Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
    • Supplementary Material
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Institutions
    • Advertisers
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
  • Connect
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • Request JHR at your library
  • Alerts
  • Call for Editor
  • Free Issue
  • Special Issue
  • Other Publications
    • UWP

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Human Resources
  • Other Publications
    • UWP
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Human Resources

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
    • Supplementary Material
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Institutions
    • Advertisers
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
  • Connect
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • Request JHR at your library
  • Alerts
  • Call for Editor
  • Free Issue
  • Special Issue
  • Follow uwp on Twitter
  • Follow JHR on Bluesky
Research ArticleArticles
Open Access

Who Benefits from Cash‐for‐Care?

Effects of a Home Care Subsidy on Maternal Employment, Childcare Choices, and Children’s Development

View ORCID ProfileMatthias Collischon, View ORCID ProfileDaniel Kuehnle and View ORCID ProfileMichael Oberfichtner
Journal of Human Resources, July 2024, 59 (4) 1011-1051; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3368/jhr.0720-11051R1
Matthias Collischon
Matthias Collischon is a Researcher at the Institute for Employment Research (IAB).
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Matthias Collischon
Daniel Kuehnle
Daniel Kuehnle is Assistant Professor at the University of Duisburg‐Essen and research fellow at IZA .
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Daniel Kuehnle
  • For correspondence: daniel.kuehnle{at}uni-due.de
Michael Oberfichtner
Michael Oberfichtner is head of a research department at IAB, professor at FAU Erlangen-Nuremberg, and a research fellow at IZA.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Michael Oberfichtner
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Additional Files
  • Figure 1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1

    Usage of Home Care Subsidy and Subsidized Childcare

    Source: Own calculations based on KiBS data from Wave 4 (interviews in 2014–2015).

    Notes: Panel A shows whether families ever receive the home care subsidy for the relevant child, by birth month for children born in 2012 using cross‐sectional survey weights (N = 2,204). Panel B shows take‐up rates at the time of the interview, by birth month for children born in 2012 using cross‐sectional survey weights (N = 2,196).

  • Figure 2
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2

    Take‐up (Ever) of the Home Care Subsidy by Household Income Prior to Birth

    Source: Own calculations based on KiBS Wave 4 (2014–2015) for children born between August 2012 and December 2013, West Germany only, children aged 12–36 months, using cross‐sectional survey weights.

  • Figure 3
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3

    Employment Outcomes

    Source: Own calculations based on BEH data for for children born between March 2008 and December 2013, West Germany only.

    Notes: Estimations for the event‐study graph are conditional on the control variables included in the main analysis, as presented in Table 6.

  • Figure 4
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4

    Children’s Development

    Source: Own calculations based on school entrance examinations data for children born in July and August between 2007 and 2012, Schleswig‐Holstein only.

    Notes: Panels in the first column include all children, and panels in the second and third columns include children for whom the development index is available. Estimations for the event‐study graph are conditional on the control variables included in the main analysis, as presented in Table 8.

  • Figure 5
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5

    Take‐up Rate of Home Care Subsidy in East Germany

    Source: Own calculations based on KiBS data from Wave 4 (interviews in 2014–2015), East Germany without Thuringia.

    Notes: Panel A shows whether families ever receive the home care subsidy for the relevant child, by birth month for children born in 2012 using cross‐sectional survey weights (N = 1,096). Panel B shows take‐up rates at the time of the interview, by birth month for children born in 2012 using cross‐sectional survey weights (N = 1,087).

Tables

  • Figures
  • Additional Files
    • View popup
    Table 1

    Descriptive Statistics—Employment Data

    VariableChildren Born in 2012 (N = 88,833)Estimation Sample (N = 506,919)
    OverallSpringAutumn
    MeanMeanSDMeanSDDiff.DiD EstimateSE
    Age at birth30.1130.08(4.19)30.14(4.17)−0.052−0.046(0.031)
    Daily wage prior to birth79.7078.92(38.64)80.46(39.27)−1.5420.533*(0.288)
    Full time0.780.78(0.41)0.78(0.41)0.003−0.003(0.003)
    No tertiary degree0.720.73(0.45)0.72(0.45)0.0010.004(0.003)
    Tertiary degree0.240.24(0.42)0.24(0.43)−0.003−0.003(0.003)
    German citizen0.920.92(0.28)0.92(0.28)0.0010.000(0.002)
    • Source: For children born in 2012, own calculations are based on children born between March and December 2012, West Germany only. The estimation sample includes children born between March and December in 2008–2013.

    • Notes: DiD estimate shows the DiD coefficient from regressions of the given variable according to Equation 1. Robust standard errors in parentheses. Significance levels: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.01.

    • View popup
    Table 2

    Descriptive Statistics—Childcare Data

    VariableChildren Born in 2012 (N = 4,879)Estimation Sample (N = 6,932)
    OverallSpringAutumn
    MeanMeanSDMeanSDDiff.DiD EstimateSE
    Mother Characteristics
    Mother’s age at birth33.2533.14(5.14)33.37(4.94)−0.2310.462(0.399)
    Child’s age in months29.7831.79(1.36)27.79(1.81)4.0020.976***(0.131)
    Tertiary degree0.400.43(0.50)0.37(0.48)0.062−0.046(0.037)
    Wage pre birth1676.771727.55(1126.41)1626.12(1006.58)101.430
    Married0.900.89(0.31)0.90(0.30)−0.0060.009(0.023)
    Partner Characteristics (Conditional on Having a Partner, N = 4,736 in 2012)
    Tertiary degree0.410.43(0.50)0.38(0.49)0.051−0.042(0.032)
    Wage pre birth2647.072734.06(1442.62)2558.17(1513.39)175.887
    Household Characteristics (N = 4,879 in 2012)
    Both parents born in Germany0.740.76(0.43)0.73(0.44)0.0260.018(0.033)
    At least one parent born outside Germany0.260.24(0.43)0.27(0.44)−0.026−0.018(0.033)
    At home: German main language0.830.85(0.36)0.81(0.39)0.0370.028(0.028)
    At home: Non-German main language0.170.15(0.36)0.19(0.39)−0.037−0.028(0.028)
    Number of children1.952.00(0.91)1.91(0.91)0.089−0.013(0.072)
    Living with partner (if in relationship)0.990.99(0.10)0.98(0.12)0.0050.000(0.007)
    • Source: For children born in 2012, own calculations are based on KiBS data from Wave 4 (interviews 2014–2015) for children born between March and December, West Germany only, using cross‐sectional survey weights. The estimation sample includes Waves 2 and 3 (interviews 2012–2014) for children born between March 2011 and December 2012.

    • Notes: DiD estimate shows the DiD coefficient from regressions of the given variable according to Equation 1. Robust standard errors in parentheses. Significance levels: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.01.

    • View popup
    Table 3

    Descriptive Statistics—School Entrance Examination Data

    VariableChildren Born in 2012 (N = 3,319)Estimation Sample (N = 19,191)
    OverallJulyAugust
    MeanMeanSDMeanSDDiff.DiD EstimateSE
    Age at examination (months)78.2078.77(2.56)77.99(2.62)1.036−0.036(0.096)
    Female0.440.44(0.50)0.46(0.50)−0.016−0.004(0.019)
    Mother, highest education level
     Missing0.220.22(0.42)0.27(0.44)0.0050.003(0.016)
     Upper secondary0.330.35(0.48)0.28(0.45)−0.004−0.039(0.018)
     Lower secondary0.440.43(0.50)0.45(0.50)−0.0010.036(0.019)
    Mother, country of origin
     Missing0.200.21(0.41)0.13(0.34)0.005−0.007(0.014)
     Other country0.110.11(0.31)0.16(0.37)0.0020.008(0.012)
     Germany0.680.68(0.47)0.71(0.45)−0.006−0.001(0.017)
    Father, highest education level
     Missing0.290.30(0.46)0.32(0.47)0.013−0.014(0.018)
     Upper secondary0.310.31(0.46)0.27(0.44)−0.0040.001(0.017)
     Lower secondary0.400.39(0.49)0.41(0.49)−0.0090.013(0.019)
    Father, country of origin
     Missing0.220.23(0.42)0.15(0.35)0.004−0.021(0.015)
     Other country0.100.10(0.31)0.15(0.36)0.001−0.001(0.012)
     Germany0.670.66(0.47)0.70(0.46)−0.0050.022(0.018)
    Main language spoken at home
     Missing0.040.04(0.20)0.06(0.23)−0.003−0.012(0.008)
     German0.760.76(0.43)0.75(0.43)0.0070.004(0.016)
     Foreign language0.080.08(0.28)0.07(0.25)0.0030.002(0.010)
     Bilingual0.120.12(0.32)0.12(0.33)−0.0080.006(0.012)
    • Source: For children born in 2012, own calculations based on school entrance examinations data for children born in July and August 2012, Schleswig‐Holstein only. The estimation sample includes all children born in July and August between 2007 and 2012.

    • Notes: DiD estimate shows the DiD coefficient from regressions of the given variable according to Equation 1. Robust standard errors in parentheses. Significance levels: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.01.

    • View popup
    Table 4

    Take‐up of the Home Care Subsidy

     Ever Take‐Up (%)N
    Panel A: All62.43,060
    Panel B: By Maternal Education
    No tertiary degree69.51,639
    Tertiary degree51.81,417
    Panel C: By Language at Home
    German62.52,510
    Non‐German61.8550
    Panel D: By Parental Country of Origin
    German62.62,296
    Non‐German61.9762
    • Source: Own calculations based on KiBS Wave 4 (2014–2015) for children born between August 2012 and December 2013, West Germany only, children aged 12–36 months, using cross‐sectional survey weights.

    • View popup
    Table 5

    Take‐up of the Home Care Subsidy by Parents’ Wage Tertile Prior to Birth

    Father’s Net WageMother’s Net Wage
    Low (≤1,291 Euros)MediumHigh (≥2,000 Euros)
    Low (≤890 euros)0.6820.6480.449
    Observations283289165
    Medium0.7540.6910.506
    Observations280275294
    High (≥2,800 euros)0.6550.6610.459
    Observations200225435
    • Source: Own calculations based on KiBS Wave 4 (2014–2015) for children born between August 2012 and December 2013, West Germany only, children aged 12–36 months, using cross‐sectional survey weights.

    • View popup
    Table 6

    Employment Outcomes—Main Results

     NEver Returned to WorkCumulated EmploymentCumulated Labor Income
    Panel A: Full Sample
    506,919−0.014***−13.511***−907.011***
    (0.003)(2.277)(197.623)
    Mean 2012 spring0.82845228,668
    Panel B: By Education
    No tertiary degree377,768−0.014***−14.884***−873.894***
    (0.003)(2.690)(205.364)
    Mean 2012 spring0.82144724,542
    Tertiary degree109,760−0.008−8.808*−1,160.849**
    (0.005)(4.527)(538.689)
    Mean 2012 spring0.85947843,265
    Panel C: By Citizenship
    Foreign40,875−0.012−12.392−825.005
    (0.011)(8.200)(689.169)
    Mean 2012 spring0.75339326,322
    German466,044−0.014***−13.591***−923.992***
    (0.003)(2.368)(206.055)
    Mean 2012 spring0.83545728,881
    Panel D: By Childcare Availability in 2012
    Below median252,607−0.011***−10.339***−700.202***
    (0.004)(3.296)(264.418)
    Mean 2012 spring0.80743825,392
    Above median251,626−0.016***−16.377***−1,109.828***
    (0.004)(3.159)(295.321)
    Mean 2012 spring0.84846531,947
    • Source: Own calculations based on BEH data for for children born between March 2008 and December 2013, West Germany only.

    • Notes: Outcomes are measured 36 months after birth. Cumulated employment is measured in days, cumulated labor income in euros. Controls in Xi are district fixed effects, age at birth dummies (<25, 25–30, 30–35, 30–40, >40), wage prior to birth dummies (<20, 20–40, 40–60, 60–80, 80–100, 100–120, >120), tertiary education (dummy), and dummies for missing values in either. Childcare availability is defined as the ratio of childcare slots divided by the number of children under three years at the district level. Robust standard errors in parentheses. Significance tests for the differences between the group are as follows: Education: returned to work: p = 0.36, employment: p = 0.25, income: p = 0.62. Nationality: returned to work: p = 0.87, employment: p = 0.89, income: p = 0.89. Childcare availability: returned to work: p = 0.33, employment: p = 0.19, income: p = 0.30. Significance levels: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.01.

    • View popup
    Table 7

    Childcare Choices—Main Results

    NExclusively ParentsSubsidized ProviderInformal Arrangement
    Panel A: Full Sample
    6,9320.065*−0.042−0.026
    (0.036)(0.028)(0.038)
    Mean 2012 spring0.3010.3050.515
    Panel B: Maternal Education
    No tertiary degree3,9620.091*−0.039−0.046
    (0.047)(0.031)(0.049)
    Mean 2012 spring0.3240.2040.558
    Tertiary degree2,9700.028−0.0580.007
    (0.052)(0.054)(0.057)
    Mean 2012 spring0.2640.4700.444
    Panel C: Main Language at Home
    German5,8290.067*−0.044−0.024
    (0.039)(0.032)(0.041)
    Mean 2012 spring0.2730.3230.535
    Non‐German1,0840.062−0.031−0.068
    (0.095)(0.065)(0.095)
    Mean 2012 spring0.4340.2200.421
    Panel D: Parental Country of Origin
    Both born in Germany5,3680.065−0.035−0.037
    (0.040)(0.033)(0.043)
    Mean 2012 spring0.2800.3270.531
    At least one born abroad1,5570.055−0.0640.006
    (0.077)(0.054)(0.079)
    Mean 2012 spring0.3650.2380.466
    • Source: Own calculations based on KiBS Waves 2 and 3 (interviews 2012–2014) for children born between March 2011 and December 2012, West Germany only.

    • Notes: DiD analysis. Exclusively parental care is defined as the absence of informal care and care by a subsidized provider. Controls are maternal age at birth dummies (<25, 25–30, 30–35, 35–40, >40), survey wave dummies, federal state fixed effects, maternal tertiary education (dummy), and children’s age in month dummies. Dummies for missing values in any control variable are included as well. Cluster robust (on mother’s level) standard errors in parentheses. Significance tests for the differences for the treatment effect on exclusively parental, subsidized, and informal care between each group are as follows, respectively: Education: p = 0.24, 0.85, 0.38; German at home: p = 0.96, 0.86, 0.66; Mother born in Germany: p = 0.91, 0.64, 0.63. Significance levels: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.01.

    • View popup
    Table 8

    Children’s Development—Main Results

    AllHarmonized Sample
    NeedsNeedsDevelopment Index
    Panel A: Full Sample
    −0.036**−0.033**0.040
    (0.014)(0.016)(0.036)
    N19,19114,76114,761
    Mean 2012 spring0.2250.2340.157
    Panel B: Maternal Education
    Low−0.029−0.0370.050
    (0.022)(0.024)(0.054)
    N8,6857,0887,088
    Mean 2012 spring0.2530.2560.056
    High−0.039*−0.028−0.034
    (0.022)(0.024)(0.052)
    N5,3254,2394,239
    Mean 2012 spring0.1560.1530.410
    Panel C: Main Language at Home
    German−0.038**−0.040**0.041
    (0.015)(0.017)(0.038)
    N14,54611,34511,345
    Mean 2012 spring0.1700.1700.268
    Non‐German0.0130.013−0.003
    (0.060)(0.062)(0.154)
    N1,2801,1351,135
    Mean 2012 spring0.5230.534−0.446
    Panel D: Parental Country of Origin
    Both born in Germany−0.045***−0.045**0.034
    (0.016)(0.018)(0.043)
    N12,6939,9829,982
    Mean 2012 spring0.1770.1740.258
    At least one born abroad−0.071−0.0640.131
    (0.045)(0.046)(0.104)
    N3,6033,0343,034
    Mean 2012 spring0.4220.416−0.224
    Panel E: By Childcare Availability in 2012
    Below median−0.017−0.0190.056
    (0.019)(0.020)(0.046)
    N9,8019,6449,644
    Mean 2012 spring0.1970.2070.132
    Above median−0.056***−0.053**0.011
    (0.021)(0.027)(0.058)
    N9,3905,1175,117
    Mean 2012 spring0.2560.2760.197
    • Source: Own calculations based on school entrance examinations data for children born in July or August between 2007 and 2012, Schleswig‐Holstein only.

    • Notes: Dependent variable in Columns 1 and 2 is binary indicator for additional support needs; in Column 3 the dependent variable is a continuous development index (see Section III.C for details). Column 1 includes all children, and Columns 2 and 3 include the subset of children for whom the total development index is available. Regressions include control variables for age at testing (monthly, dummies), child’s gender, parents’ education (dummies), maternal country of origin (dummies), language spoken at home (dummies), and district‐level fixed effects (Kreise). Childcare availability is defined as the ratio of childcare slots divided by the number of children under three years at the district level. Robust standard errors in parentheses. Significance levels: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.01.

    • View popup
    Table 9

    Employment Outcomes—Robustness Checks

    NEver Returned to WorkCumulated EmploymentCumulated Labor Income
    Panel A: Baseline DiD
    506,919−0.014***−13.511***−907.011***
    (0.003)(2.277)(197.623)
    Mean 2012 spring0.82845228,668
    Panel B: Specification Checks
    Baseline—No Control Variables506,919−0.013***−12.648***−677.401***
    (0.003)(2.312)(229.431)
    Linear506,919−0.010***−11.888***−853.363***
    (0.003)(2.446)(213.857)
    Quadratic506,919−0.011***−12.029***−810.856***
    (0.003)(2.484)(216.321)
    Panel C: Observation Period: Births in. . .
    July and August excluded443,253−0.015***−14.692***−916.254***
    (0.003)(2.436)(211.334)
    Mean 2012 spring0.82945328,716
    May to October only292,160−0.015***−13.255***−845.956***
    (0.004)(3.002)(260.605)
    Mean 2012 spring0.82645128,599
    June to September only181,110−0.012**−10.083***−649.802**
    (0.005)(3.822)(330.319)
    Mean 2012 spring0.82444728,262
    Panel D: Accounting for Legal Entitlement to Slot in Childcare
    Controlling for slot entitlement (months)506,919−0.014***−13.499***−840.248***
    (0.003)(2.350)(204.045)
    Mean 2012 spring0.82845228,668
    Slot entitlement + childcare coverage502,948−0.013***−13.359***−828.215***
    (0.003)(2.355)(204.722)
    Mean 2012 spring0.82845228,668
    Placebo 2011325,604−0.004−2.955−144.233
    (0.003)(2.498)(213.493)
    Mean 2011 spring0.81344527,681
    DiDisc506,919−0.010−9.703*−742.962*
    (0.006)(5.191)(449.229)
    Panel E: Excluding Observations above the Social Security Contribution Threshold
    Below threshold479,700−0.014***−13.602***−811.177***
    (0.003)(2.348)(186.495)
    Mean 2012 spring0.82244626,145
    Panel F: Effects 48 Months after Birth (For Births before 2013 Only)
    48 Months after birth414,437−0.007***−15.330***−1,080.891***
    (0.002)(3.081)(278.040)
    Mean 2012 spring0.87766542,538
    • Source: Own calculations based on BEH data for for children born between March 2008 and December 2013, West Germany only.

    • Notes: Outcomes are measured 36 months after birth in Panels A–E. Cumulated employment is measured in days, cumulated labor income in euros. Controls in Xi are district‐level fixed effects (Kreise), age at birth dummies (<25, 25–30, 30–35, 30–40, >40), daily wage prior to birth dummies (<20, 20–40, 40–60, 60–80, 80–100, 100–120, >120), tertiary education (dummy), dummies for missing values in either. Robust standard errors in parentheses. Significance levels: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.01.

    • View popup
    Table 10

    Childcare Choices—Robustness

    NExclusively ParentsSubsidized ProviderInformal Arrangement
    Panel A: Baseline DiD
    6,9320.065*−0.042−0.026
    (0.036)(0.028)(0.038)
    Mean 2012 spring0.3010.3050.515
    Panel B: Specification Checks
    No control variables6,9320.075**−0.041−0.055
    (0.034)(0.029)(0.036)
    Mean 2012 spring0.3010.3050.515
    Partner controls6,9320.063*−0.042−0.024
    (0.036)(0.028)(0.037)
    Mean 2012 spring0.3010.3050.515
    Didisc6,9320.083−0.042−0.090
    (0.061)(0.052)(0.067)
    Mean 2012 spring0.3010.3050.515
    Maternal age at birth and children’s age as. . .
    Squared polynomials6,9320.070**−0.048*−0.034
    (0.035)(0.028)(0.037)
    Mean 2012 spring0.3010.3050.515
    Cubic polynomials6,9320.073**−0.051*−0.035
    (0.035)(0.028)(0.037)
    Mean 2012 spring0.3010.3050.515
    Panel C: Observation Period: Births in. . .
    May to October4,5890.076*−0.051−0.052
    (0.043)(0.035)(0.045)
    Mean 2012 spring0.3020.3040.510
    June to September3,3190.107**−0.069*−0.070
    (0.050)(0.041)(0.053)
    Mean 2012 spring0.3100.3000.501
    • Source: Own calculations based on KiBS Waves 2 and 3 (interviews 2012–2015) for children born between March 2011 and December 2012, West Germany only.

    • Notes: Exclusive parental care is defined as the absence of informal care and care by a subsidized provider. Controls are maternal age at birth dummies (<25, 25–30, 30–35, 35–40, >40), survey wave dummies, federal state fixed effects, maternal tertiary education (dummy), children’s age in month dummies. Partner controls include a dummy for having a partner as well as partner’s education. Dummies for missing values in any control variable are included as well. Cluster robust (on mother’s level) standard errors in parentheses. Significance levels: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.01.

    • View popup
    Table 11

    Children’s Development—Robustness Checks

    AllHarmonized Sample
    NeedsNeedsDevelopment Index
    Panel A: Baseline DiD
    −0.036**−0.033**0.040
    (0.014)(0.016)(0.036)
    N19,19114,76114,761
    Panel B: Specification Checks
    No control variables−0.028*−0.0230.008
    (0.015)(0.017)(0.040)
    N19,19114,76114,761
    Linear time trends−0.038**−0.041*0.004
    (0.019)(0.021)(0.049)
    N19,19114,76114,761
    Quadratic time trends−0.044−0.0470.013
    (0.030)(0.035)(0.082)
    N19,19114,76114,761
    Panel C: Accounting for Legal Entitlement to Slot in Childcare
    Placebo 20110.0010.0080.028
    (0.014)(0.017)(0.040)
    N15,87412,16712,167
    • Source: Own calculations based on school entrance examinations data for children born in July or August between 2007 and 2012, Schleswig Holstein only.

    • Notes: Robust standard errors in parentheses. Significance levels: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.01.

    • View popup
    Table 12

    Employment Outcomes—East Germany

    NEver Returned to WorkCumulated EmploymentCumulated Labor Income
    Panel A: Baseline
    109,8540.0042.693493.827
    (0.004)(3.824)(343.883)
    Mean 2012 spring0.93757039,120
    Panel B: By Education
    No tertiary degree74,4110.0054.592531.009
    (0.004)(4.572)(353.418)
    Mean 2012 spring0.94558435,015
    Tertiary degree31,5800.002−3.204525.606
    (0.007)(7.134)(805.487)
    Mean 2012 spring0.93055049,388
    Panel C: By Childcare Availability in 2012
    Below median56,4720.001−0.695457.517
    (0.006)(5.610)(525.637)
    Mean 2012 spring0.92354039,159
    Above median53,3820.0076.391490.621
    (0.005)(5.155)(435.074)
    Mean 2012 spring0.95260239,078
    • Source: Own calculations based on BEH data for for children born between March 2008 and December 2013, East Germany without Thuringia only.

    • Notes: Outcomes are measured 36 months after birth. Cumulated employment is measured in days, cumulated labor income in euros. Controls in Xi are district fixed effects, age at birth dummies (<25, 25–30, 30–35, 30–40, >40), wage prior to birth dummies (<20, 20–40, 40–60, 60–80, 80–100, 100–120, >120), tertiary education (dummy), and dummies for missing values in either. Robust standard errors in parentheses. Significance levels: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.01.

    • View popup
    Table 13

    Childcare Choices—East Germany

    NExclusively ParentsSubsidized ProviderInformal Arrangement
    2012 X Autumn3,777−0.0420.0060.089**
    (0.033)(0.037)(0.038)
    Mean 2012 spring0.1810.7590.341
    • Source: Own calculations based on KiBS Waves 2 and 3 (interviews 2012–2014) for children born between March 2011 and December 2012, East Germany without Thuringia only.

    • Notes: DiD analysis. Exclusively parental care is defined as the absence of informal care and care by a subsidized provider. Controls are maternal age at birth dummies (<25, 25–30, 30–35, 35–40, >40), survey wave dummies, federal state fixed effects, maternal tertiary education (dummy), and children’s age in month dummies. Dummies for missing values in any control variable are included as well. Cluster robust (on mother’s level) standard errors in parentheses. Significance levels: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.01.

Additional Files

  • Figures
  • Tables
  • Free alternate access to The Journal of Human Resources supplementary
    materials is available at 
    https://uwpress.wisc.edu/journals/journals/jhr-supplementary.html

    • 0720-11051R1_supp.pdf
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Human Resources: 59 (4)
Journal of Human Resources
Vol. 59, Issue 4
1 Jul 2024
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Human Resources.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Who Benefits from Cash‐for‐Care?
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Human Resources
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Human Resources web site.
Citation Tools
Who Benefits from Cash‐for‐Care?
Matthias Collischon, Daniel Kuehnle, Michael Oberfichtner
Journal of Human Resources Jul 2024, 59 (4) 1011-1051; DOI: 10.3368/jhr.0720-11051R1

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Who Benefits from Cash‐for‐Care?
Matthias Collischon, Daniel Kuehnle, Michael Oberfichtner
Journal of Human Resources Jul 2024, 59 (4) 1011-1051; DOI: 10.3368/jhr.0720-11051R1
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • I. Introduction
    • II. Institutional Background
    • III. Data and Descriptive Statistics
    • IV. Empirical Strategy
    • V. Effects of the Home Care Subsidy in West Germany
    • VI. Robustness Checks
    • VII. Comparison of West and East Germany
    • VIII. Discussion and Conclusions
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Prescription for Disaster
  • Occupation and temperature-related mortality in Mexico
  • Employers’ Language Proficiency Requirements and Hiring of Immigrants
Show more Articles

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • J13
  • J18
  • J22
UW Press logo

© 2026 Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System

Powered by HighWire