FPG Snapshot, FPG Child Development Institute, University of North Carolina
at Chapel Hill. (2006).

The Multi-State Study of Pre-Kindergarten “is based on data collected from 240 state-funded pre-k programs in Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Ohio, and regions of California (Los Angeles and Central Valley) and New York (New York City and Albany).  Of all 4-year-olds attending State pre-k programs in the U.S., about half are in these six States.  For this study, ‘pre-k’ applies to center-based programs for 4-year-olds that are fully or partially funded by state education agencies and that are operated in schools or under the direction of state and local education agencies.  Within each State, a sample of 40 centers/schools was selected at random.  One classroom in each center/school was selected at random for observation, and four children in each classroom were selected for individual assessment (language, literacy, and number skills).  Data collection tracked children from the beginning of pre-k through first grade.”  The Snapshot summarizes major findings about children and Pre-K teachers in the study and the study’s examination of classroom quality.
The Snapshot: http://www.fpg.unc.edu/news/fpg_snapshot_detail.cfm?ID=562&go=archive
For more information on the Multi-State Study of Pre-Kindergarten:
http://www.fpg.unc.edu/%7Encedl/pages/pre-k_study.cfm

Local School Readiness Evaluations
Regional Educational Laboratory Southeast at SERVE Center,
University of North Carolina, Greensboro. (2007).
G. Brown, C. Scott-Little, L. Amwake, & L. Wynn
Prepared for the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education

“This report provides detailed information about the methods and instruments used to evaluate school readiness initiatives, discusses important considerations in selecting instruments, and provides resources and recommendations that may be helpful to those who are designing and implementing school readiness evaluations.”
Full text:   http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/projects/project.asp?id=64

A Science-Based Framework for Early Childhood Policy:  Using Evidence to Improve Outcomes in Learning, Behavior, and Health for Vulnerable Children
Center on the Developing Child, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts (2007).
National Forum on Early Childhood Program Evaluation
and National Scientific Council on the Developing Child

“This paper builds on a process of systematic analysis that began with the publication in 2000 of a landmark report by the National Academy of Sciences entitled From Neurons to Neighborhoods: The Science of Early Childhood Development, followed by the ongoing work of the National Scientific Council on the Developing Child and the National Forum on Early Childhood Program Evaluation, both of which are based at the Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University.  These groups of scientists and scholars engage in active debate about what the rapidly advancing biological and social sciences do and do not say about early childhood, brain development, and the impact of intervention programs.  As agreement is reached on each issue, the groups integrate findings across disciplines and communicate this integrated information to policymakers and civic leaders to bring accurate knowledge to bear on public decision-making aimed at enhancing children’s learning, behavior, and health. . . . Four decades of program evaluation research point to a number of factors that can enhance positive development in the first five years of life.”  This paper discusses these effectiveness factors in the context of the science of program evaluation.
Full text – Scroll down and also see related papers on this page:
http://www.developingchild.harvard.edu/content/publications.html
From Neurons to Neighborhoods (2000) is available for purchase at:
http://fermat.nap.edu/catalog/9824.html?onpi_newsdoc100300


Addressing the Needs of Latino Children:
A National Survey of State Administrators of Early Childhood Programs

Nuestros Niños/Our Children, A Project of the FGP Child Development Institute, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. (2004).

This executive summary presents the results of a national survey of 117 State administrators of early childhood programs in 48 states and the District of Columbia to examine specific challenges, strategies, and beliefs around serving Latino children (birth to 5) and their families.  The four types of programs included child care, Head Start, Part B-Section 619 preschool programs for children with disabilities, and Part C Infant-Toddler programs for children with developmental delays or at-risk conditions.  All four groups reported the lack of Latino or bilingual professionals and the lack of sufficient staff preparation and training as the most urgent challenges in serving the Latino population. . . . Taken together, the findings from this study contribute new knowledge about the specific linguistically and culturally appropriate practices that State administrators report are recommended or being used by early education and intervention programs serving Latino children and families.  Ideally,  these findings will serve as a springboard for future research and planning to  address both the immediate needs and long-term goals related to serving Latino  children and families in early childhood programs.
Executive summary:
http://www.fpg.unc.edu/~nuestros/pages/products.cfm?tab=prod

National Council of La Raza, Washington DC. (2007).   M. Calderón.

“This report concludes that investing in high-quality, comprehensive early childhood education programs could help narrow the growing school readiness gap between Latino and other children.  The report also makes a series of recommendations for policy-makers to improve the quality of life and school readiness for Latino children in the U.S.”
Full text:   http://www.nclr.org/content/publications/detail/45609/

Building Blocks:  Making Children Successful in the Early Years of School
Palgrave Macmillan, New York City. (2006).  G. Maeroff.

“Building Blocks offers a concrete and groundbreaking approach for early education. It looks at the period from pre-kindergarten through third grade (PK-3) as a unified period of schooling. . . . Replete with classroom descriptions, anecdotes, and interviews, this book paints a rich portrait of American education.  It is the product of two years of work during which Maeroff visited schools in more than a dozen States — from Massachusetts to California, from Indiana to Texas.  It is a book for parents, educators, policymakers, and readers of public affairs topics.”
For purchase:
http://www.palgrave-usa.com/catalog/product.aspx?isbn=1403969949

Building on the Promise:  State Initiatives to Expand Access to Early Head Start for Young Children
and Their Families
Center for Law and Social Policy and Zero to Three, Washington DC.  (2008).
R. Schumacker & E. DiLauro

This report “draws on newly conducted research on State efforts to expand or enhance access to Early Head Start services for infants, toddlers and their families.  The federal Early Head Start program was created to help minimize the disparities caused by poverty by supporting the healthy development of expectant mothers and low-income infants and toddlers in the context of their families and communities.  However, less than 3 percent of babies and toddlers who are eligible for Early Head Start are currently being reached.  This report is an in-depth study of current State initiatives to build upon Early Head Start, and includes an analysis of the lessons learned from State experiences, as well as recommendations to help other States expand the reach of Early Head Start.”
Overview and click for full text – also see profiles of State initiatives:
http://www.zerotothree.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ter_pub_early_headstart#building


Caring for Infants and Toddlers
The Future of Children. (2001).  R. E. Behrman & M. B. Larner (Eds.).
Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University and The Brookings Institution, Washington DC.

Caring for Our Children --  National Health and Safety Performance Standards: Guidelines for Out-of-Home Child Care (Second Edition).
American Academy of Pediatrics and American Public Health Association. (2002).
Distributed by the National Resource Center for Health and Safety in Child Care, University of Colorado Health Science Center at Fitzsimons.

This document presents a comprehensive set of health and safety standards.  “In the years  since the first edition (1992) was published, the interest in and the enrollment of young children in early childhood education programs has increased not only in the United States but also in other nations in the world. . . . The revision of the standards for the second edition was an extensive process.  Ten technical panels focused on their particular subject matter areas, after which time their recommendations were merged into a single set of recommended standards and widely reviewed by representatives of all stakeholders with an interest in child care, including parents. The final document represents a consensus of the various disciplines involved with child care, with the largest contribution of factual content coming from experts in health and safety.”
Full text:   http://nrc.uchsc.edu/CFOC/index.html
Also see Stepping Stones to Using Caring for Our Children – Available in English and Spanish:
http://nrc.uchsc.edu/STEPPING/index.htm


Child  Abuse and Neglect -- Guide for Prevention, Assessment, and Intervention:
User Manual Series
Child Welfare Information Gateway, Children’s Bureau, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2003-2006).

“The Child Abuse and Neglect User Manual Series provides guidance on identifying, preventing, and effectively responding to child maltreatment.  Revisions to the series began in 2000 to address new issues and significant changes that have occurred in the service delivery systems for children and families.”.
Full texts -- Click on New and Revised Child Abuse and Neglect User Manuals:   
http://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/usermanual.cfm
Also see  Child Abuse and Neglect Fatalities: Statistics and Interventions -- Numbers and Trends (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2008):
http://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/factsheets/fatality.cfm


Child Care Works:  Research to Practice CD-ROM

Child Care Bureau, Administration for Children and Families,
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2006).

This resource “engages users in examining selected issues critical to improving the quality of child care from Federal, State, and Tribal perspectives.  The CD-ROM is organized by several themes (a) Social and Emotional Development, (b) Work and Family, (c) Systems to Improve Quality, (d) Assessment and Evaluation, and (e) Provider Training Models -- and includes video clips, as well as key points, resources, and discussion questions to facilitate critical thinking and discussion among key stakeholders on each topic.  The CD-ROM is a training and professional development resource for early care and education policymakers, training and technical assistance providers, and program administrators.”
Available at no cost – Order online at:
http://www.ccb-cmc.org/childcareworkscd/



“This paper describes the development of a multipart assessment of kindergarten readiness for the State of Vermont.  The approach described reflects emerging consensus around the appropriate domains of development to include in child assessments, as well as the need to assess schools’ readiness for young children and their families.  The approach differs from some States’ approaches, however, in its emphasis on readiness data for purposes of community-level accountability rather than to support individualized instruction. . . . .Schools’ readiness was conceptualized as including the areas of (a) smooth transitions to school, (b) instruction and staff development, (c) partnership with community, and (d) resources.  Results confirmed the viability of a brief teacher-reported assessment of children and an assessment of ‘ready school’ practices.  Further tasks related to promoting local use of the assessment data, and implications for policy, are identified.”
Full text:   http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v4n2/murphey.html


Early Childhood Assessment:  Why, What, and How?
National Academies Press, Washington DC. (2008). 
C. E. Snow &. S. E. Van Hemel (Eds.),
National Research Council of the National Academies

“Growing interest in publicly funded programs for young children has drawn attention to whether and how Head Start and other early childhood programs should be asked to prove their worth.  Congress asked the National Research Council for guidance on how to identify important outcomes for children from birth to age 5 and how best to assess them in preschools, child care, and other early childhood programs.  The Research Council's new report concludes that well-planned assessments can inform teaching and efforts to improve programs and can contribute to better outcomes for children, but poor assessments or misuse of the results can harm both children and programs.  . . . Federal agencies, States, school systems, and other organizations that evaluate early childhood programs or the children they serve should make the purpose of any assessment explicit and public in advance, the report says.   For example, a State should specify whether an assessment will be used to help teachers gauge the progress of individual children or to help public agencies decide whether to continue a program's funding. . . . The report offers principles to guide the design, implementation, and use of assessments in early childhood settings.”
Press release -- Overview:
http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=12446
For purchase or to skim chapters online:
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12446#toc

Early Childhood Comprehensive Systems That Spend Smarter:
Maximizing Resources to Serve Vulnerable Children
National Center for Children in Poverty, Mailman School of Public Health,
Columbia University, New York City. (2006).  K. Johnson & J. Knitzer.

Early Interventions for the Achievement Gap:  The Importance of Family in Early Learning
National Urban League Policy Institute, Washington DC. (2008).  R. R. Hanson

“This report examines the role of family background and parental involvement in determining early learning outcomes of children in kindergarten and reveals that students who attended more structured preschool settings, like Head Start or other center-based programs, performed better on early reading and math tests.”   The author discusses (a) patterns in early childhood learning (socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity, types of preschool; (b) child and family background characteristics on school readiness; (c) background and parental involvement on early academic reading proficiency, and offers recommendations.  The report also describes three highly effective early education programs as examples of high-quality preschool education for young children from low-income families – the Child-Parent Center program (Chicago); the Perry Preschool Project; and the Abecedarian Early Childhood Intervention project.
Full text - See the third title:  http://www.nul.org/policyinstitutereports.html
The Abecedarian Project, the Child-Parent Center Program, and the High/Scope Perry Preschool Project are described elsewhere in the SERRC collection – with links to evidence.  Scroll down at:   http://www.rrfcnetwork.org/content/view/321/47/

Early Learning Standards:  Results from a National Survey to Document Trends
in State-Level Policies and Practices
Early Childhood Research and Practice. (2007).  University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana.  C. Scott-Little, J. Lesko, J. Martella, & P. Milburn.

“Early learning standards — documents that outline what children should know and be able to do before kindergarten entry — are increasingly common in the United States.  Data from a national survey are presented to illustrate trends in how States have developed and implemented early learning standards within the past four years.  Results indicate that almost all states have developed early learning standards for prekindergarten-age children, and the number of states that have developed infant-toddler early learning standards has increased markedly.  States have used a variety of strategies to support teachers in their use of early learning standards, and a number of States have or are developing monitoring systems to gauge the extent to which programs are using the standards.  The authors discuss the implications that trends related to the development and implementation of early learning standards have for early childhood policies and practices, and they discuss areas where further research is needed.”
Full text:   
http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v9n1/little.html


Effective Preschool Curricula and Teaching Strategies.
Pathways to Early School Success:  Issue Brief No. 2
National Center for Children in Poverty, Mailman School of Public Health,
Columbia University, New York City. (2006).  L. Klein & J. Knitzer.

“This issue brief explores lessons from research and practice about the role of intentional curriculum  and professional development and supports for teachers in closing the achievement gap in early literacy  and math for low-income preschool-age children.  The aim is to help policymakers and administrators integrate this emerging knowledge more rapidly into their decisions to support teachers.  It is part of  a series of reports from the National Center for Children in Poverty that address the question  What will it take to ensure that young low-income children succeed in the early school years?”.
Full text and summary:  http://www.nccp.org/pub_pes06b.html

National Institute for Early Education Research (NIEER). (2005).  L. M. Laosa.
Rutgers University, The State University of New Jersey

“The achievement gap has deep roots that begin before school entry.  Studies show  that the foundation for literacy and other academic learning is laid down before age 5.   Other studies demonstrate that high-quality preschool education can improve the school  readiness and school performance of children, especially low-income children.”  This report reviews (a) the achievement gap in school and prior to kindergarten; (b) research on the effects of preschool; (c) State preschool programs; (d) teacher qualifications and compensation; (e) the universal vs. targeted debate; and (f) policy conclusions and recommendations.
Full text:   http://nieer.org/docs/index.php?DocID=122

Social Policy Report (2002).  C. C. Raver.
Society for Research in Child Development, Ann Arbor, Michigan

This article “reviews a recent and persuasive body of  rigorous research, to determine whether children’s emotional adjustment can be significantly affected by interventions implemented in the preschool and early school years.  Results of this review suggest that family, early educational, and clinical interventions offer policy makers a wide array of choices in ways that they can make sound investments in young children’s emotional development and school readiness.  This research suggests that, while young children’s emotional and behavioral problems are costly to their chances of school success, these problems are identifiable early, are amenable to change, and can be reduced over time. . . . Policy makers should consider targeting young children’s emotional adjustment prior to school entry, in diverse settings such as Head Start, child care settings, as well as in the first few years of school.”
Full Text – Scroll down to 2002, Issue 3:
http://www.srcd.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=232&Itemid=1

Ensuring Quality Care for Low-Income Babies:  Contracting Directly with
Providers to Expand and Improve Infant and Toddler Care
Center for Law and Social Policy, Washington DC.  (2008).
H. Matthews & R. Schumacher

“While most States provide child care assistance through vouchers or certificates, States have the option of contracting directly with providers to expand infant/toddler care for low-income families.  Based on interviews with state policymakers, this paper explains how States are using contracts to create or stabilize care in particular communities or for specific populations; to create child care slots meeting quality standards important for infants and toddlers; to extend the day for infants and toddlers served in Early Head Start; and to improve the quality of infant/toddler family child care.”
Full text – Scroll down:
http://www.clasp.org/publications.php?id=3&year=2008#0
On the same page, click for Early Head Start Initiatives -- profiles of 20 States.

Zero to Three, Washington DC. (2006).
V. Buysse & P. W. Wesley

This book “defines the evidence-based practice movement and explains how it is empowering professionals to deliver the most effective interventions available.  The authors examine how evidence-based practice is changing the way research is conducted and how various sources of evidence can be applied to solve real-world problems and used to inform critical policy decisions.”
For purchase:

National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics
(La Comisión Nacional para la Educación de la Niñez Hispana). (2007).
Arizona State University, Tempe
Funded by a grant from the Foundation for Child Development, New York City.

This report provides (a) a demographic profile of young Hispanic children and their education performance patterns; (b) a review of early sources of school readiness and achievement gaps; (c) promising practices in infant/toddler, Pre-K, and K-3 education; (d) strategies to accelerate progress for English language learners; (e) a summary of task force findings and recommendations for action.
Overview and click at the right for Executive Summary:
http://www.fcd-us.org/resources/resources_show.htm?doc_id=469502


Getting Ready -- Findings from the National School Readiness Initiative:
A 17 State Partnership
Rhode Island KIDS COUNT, Providence, Rhode Island. (2005).
Sponsored by The David and Lucile Packard Foundation, the Kauffman Foundation, and the Ford Foundation.

The National School Readiness Indicators Initiative: Making Progress for Young Children was a multi-state initiative that developed sets of indicators at the State level to track results for children from birth through age 8.  The goal was for States to use the school readiness indicators to inform public policy decisions and track progress in meeting key goals for young children. . . . (The project) involved teams from 17 States, including Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Ohio, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia and Wisconsin.  Over the course of the Initiative, 17 State teams worked to increase their capacity to obtain and use data, to develop effective communications strategies and to inform a school readiness policy agenda. . . . This report shares the core set of common indicators and the lessons learned from the collective work of the participating States.
Full text, summary, press release, and other information:
http://www.gettingready.org/matriarch/MultiPiecePage.asp_Q_PageID_E_318_A_PageName_E_NationalSchoolReadinessIndicat

Helping the Most Vulnerable Infants, Toddlers, and Their Families
National Center for Children in Poverty. (2006).  J. Knitzer & J. Lefkowitz.
Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York City.

Chapin Hall Center for Children, University of Chicago. (2006).
M. Wasserman

Home visiting programs that support pregnant women and families with young children have proliferated in recent decades.  Several program models have established national offices that support the expansion of their program in new States.  As the number of establishments has grown, they have also instituted state-based systems which deal with collective concerns such as funding, advocacy and quality assurance within their particular State’s circumstances. This study looks at the experience of developing State-based home-visiting systems.  Chapin Hall conducted interviews with State and national representatives from four of the large national home visiting models: Healthy Families America, the Nurse-Family Partnership, Parents as Teachers, and the Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youngsters.”  This is the report of their findings.
Overview and click for full text:
http://www.chapinhall.org/article_abstract.aspx?ar=1433&L2=61&L3=129
Descriptions of the Nurse-Family Partnership and the Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youngsters – with links to evidence – are shown in a separate section of SERRC's collection.  Scroll down at:
http://www.rrfcnetwork.org/content/view/321/47/

Implementing Policies to Reduce the Likelihood of Preschool Expulsion
Foundation for Child Development, New York City. (2007).  W. S. Gilliam

“This policy brief examines factors associated with expulsion from Prekindergarten (PK).  Recent
research has explored issues regarding the rate at which preschoolers (children ages three to four)
are expelled from PK programs, as well as some of the factors associated with expulsion and the
effectiveness of mental health consultation to reduce the classroom behavior problems that may
lead to expulsion.  Although several factors that predict an increased likelihood of expulsion have
been described, this brief addresses those factors that may inform changes in policy that can be
both implemented and regulated.”
Full text:
http://www.fcd-us.org/resources/resources_show.htm?doc_id=636702
This policy brief is a followup to the 2005 study on expulsion rates in State kindergarten programs:
http://www.fcd-us.org/resources/resources_show.htm?doc_id=464280


Investigating the Tallgrass Prairie
Early Childhood Research & Practice. (2008).  University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign.  M. V. Burns, S. Y Chi, & N. B. Hertzog

“This article describes an investigation of a tallgrass prairie undertaken by 3- through 7-year-old children in a preschool and a combined kindergarten/first-grade classroom at a Midwestern university. The teaching teams were curious about how these two age groups would explore their questions about the prairie—how their questions would differ by age group, what interested them most, and whether they would come to different levels of understanding. The children's involvement in this investigation is illustrated through photographs, samples of their work, and explanations. The article compares the studies in each classroom, discussing how children addressed similar questions and the effects of collaboration on their social and emotional development.”
Full text
http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v10n1/burns.html


Is More Better? The Effects of Full-Day vs Half-Day Preschool
on Early School Achievement: NIEER Working Paper
National Institute for Early Education Research, Rutgers University,
The State University of New Jersey. (2006).

Center for Law and Social Policy, Washington DC. (2007).
R. Schumacher, K. Hamm, & D. Ewen.

“This paper is based on a review of the first in-depth national research on the 29 States that, as of 2004, allowed mixed delivery in their prekindergarten programs.  . . . This paper (a) provides evidence that policymakers need to review their pre-kindergarten initiatives to ensure maximum access for children in working families, especially low-income children; (b) describes some models States and localities are using to be responsive to low-income working families’ needs by delivering pre-kindergarten in community-based settings; and (c) highlights key strategies to address the needs of low income working families and examines the extent to which State pre-kindergarten policies currently do so.”  A link to the original paper is included.
Full text - Scroll down (way down):
http://www.clasp.org/publications.php?id=3&type=1#0

Many Happy Returns:
Three Economic Models That Make the Case for School Readiness
State Early Childhood Policy Technical Assistance Network,
Des Moines, Iowa. (2004).  C. Bruner

Prepared for Kindergarten: What Does "Readiness" Mean?
NIEER Policy Report
National Institute for Early Education Research, Rutgers University. (2005). 
D. J. Ackerman & W. S. Barnett.

Center for Law and Social Policy, Washington DC. (2006). 
H. Matthews & D. Ewen

“One in five children in the United States is the child of an immigrant.  These children stand to benefit greatly from high-quality child care and early learning programs, yet appear less likely to participate in such programs. This paper summarizes evidence about the participation of young children of immigrants in early care and education programs, as well as the demographic and socio-economic characteristics of immigrant families that likely influence participation.  It then offers policy recommendations for State and local administrators of pre-kindergarten and other early care and education programs, and proposes areas for additional research.
Full text – Scroll down (way down):   http://www.clasp.org/publications.php?id=3&type=1#0

Resources to Promote Social and Emotional Health and School Readiness
in Young Children and Families: A Community Guide
Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York City. (2005).
J. Knitzer & J. Lefkowitz.

“This guide provides information about resources and strategies that families, child care providers, teachers, and others who come into contact with young children every day can use to help children develop the social and emotional skills they need to succeed in school.  Some of the resources and strategies focus on babies and toddlers, others on preschoolers, and still others on young children facing especially harsh early circumstances.  All have been used in low-income communities and work best if they are embedded in a larger community effort to promote resilience and build on the strengths that exist in families and communities.”
Full text:   http://www.nccp.org/pub_rps05.html

School Readiness: Closing Racial and Ethnic Gaps
The Future of Children. (2005).  S. McLanahan (Ed.)
The Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at
Princeton University and The Brookings Institution

“Child care providers, teachers, and home visitors all struggle with how to help young children facing risks to early school success related to social and emotional challenges.  Spending Smarter is designed to help policymakers, agency officials, families, and other advocates maximize the impact of existing funding streams to support positive social and emotional development, early intervention, and treatment strategies that can improve school readiness.”
Full text:   http://www.nccp.org/pub_ssf.html

State Early Childhood Policies:
Highlights from the “Improving the Odds for Young Children” Project
National Center for Children in Poverty, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York City. (2007).  H. Stebbins & J. Knitzer.

“Improving the Odds for Young Children tracks policies to: (a) promote healthy development — access to health care for young children, their parents, and pregnant women; to nutrition programs; and to mental health services and supports; (b) promote high-quality early care and education — access to high-quality child care, responsive to the special needs of infants and toddlers; and access to prekindergarten for 3- and 4-year-olds; and (c) promote effective parenting—to ensure that parents/mothers have time and skills to build a relationship with their young children, especially infants, while maximizing family resources.”  This paper summarizes the most recent findings.
Excerpt and click for full text, State profiles, and related information:
http://www.nccp.org/publications/pub_725.html


State Indicators for Early Childhood:  Short Take No. 7
Project THRIVE, National Center for Children in Poverty, Mailman School
of Public Health, Columbia University, New York City. (2008).
K. Johnson, L. Davidson, S. Theberge, & J. Knitzer

“Virtually all State Early Childhood Comprehensive System Initiatives have adopted or identified indicators for monitoring program performance and child outcomes related to early childhood systems.  These are primarily based on nationally recommended indicators or on state initiatives.  However, although a functional set of indicators is needed to monitor progress of ECCS initiatives across the states, there is no one overarching set of indicators consistently being used. . . . This Short Take reviews the characteristics of good indicators and proposes 36 indicators, based on a review of the literature, an analysis of key national indicator sets, and a comparative review of indicators set out in State ECCS reports and plans.” See Table 1 for the proposed indicator set for early childhood comprehensive systems.
Full text:    http://www.nccp.org/publications/pub_822.html

Brookings Institution, Washington DC. (2007).  J. Ludwig & I. Sawhill

The authors “argue that closing this gap requires intensive intervention in a child’s formative years.  Using  evidence from the Abecedarian experiment in early education and the Success for All reading program, they propose a Success by Ten program to  help every child achieve success in school by age ten.  By intervening early, often,  and effectively, the proposed program aspires to substantially improve the lives of  disadvantaged children, ultimately benefiting the economy as a whole.
Full text (click at the top) and related policy brief (click at end of the page):
http://www.brookings.edu/views/papers/200702ludwig-sawhill.htm

Successful Kindergarten Transition:
Your Guide to Connecting Children, Families, and Schools
National Center for Early Development and Learning, FPG Child Development Institute, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. (2003).
R. C. Pianta & M. Kraft-Sayre.
Distributed by Brookes Publishing

“The 128-page book is a how-to handbook with field-tested methods to help schools and programs make successful kindergarten transitions. , , , It helps professionals and caregivers to (a) develop a solid transition plan (Readers will learn how to form a collaborative team; foster strong social connections among children, families, and professionals; create a menu of transition activities that can be tailored to each child’s needs; and establish a timeline for putting the transition plan into action); (b) implement the plan (Readers will discover how to anticipate barriers; keep families involved; and conduct ongoing assessment, evaluation, and revision of transition activities. Appendices include forms such as brainstorming sheets, parent interview forms, timeline worksheets, and questionnaires for teachers, principals, and family workers); and (c) stay motivated (Readers will learn from the experience of others with insight from real families, educators, and school personnel, plus sample menus of activities they can use in their own homes and classrooms.)”
For purchase: 
http://www.brookespublishing.com/store/books/pianta-6156/index.htm


Supporting Pretend Play
Early Childhood Research & Practice. (2008).  University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign.  Three papers:  J. Mendoza & L. G. Katz;  K. Servizzi;
and M. Browne & S. Brokmeier.

This special section of the journal includes three papers: (a) Introduction to the Special Section on Dramatic Play; (b) “Fixing Puppets So They Can Talk”: Puppets and Puppet Making in a Classroom of Preschoolers with Special Needs; and (c) At the Zoo:  Kindergartners Reinvent a Dramatic Play Area.
Full texts of three articles -- Scroll to Special Section:
http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v10n2/index.html


Taking Stock:  Assessing and Improving Early Childhood Learning and Program Quality – The Report of the National Early Childhood Accountability Task Force
Pew Charitable Trusts, the Foundation for Child Development,
and the Joyce Foundation. (2007).

In 2005, The National Early Childhood Accountability Task Force was charged to:  “develop recommendations for a State accountability system for early education programs for prekindergarten children and for linking such efforts to standards-based assessment efforts in kindergarten and the primary grades.  The charge called upon the Task Force to review current State and federal initiatives, to provide guidance on tough issues and controversial questions, and to be forthright in recommending steps that States should and should not take as they embark on accountability and program improvement efforts.”  This is the report of that effort.
Summary and click for full text:
http://www.pewtrusts.org/our_work_report_detail.aspx?id=30962

Early Childhood-Head Start Task Force, U.S. Department of Education
and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2002).

“This booklet draws from scientifically based research about what you can do to help children to develop their language abilities, increase their knowledge, become familiar with books and other printed materials, learn letters and sounds, recognize numbers, and learn to count.   Many examples of strategies you can use for teaching these skills are included here.  Also included are examples of ways to create an environment in your preschool classrooms that will nurture children’s natural curiosity and their zest for learning.  Throughout this book you will find shaded sections titled Teacher Talk.  These are examples of conversations teachers have with children to enhance their learning during everyday activities.”
Full text: http://www.ed.gov/teachers/how/early/teachingouryoungest/index.html



“This report identifies multiple barriers that impede immigrant families from accessing high-quality child care and early education. It also highlights promising strategies being used in local communities to break down those barriers and to improve child care and early education programs so that they are more responsive to the needs of diverse immigrant families. It concludes with a set of recommendations for federal, state, and local policymakers, advocates, private foundations, and researchers.”
Full text:   http://clasp.org/publications/challenges_change.htm

Center for Evaluation and Education Policy, Indiana University. (2004).
J. A. Plucker, J. J. Eaton, K. E. Rapp, W. Lim, J. Nowak, & A. Bartleson

“The Indiana Association of Public School Superintendents contracted with the Center for Evaluation and Education Policy to conduct a review of research on full-day kindergarten.  The goal of this report is to provide useful information to Indiana policymakers as they debate the merits of full versus half day programs. This report sought to answer three questions: (a) What does the national research say about the effectiveness of full-day kindergarten?; (b) What does the Indiana data say about full-day kindergarten?; and (c) How is time used within full-day kindergarten programs?  Finally, the report concludes with a series of recommendations regarding Indiana policy on full-day kindergarten.”
Full text – Click at the bottom of the page for this and a related paper:
http://ceep.indiana.edu/FDK/

National Institute for Early Education Research,
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick.  (2005).

“This short paper examines state-funded preschool programs in five States. In a nutshell, it finds that these state-funded preschool programs have ''statistically significant and meaningful impacts on children's early language, literacy and mathematical development, with some evidence of an enhanced program effect for print awareness skills (understanding the fundamentals of print reading, e.g. words run from left to right) for children in low-income families.  (They don't find any significant impact on '’phonological awareness,'’ a skill that aids in early reading acquisition.)  The authors studied the skills displayed by a sample of kindergarten students, some of whom attended preschool.  The study provides evidence that preschool indeed matters -- though, as the authors make clear, the programs they evaluated appear to be of unusually high quality. Each requires its teachers to have four-year degrees with certifications in early childhood education.” Separate STATE REPORTS are shown for Michigan, New Jersey, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and West Virginia.
Overview and click for full text:   http://nieer.org/docs/?DocID=129


Title I and Early Childhood Programs:  A Look at Investments in the NCLB Era
Center for Law and Social Policy, Washington DC. (2007). 
D. Ewen & H. Matthews

“This paper explores the wide range of ways in which school districts are using funds from Title I of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) for early education through kindergarten and examines how the implementation of NCLB has impacted those investments. It also makes recommendations for local educational agencies interested in creating Title I-funded early education programs or thinking about how to sustain these types of investments in the face of policy and funding challenges.”
Full text – Scroll down (way down): 
http://www.clasp.org/publications.php?id=3&type=1#0

National Center for Children in Poverty,
Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York City. (2006).

“Family, friend, and neighbor (FFN) child care is a widely used form of care for young children in the United States, particularly for children birth through age 2.  It accounts for 46 percent of the hours these youngest children spend in nonparental care.  Thirty-three experts from a range of research, policy, and practice organizations came together for a symposium on FFN care on November 2, 2005, entitled Improving Family, Friend, and Neighbor Care: Toward a National Strategy.  This symposium report outlines the picture of current FFN research, practice, and policy that emerged and identifies next steps to strengthen all three areas.”
Full text:   http://www.nccp.org/pub_ffn06.html

Toward an Early Care and Education Action Agenda for Hispanic Children
Early Childhood Research and Practice. (2004),  Early Childhood and Parenting Collaborative, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
R. Collins & R. Ribeiro.