Abstract
Purpose. The study examined the perceptions of legislators and advocates regarding the relative importance of investing in early care and education programs, as compared to other public needs. The study also evaluated tactics that are most effective in influencing policy decisions as assessed from the perspective of California state legislators and early care and education advocates. Methodology. Descriptive and ex post facto research were used. Interviews were done with eighteen child advocates and eighteen California State Legislators. Face-to-face and telephone interviews were completed using a fourteen-question instrument. Both groups rank ordered public needs, funding of child care programs, sources that legislators rely on when making voting decisions and advocacy tactics that are most effective when lobbying a legislator. An independent t-test was used to determine whether mean responses were significantly different. Findings. Data from the independent t-tests indicated that there was a significant difference between legislators and advocates in each of the four common questions asked of both groups. Legislators ranked K–12 education as the highest of public needs more often than advocates. The two groups did not agree on sources that legislators rely on when making voting decisions and there was a significant difference in what legislators and advocates said were effective advocacy techniques. Implications for action. This study implies that advocates should link child care advocacy with K–12 education. Advocates need to collaborate with parents and business partners and enlist their support. Legislators should have face-to-face interactions with their constituents through site visits. Advocates need to deliver a simplified, unified message to legislators and there is a need to encourage new and younger advocates to participate in the process. Recommendations. Based on this study, work towards a unified message from child care advocates should be developed and delivered by a variety of constituents and partners. Future studies should concentrate on evaluation of voting records; the impact of term limits and the effects of approaching child care as a K–12 issue.