Elucidating and Dismantling the Bias Against Family, Friend, and Neighbor Care

Overview:

The R&R Network Research and Policy Team is currently working on a 3 year project funded by First 5 LA to investigate the bias that exists against family, friend, and neighbor (FFN) care in the ECE/child care field. There’s often an assumption that FFN care is lower quality than licensed care and that parents only choose it when it’s the only option available. We see the bias in the low reimbursement rates for license-exempt individuals, and the way FFN care is either excluded in conversations around a mixed delivery system, or included as an afterthought.

Existing Research:

Only 25% of children with working parents in California have a licensed child care space available to them, so we know that FFN care is ubiquitous. In conversations around child care supply and deserts, we assume that the other 75% is a gap of unmet need, but this is ignoring this very important type of care, and missing the full picture. According to the Bipartisan Policy Center, 57% of parents who use FFN care would continue to use it even if a free, local licensed space was available to them. This is a national estimate, but is important in showing that FFN care is often the first choice for families.

The assumption that FFN care is lower quality than licensed care isn’t based on robust research; the literature that does exist is scarce and uses measurements such as provider education level and number of structured activities, which are not appropriate indicators for this type of care. There are two interesting studies that have been published in the past few years: one from Tennessee, and one from Georgia. Both studies show that children who were randomly selected to attend the State’s PreK program, while better prepared academically at the start of Kindergarten, performed worse on both academic and behavioral measures after a few years. Some hypotheses for why these results occurred are that the child care arrangement the children who didn’t attend the PreK program (the control group) were in probably included a lot of child-led activities, and interactions with adults they’re close to and who love them. This isn’t to say that PreK or center-based programs are never the right setting for a child, just that it can’t be assumed that it’s best for everyone.

Project Details:

In phase I of this project, we aimed to investigate the bias that exists against FFN care in the field by first interviewing influential leaders in the ECE/child care field to assess their perceptions and beliefs about FFN care. Then, we conducted focus groups with both FFN providers and parents who relied on FFN care to see what was actually happening on the ground, and how parents perceived their child care arrangement. In phase II of this project, we uncovered the policies and systems that perpetuate the FFN bias and marginalization. As we move into phase III, we aim to initiate movement among community and coalition members to dismantle FFN bias.

As part of this research, we created a podcast called The Love Connection, where we dive deeper into child care to uncover the heart and meaning of Family, Friend, and Neighbor care. Season 1 asked, "How do you measure love?" and explored California's child care quality rating and improvement system. Season 2 challenged biased narratives about Family, Friend, and Neighbor (FFN) care through provider and parent stories. And season 3, launching September 9, 2025 looks ahead to what changes need to happen in our field to bring visibility and value to FFN Care.

For any questions, please contact research@rrnetwork.org.