribute more toboth sides of the balance without threaten<strong>in</strong>g the public treasury even <strong>in</strong> hard times. Not only are expenditureson CCAP an effective economic stabilizer that helps prevent unemployment, but as an <strong>in</strong>vestment <strong>in</strong> a work<strong>in</strong>gmother and her <strong>child</strong>ren, it helps her work to her full productive potential and prevents the social isolationof <strong>child</strong>ren that makes them more at-risk.Support<strong>in</strong>g work<strong>in</strong>g families and promot<strong>in</strong>g early education strengthens our work<strong>for</strong>ce and better preparesour <strong>child</strong>ren <strong>for</strong> success as adults.* Like many work<strong>in</strong>g parents, she may also be eligible <strong>for</strong> a very modest <strong>child</strong> <strong>care</strong> <strong>in</strong>come tax credit.** Either way, an <strong>in</strong>crease would go directly to a <strong>child</strong> <strong>care</strong> provider and affect the quality of <strong>care</strong> that provider can offer.28