Refugees and Early Childhood Education

Greece and Turkey recently forged an agreement aimed at minimizing the illegal smuggling of refugees between the two countries. Essentially they created a one-for-one exchange: for every Syrian returned to Turkey, another Syrian will be safely resettled in an E.U. country. And so on Monday, Greece followed through on its promise to send refugees who arrived in the country illegally back to Turkey. This is just the latest development in the refugee and humanitarian crisis that has strained many European countries in recent months.

Here in the United States, Secretary of State John Kerry announced last September that the cap on the number of refugees admitted over the next two years would be increased to 100,000. While that increase may seem minuscule given the scope of the crisis (the UN Refugee Agency estimates there are over 15 million refugees worldwide), it’s significant for the federal and local agencies charged with refugee screening, placement and support.

When refugees arrive in the U.S., they are partnered with a refugee resettlement agency that helps them secure basic needs (food, housing, clothes), find employment (or apply for benefits such as SNAP and TANF), enroll children in school and find childcare, among other services. In 2014, approximately 70,000 refugees were resettled 46 different U.S. states. The majority came from Iraq, Burma, Somalia and Bhutan.

But, as several new reports by the Migration Policy Institute (MPI) reveal, refugees’ unique and diverse backgrounds can have a significant impact on the services and supports they require to successfully integrate into American society. Additionally, services are often provided by multiple government and nonprofit agencies that rarely communicate and coordinate services. This lack of collaboration can make it harder to identify and support refugees access to essential services such as childcare and early education programs like Head Start.

Nationally, young children of refugees have lower levels of enrollment and participation in early childhood education (ECE). According to one new MPI report, Young Children of Refugees in the United States: Integration Successes and Challenges, forty-two percent of these children are enrolled in preschool programs, compared with 48 percent of children of U.S. born-parents. These numbers vary substantially between refugees of different origins. Consider: less than 30 percent of children born to parents from Burma are enrolled in preschool, compared to about 70 percent of children born to Iranian refugees.

These statistics are significant given that young children of refugee groups with lowest enrollment in ECE, such as those from Burma, Somalia, and Iraq, often face multiple risk factors. Burmese and Somali refugees generally have lower levels of education and home language literacy, limited English skills, and higher poverty rates than refugees from other countries, according to the report. Iraqi refugees have similarly high poverty rates and also high rates of unemployment. Taken together, these children could stand to benefit the most from high-quality early childhood education. Multiple research studies have documented the positive impact of early childhood education on dual language learners (DLLs) and immigrant children in particular. For example, Head Start has been found to improve DLLs’ receptive vocabulary (the words they can understand) and early numeracy skills.

In a related MPI report, Challenges in Accessing Early Childhood Education and Care for Children Refugee in Families in Massachusetts, authors Jeff Gross and Christine Ntagengwa highlight the barriers refugee parents face in securing consistent and high-quality ECE options. Interestingly, refugees’ cultural backgrounds can be a barrier to access; refugees often lack awareness of and information about how U.S. early childhood education options work. Additionally, some cultures place stronger trust in family and informal care arrangements over formal center-based programs.

But the biggest barriers faced by refugees are structural. Gross and Ntagengwa argue that “the system’s focus on child care as a means of overcoming parents’ employment barriers rather than as a tool for children’ long-term socioemotional and educational outcomes” is a big problem. Many refugee parents are expected to enter job training programs within their first or second month in the country — and to secure employment within four months. This timeline doesn’t align well with the realities of finding reliable and safe child care and early education options.

In Massachusetts, where about 2,000 to 2,400 refugees from Iraq, Bhutan, Somalia, Burma, Haiti and other countries were resettled annually between 2009 to 2014, accessing child care is “complex.” Case managers help refugees register with the Massachusetts Department of Transitional Assistance so they can be referred for child care vouchers. It is then up to the parent to find a licensed provider using an online database maintained by the state’s Child Care Resource and Referral agencies. As the report notes, that process requires refugee parents to use an English-only online system, visit and meet with potential providers, and monitor their eligibility for vouchers. Not surprisingly, these parents lean heavily on their case managers for help with this process, but this presents its own challenges, as refugee employment service providers are often understaffed.

There are five different Massachusetts organizations responsible for helping refugees secure ECE options for their children. And, again, their levels of communication and collaboration vary. The authors note that the “lack of accountability, interagency training, and information sharing among these actors makes the process of obtaining child care unduly confusing” for refugee parents.

So what can be done to minimize these challenges and increase enrollment in high-quality ECE for refugee children? That question is tackled by another recent MPI report, Providing a Head Start: Improving Access to Early Childhood Education for Refugees, which profiles initiatives in Maricopa County in Arizona and Onondaga County in New York aimed at promoting collaboration across service systems. This intersectoral collaboration between refugee resettlement agencies and local Head Start and Early Head Start providers led to significant increases in refugee enrollment in these programs in both cities.

The report draws on qualitative interviews and focus groups with representatives from different agencies and refugee parents. It supplements this information with  quantitative data from Head Start’s Program Information Report (PIR). A quick note about the data — the authors admit to several limitations, including that the PIR system doesn’t collect information about refugee status. But, the PIR does ask about languages spoken at home and many EHS/HS programs (and the report’s authors) use language as a proxy for refugee status.

In Maricopa County collaboration was initiated by the state’s refugee coordinator, who worked with local EHS/HS staff and ethnic community-based organizations to increase refugee enrollment. They launched orientation and cross-service training for both EHS/HS and resettlement staff, suggested that EHS/HS programs hire refugee community members and parents as interpreters and classroom aides, placed refugees in areas proximate to programs, and weighted the EHS/HS application process to favor refugee applicants.

Meanwhile, in Onondaga County, the charge was led by a representative from the Office of Head Start who initiated contact with resettlement agencies, ran cross-agency training sessions, hired a former Somali refugee as a case manager, coordinated intake and enrollment sessions at resettlement agencies, and developed an online case management database that was shared with resettlement agencies.

Over a six-year period, the refugee enrollment rate in EHS/HS programs in Onondaga County increased by 500 percent and by 200 percent in Maricopa County. The authors identify several essential mechanisms for successful collaboration, such as shared knowledge and goals. For example, in Maricopa County resettlement agencies often did not attempt to point refugees to Head Start due to assumptions that they were inaccessible due to “waiting lists and cultural and language barriers.”  EHS/HS staff commented that they lacked knowledge of the refugee resettlement system and about the differences between refugees and immigrants. Communication across agencies allowed staff to realize that they shared the common goal of promoting self-sufficiency among refugee families.

As the United States prepares to welcome 10,000 Syrian refugees in the coming year, collaboration across service agencies seems more imperative than ever. Many of the Syrians resettled here will have experienced trauma and been exposed to high level of violence and may require significant support. The three reports build a strong case for why (and how) intersectoral collaboration can be a powerful tool for breaking barriers that can limit refugees access to vital services. After all the most important part of resettlement is giving refugees the chance to heal, recover, and start again.

--This post is part of New America’s Dual Language Learners National Work Group. Click here for more information on this team's work. To subscribe to the biweekly newsletter, click here, enter your contact information, and select "Education Policy.""