Campus Access Only

All rights reserved. This publication is intended for use solely by faculty, students, and staff of University of the Pacific. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, now known or later developed, including but not limited to photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the author or the publisher.

Date of Award


Document Type


Degree Name

Doctor of Education (Ed.D.)


Graduate School

First Advisor

Sandra Anselmo

First Committee Member

Barbara Tardif

Second Committee Member

Esther Cohen

Third Committee Member

Robert R. Hopkins

Fourth Committee Member

Roger Reimer


PURPOSE: Licensed family day care providers in two northern California counties were surveyed to ascertain their views about current licensing regulations and four alternatives. The resulting data can be used by the legislature, the licensing agencies, and other groups involved in planning for improvement and expansion of child care services. PROCEDURES: Opinion statements were written which contained key elements of the present licensing system and four alternatives. Part I of a questionnaire was c·omposed of these statements. Part II consisted of five items which solicited demographic data which could be related to views on regulatory issues. The questionnaire was pilot tested in Stockton, California and item reliability was established by use of the test-retest technique. A sample population of 620 licensed providers from twO counties were asked to participate in this study, of which 343 usable questionnaires were returned. This represented a 57% response return. CONCLUSIONS: The data indicated the typical respondent to be between 30-39 with some college education. This person had been in business from 3-5 years and cared for 5 children. Day care fees contributed 26-50% to the total family income. The majority of providers favored a highly regulated system which attempted to protect the health and safety of children. The four alternatives were viewed as unacceptable by the providers. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. The state should institute a responsive complaint process and organize a campaign to enlist the aid of parents in protecting their children. A survey of. parents should be undertaken to determine their knowledge of a)quality standards and b)available state resources to whom to turn for help. 3. The needs and purposes of inspections should be reassessed. 4. An examination of unlicensed providers' views on current regulations and alternatives should be forthcoming. 5. A regulatory model is presented. This model offers incentives to those providers presently licensed and encourages those unlicensed to join the regulated network.



Included in

Education Commons