More than half the caseload of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program consists of child-only cases, in which a child receives TANF cash assistance but the parent or caregiver does not. The most common type of child-only case is a nonparent caregiver case, consisting of children being cared for by someone other than their parents, often a grandparent. Research suggests that nonparent caregiver cases are often vulnerable with many unmet needs and that the children in these cases share characteristics with children living in foster care: mental health conditions, school-related problems, and experience with trauma. Kinship navigator programs can be an important tool for supporting these families. Most states are developing or expanding these programs, and the federal government has provided funding in fiscal years 2018 and 2019 to state and eligible tribal child welfare agencies to develop, enhance, or evaluate kinship navigator programs. The Family First Prevention Services Act amended the Social Security Act to allow title IV-E agencies to receive funding for kinship navigator programs that meet certain evidence-based criteria; see ACYF-CB-PI-18-11 for program requirements.

On July 16, 2019, the Office of Family Assistance, in collaboration with the Children’s Bureau, sponsored a webinar that featured kinship navigator programs operating in three states and the services they offer to nonparent caregivers. Arizona Kinship Support Services connects kinship families to government benefits, links them to legal services, and helps them navigate existing community support systems. California’s UWCA-211-iFoster Kinship Navigator Collaborative provides an online, self-service resource portal for kinship families that coordinates public and private resources based on the families’ individual needs and preferences. The New York State Kinship Navigator provides an information and referral network for kinship caregivers statewide. In addition to these three states, the webinar featured a representative from the Children’s Bureau who discussed the federal funding available for kinship navigator programs and a representative from the Assisting Special Populations to Improve Readiness and Engagement (ASPIRE) study team who shared information on TANF child-only cases.

This blogpost, authored by the Assistant Secretary of the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), describes the 10 listening sessions that ACF held nationally among key stakeholders to address family homelessness. These stakeholders, who provided input on the latest trends and local innovative programs, included parents with homelessness experience, grantee and non-grantee service providers, faith-based partners, educators, and government leaders. Five of ACF’s program offices either directly focus on homelessness or offer services and resources to move families from homelessness towards self-sufficiency and include: the Office of Head Start, the Family and Youth Services Bureau, the Office of Child Care, the Office of Family Assistance, and the Children’s Bureau.

This Urban Institute report uses the Analysis of Transfers, Taxes, and Income Security (ATTIS) microsimulation model to examine potential funding expansion under the federal Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF). The analysis suggests that the CCDF has enough funding for only a portion of eligible families under the program. The study identifies the potential increase in the number of families who might receive subsidies, as well as the reduction in the number of children living in poverty as more parents would be able to work and experience increases in household income.

This Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation literature review looks at research studies on the stability of Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) child care subsidies. The review features the importance of stability in using CCDF subsidies, since breaks in receiving the subsidy due to a parent’s job loss, income change, or paperwork difficulties can interrupt child care arrangements.

This Urban Institute brief identifies challenges to accessing child care for parents who engage in education and training. An overview of state eligibility requirements under the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) for low-income families pursuing education and training is presented. The brief is premised on how lack of child care is a barrier to undertaking workforce development activities.

This National Conference of State Legislatures blogpost identifies state initiatives and model programs that support early education and child care. Highlighted are initiatives on parental leave programs; home visiting; improving infant and toddler child care supply and quality; well-being and developmental physical and mental health screenings for 9-, 18-, and 30-month-olds; and child care funding and early education subsidies.

Family engagement has been identified as a key factor in children’s early learning and development at a cognitive and social level. Since few ways exist for early care and education (ECE) programs to determine the strength of family engagement supports and to identify areas for improvement, the Georgia Family Engagement Assessment and Planning Tool (FEAP-T) was developed. This National Center for Children in Poverty report presents findings from a FEAP-T pilot, suggests that the FEAP-T be revised, and highlights ways a revised tool could help strengthen family engagement practices in Georgia’s ECE programs.

This Child Trends blog post illustrates how family engagement is now being recognized as falling along a continuum of services that support children’s development. The authors distinguish between home visiting, which works more with parents to improve outcomes for their children, and early child care and education that is more child-focused. The use of a family engagement continuum addresses these complementary roles that center on communications and how we engage families to set and achieve child and family goals.

This Center for Law and Social Policy report identifies challenges that state level officials encounter in implementing the 2014 reauthorization of the Child Care and Development Block Grant program. State profiles from Alabama, California, and Louisiana are highlighted. Also presented are lessons learned as a result of the lack of resources and data needed to implement the law more effectively.

This Urban Institute research brief offers a set of demographic data and definitions that addresses misconceptions about the reach of U.S. safety net programs. In particular, the analysis distinguishes between “means tested” and universally received benefit programs and those supports that are received monthly compared to those received annually. Programs outlined and reviewed in this report are SNAP; Supplemental Security Income; TANF cash assistance; public or subsidized housing; Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children; and the Child Care and Development Fund.