Family Child Care Environment Rating Scale-Revised Edition (FCCERS-R)

Abstract

The Family Child Care Environment Rating Scale-Revised Edition (FCCERS-R) is an internationally recognized, standardized observational assessment instrument designed to evaluate process quality within home-based early care and education environments. Developed by Thelma Harms, Richard M. Clifford, and Debby Cryer at the Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the instrument provides a comprehensive evaluation of family child care settings serving mixed-age cohorts ranging from birth through 12 years of age. The scale assesses both the physical infrastructure and the dynamic relational and pedagogical interactions between providers, enrolled children, and the provider’s own family members. Structurally, the instrument organizes environmental quality across seven primary subscales: Space and Furnishings, Personal Care Routines, Listening and Talking, Activities, Interaction, Program Structure, and Parents and Provider. Measurement relies on an empirically grounded, 7-point Likert-type anchored scoring rubric ranging from 1 (Inadequate) to 7 (Excellent), evaluated through systematic on-site observation supplemented by a structured provider interview. Psychometric evaluations demonstrate robust inter-rater reliability (overall intraclass correlation coefficients exceeding .85 and item-level agreement within one point surpassing 80% to 90%), alongside solid internal consistency across subscales (Cronbach’s alpha typically ranging between .75 and .93 for total quality scores). Construct, convergent, and predictive validity analyses confirm that higher FCCERS-R scores significantly correlate with enriched receptive language development, enhanced executive functioning, and elevated social-emotional competence in young children. Widely operationalized within state-level Quality Rating and Improvement Systems (QRIS), regulatory evaluations, professional development interventions, and epidemiological early childhood research, the FCCERS-R remains a foundational benchmark for measuring structural and process quality in home-based child care.

Keywords

Family Child Care Environment Rating Scale-Revised Edition, FCCERS-R, process quality, home-based child care, early childhood education, observational assessment, psychometrics, Quality Rating and Improvement Systems (QRIS), child development outcomes, environmental quality, program evaluation

Authors

The Family Child Care Environment Rating Scale-Revised Edition was co-authored by leading researchers in the field of early childhood quality measurement and program evaluation based at the Frank Porter Graham (FPG) Child Development Institute, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill:

• Thelma Harms, Ph.D. — Director of Curriculum Development at the FPG Child Development Institute and Clinical Professor in the School of Education at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Dr. Harms is internationally renowned for co-originating the suite of Environment Rating Scales, including the ECERS, ITERS, and SACERS.
• Richard M. Clifford, Ph.D. — Senior Scientist Emeritus at the FPG Child Development Institute and former President of the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). His scholarly focus centers on early childhood policy, educational financing, and large-scale program quality monitoring.
• Debby Cryer, Ph.D. — Senior Scientist Emerita at the FPG Child Development Institute, specializing in the investigation of early childhood environments, child health, safety practices, and international early childhood program benchmarking.

The authors coordinate training and psychometric fidelity monitoring through the Environment Rating Scales Institute (ERSI) (https://www.ersi.info/), providing standardized certification and technical guidance for researchers and policy evaluators worldwide.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Family Child Care Environment Rating Scale-Revised Edition (FCCERS-R) is to provide an objective, comprehensive, and psychometrically robust measurement of global environmental quality in home-based early care and education settings. Family child care homes represent a unique ecological niche distinct from center-based preschools or institutional daycares. In family child care, a single primary provider (often assisted by a secondary caregiver) cares for a mixed-age group of children ranging from infants and toddlers to preschool-aged children and school-age youth, frequently integrating the provider’s own biological children or relatives into the daily cohort. The FCCERS-R was engineered specifically to capture this dual structural identity: the authentic home environment blended with intentional pedagogical, developmental, and caregiving operations.

In clinical, research, and applied policy settings, the scale addresses the urgent need to evaluate both structural quality (e.g., adult-to-child ratios, square footage, safety barriers, sanitation infrastructure, material accessibility) and process quality (e.g., the nature of social-emotional interactions, emotional warmth, language modeling, individualized scaffolding, predictable yet flexible scheduling). Research consistently reveals that process quality serves as the primary direct vehicle driving positive child developmental outcomes. Consequently, measuring process quality requires an instrument that moves beyond regulatory check-boxes to evaluate actual day-to-day relational and educational practices.

The applications of the FCCERS-R encompass four major operational domains:

• Program Quality Improvement and Self-Assessment: Home-based providers utilize the detailed indicators to self-evaluate their environments, identifying systemic blind spots such as improper sanitation workflows, inadequate literacy spaces, or lack of cultural diversity in play materials, thereby formulating self-directed continuous quality improvement plans.
• Professional Development and Coaching: Technical assistance specialists, mentors, and instructional coaches utilize FCCERS-R baseline profiles to design targeted coaching interventions, focusing on specific dimensions such as responsive verbal interaction, intentional conflict resolution, or physical space arrangement.
• Policy, Accreditation, and QRIS Accountability: Municipal, state, and national early childhood agencies deploy certified independent evaluators using the FCCERS-R as a high-stakes metric within Quality Rating and Improvement Systems (QRIS), linking tier ratings, tiered subsidy reimbursement rates, and formal accreditation to composite scale scores.
• Empirical Research and Epidemiological Studies: Developmental psychologists and early childhood economists employ the scale as an independent or moderator variable when examining the longitudinal associations between child care quality, socioeconomic trajectories, executive function development, and school readiness markers.

Psychological Construct

The core construct measured by the FCCERS-R is global environmental quality in home-based child care, defined as the collective presence of physical, temporal, interactional, and relational features that safeguard children’s physical health and emotional safety while simultaneously stimulating cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical development. Rather than viewing quality as a unidimensional attribute, the FCCERS-R operationalizes quality across seven comprehensive dimensions (subscales):

1. Space and Furnishings

This dimension assesses the structural and spatial affordances of the home environment. It measures the sufficiency and safety of indoor spaces used for play, eating, and resting, evaluating whether children possess adequate floor area to explore freely without hazardous overcrowding. It scrutinizes furniture for routine care, play, and learning, demanding age-appropriate ergonomic dimensions (e.g., child-sized tables and chairs, infant highchairs with secure harnessing). Furthermore, it evaluates the presence of specialized furnishings for relaxation and comfort (e.g., soft rugs, cushions, stuffed seating) separated from high-traffic zones, the systematic spatial organization of interest areas to prevent disruptive pathways, and the safety, accessibility, and developmental stimulation offered by outdoor play spaces and gross motor equipment.

2. Personal Care Routines

Rooted in preventive health and developmental pediatrics, this construct captures the degree to which essential biological routines are transformed into predictable, secure, and health-promoting learning interactions. Sub-dimensions evaluate strict hygiene workflows during diapering, toileting, and handwashing designed to interrupt fecal-oral and respiratory pathogen transmission (e.g., using running water, single-use disposable towels, and germicidal sanitizing solutions on changing surfaces). It assesses nutritional adequacy and hygiene during meals and snacks, sanitary conditions and individualization during rest and nap times, and proactive safety measures implemented indoors and outdoors to prevent accidental trauma.

3. Listening and Talking

This construct examines the environmental opportunities and linguistic scaffolding provided to cultivate receptive and expressive language, emergent literacy, and communicative competence. It assesses the availability and condition of a diverse array of age-appropriate books and language materials (placed within direct reach of infants, toddlers, and older children). Importantly, it analyzes the communicative dynamics of the provider: the intentional use of rich conversational turns, open-ended questioning, verbal expansion of child utterances, narrative storytelling, and the deliberate support of children’s self-expression and internal verbal reasoning during daily routines and play.

4. Activities

This multifaceted dimension measures the physical availability, temporal accessibility, and developmental variety of learning materials across seven core experiential domains: fine motor manipulatives, creative art experiences, music and movement resources, spatial block play, dramatic and sociodramatic play props, nature and physical science investigations, and math/number concepts. Additionally, this construct assesses the promotion of diversity by evaluating whether books, dolls, pictures, and curriculum materials positively portray diverse racial, ethnic, cultural, age, gender, and differing physical ability identities without stereotypical reductionism.

5. Interaction

This subscale evaluates the socio-emotional climate and relational attachment infrastructure within the home. It focuses on the continuous visual and auditory supervision of children during both gross motor play and quiet learning tasks, balancing vigilant safety monitoring with non-intrusive support. It evaluates staff-child interactions, capturing warmth, empathy, physical affection, emotional responsiveness, and mutual respect. Furthermore, it explicitly evaluates provider discipline practices, assessing whether guidance is rooted in proactive environmental management, positive redirection, emotional co-regulation, and non-punitive conflict resolution, strictly penalizing physical discipline, verbal threats, humiliation, or withholding of basic needs.

6. Program Structure

This construct evaluates the macro-temporal organization and operational rhythm of the care setting. It assesses whether the daily schedule provides a predictable, stabilizing framework balancing child-initiated exploration with provider-guided engagements, and quiet restful periods with vigorous physical activity. It examines transitions between activities, verifying whether transitions are smooth, individualized, and unhurried rather than characterized by chaotic waiting periods. Finally, it measures provisions for children with identified disabilities or exceptional healthcare needs, assessing structural adaptations, individualized integration, and alignment with therapeutic goals.

7. Parents and Provider

Recognizing the family child care home as an embedded ecological system, this construct captures the systemic partnership established between the caregiver and the enrolled children’s families. It evaluates formal and informal communication mechanisms regarding children’s developmental trajectories and daily experiences, parent participation opportunities, support systems provided to families experiencing stress, and structural provisions designed to sustain provider professional sustainability (such as professional networking, continuing education, and dedicated business administration spaces).

Theoretical Framework

The design and scoring architecture of the FCCERS-R are grounded in robust, integrated developmental paradigms that emphasize the transactional relationship between children and their immediate physical and social ecologies.

Bioecological Systems Theory

The paramount theoretical foundation of the FCCERS-R is Urie Bronfenbrenner’s Bioecological Systems Theory. Bronfenbrenner posited that human development occurs through increasingly complex reciprocal interactions between an active, evolving biopsychological organism and the persons, objects, and symbols in its immediate external environment—termed proximal processes. Within the FCCERS-R framework, the family child care home operates as a foundational microsystem. The scale operationalizes proximal processes by measuring not only the mere presence of learning objects (the distal structural environment) but also the frequency, continuity, and emotional quality of the caregiver-child interactions centered around those objects.

Furthermore, the subscale Parents and Provider directly targets the mesosystem—the linkages and processes taking place between two or more major settings containing the developing person (the child’s home family and the provider’s caregiving setting). High mesosystemic congruence, characterized by mutual communication, shared values, and mutual respect between parents and providers, creates psychological safety and continuity of care, which amplifies positive developmental trajectories.

Sociocultural Cognitive Theory

The conceptualization of language and cognitive scaffolding within the FCCERS-R draws directly from Lev Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory. Vygotsky emphasized that higher cognitive functions emerge initially on the interpsychological (social) plane before being internalized on the intrapsychological (individual) plane. The FCCERS-R subscale Listening and Talking operationalizes Vygotsky’s concept of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). The scale awards higher-level scores (Levels 5 and 7) when the provider does not simply direct or lecture children, but actively scaffolds language by asking open-ended questions that provoke internal reasoning, introducing specialized vocabulary during spontaneous play, and connecting immediate sensory observations to broader conceptual frameworks.

Attachment Theory and Social-Emotional Development

Drawing on John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth’s Attachment Theory, the FCCERS-R asserts that optimal learning and exploratory behaviors can only manifest when children experience a secure emotional base. In family child care, where infant and toddler cohorts spend long durations with a single adult, the provider acts as a primary secondary attachment figure. The Interaction and Personal Care Routines subscales explicitly evaluate maternal/caregiver sensitivity, physical responsiveness, emotional availability, and co-regulation. The absence of harsh punitive methods, combined with empathetic comfort during times of physical distress or emotional dysregulation, provides the internal working model of security required for exploratory learning.

Developmentally Appropriate Practice (DAP)

The scale embodies the core tenets of Developmentally Appropriate Practice formulated by NAEYC (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997). DAP mandates that educational and caregiving environments account for age-related developmental norms, individual child strengths and vulnerabilities, and sociocultural contexts. In family child care, mixed-age grouping creates unique developmental challenges: an activity suitable for a 4-year-old (such as small counting beads) presents a severe choking hazard for a crawling infant. The FCCERS-R scoring rules mandate that materials and activities must be developmentally safe and stimulating for all age brackets simultaneously present within the home.

Validity

The psychometric integrity of the FCCERS-R has been corroborated across numerous empirical validation studies conducted in diverse child care landscapes across North America and internationally.

Construct Validity

Construct validity evaluates whether the operational indicators faithfully reflect the theoretical domain of child care quality. During the revision of the original Family Day Care Rating Scale (FDCRS) into the FCCERS-R, authors convened expert panels of early childhood educators, child health professionals, and child care administrators to review, update, and refine indicators. The revision added specific indicators addressing mixed-age care realities, inclusive practices for children with special needs, and cultural/linguistic diversity. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses demonstrate that the items load coherently onto their theorized latent constructs, with primary loadings confirming that structural components (furnishings, health protocols) and process components (dialogue, interactive warmth) converge toward an integrated measure of global environmental quality.

Predictive and Criterion-Related Validity

Predictive validity has been substantiated through extensive empirical links connecting FCCERS-R baseline scores to standardized child developmental outcomes. In landmark studies evaluating state Quality Rating and Improvement Systems and large-scale early childhood cohorts (e.g., Burchinal et al., 2008; Child Care Bureau studies):

• Language and Cognitive Competence: Enrolled children in home-based settings scoring higher on the Listening and Talking and Activities subscales consistently demonstrated significantly higher standardized scores on the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT) and Woodcock-Johnson Applied Problems subtests, even after controlling for maternal education and family income.
• Socio-Emotional Functioning: Higher ratings on the Interaction and Program Structure subscales significantly predicted lower observed externalizing behaviors, higher levels of peer social play, and enhanced emotional regulation as assessed via teacher and parent reports on the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL).
• Dose-Response Relationships: Longitudinal tracking reveals that children who spend prolonged hours in FCCERS-R high-tier environments (scores ≥ 5.0) exhibit measurable school-readiness advantages upon kindergarten entry compared to peers attending low-scoring environments (scores ≤ 3.0).

Convergent and Discriminant Validity

The FCCERS-R exhibits strong convergent validity when compared against alternative observational measures of caregiving quality. Studies cross-validating the FCCERS-R against the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS) Toddler and Pre-K versions report moderate-to-strong positive correlations (typically ranging from r = .52 to .68) between the FCCERS-R Interaction and Listening and Talking subscales and the CLASS Emotional Support and Instructional Support domains. Conversely, discriminant validity is demonstrated by weak correlations between FCCERS-R process quality scores and distal socioeconomic markers such as provider household square footage or rural versus urban physical setting alone, confirming that the tool isolates actual caregiving processes rather than sheer household wealth.

Reliability

Rigorous reliability testing is vital for observational scales wherein subjective observer bias could undermine data validity. The FCCERS-R has undergone extensive empirical reliability testing, demonstrating exceptional stability and cross-rater concordance.

Inter-Rater Reliability

During the national field trials for the revised instrument, trained paired observers conducted concurrent, independent evaluations across representative samples of family child care homes. Inter-rater reliability metrics documented in the scale manual and independent psychometric assessments establish the following parameters:

• Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC): The overall total scale ICC consistently reaches between .85 and .94, reflecting high multi-observer concordance when raters have undergone standardized ERSI training.
• Percent Agreement Within One Point: Across all items, paired raters achieved average exact indicator agreement exceeding 86%, with consensus within one scale point (e.g., a score of 4 versus 5) routinely exceeding 90% to 95% across field trials.
• Subscale-Specific Consistency: Agreement remains highest on concrete observational items within Space and Furnishings and Personal Care Routines (ICC > .88), whereas dynamic items within Interaction require disciplined observer calibration to maintain ICCs above .80.

Internal Consistency

Internal consistency analyses evaluate the homogeneity of items within the overall instrument and its respective subscales. In extensive empirical datasets (e.g., Clifford et al., 2005; Harms et al., 2007):

• Total Scale Alpha: Cronbach’s alpha for the full 38-item FCCERS-R scale consistently exceeds α = .90 to .93, indicating exceptional overall internal reliability.
• Subscale Alphas: Individual subscales demonstrate robust internal consistency: Space and Furnishings (α ≈ .75–.81), Personal Care Routines (α ≈ .72–.78), Listening and Talking (α ≈ .83–.88), Activities (α ≈ .86–.91), Interaction (α ≈ .82–.87), Program Structure (α ≈ .74–.80), and Parents and Provider (α ≈ .70–.76).

Test-Retest Stability

Short-term test-retest reliability evaluations, conducted over intervals of two to four weeks without intervening professional coaching, demonstrate temporal stability coefficients ranging from r = .78 to .86. This indicates that while the FCCERS-R captures dynamic daily routines, the foundational infrastructure and habitual caregiving patterns of home-based providers remain stable over time in the absence of systematic programmatic interventions.

Factor Analysis

Extensive structural analyses utilizing both Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) have been conducted on the FCCERS-R to unpack whether its 38 items operate as a strict unidimensional construct or reflect a multi-tiered structural system.

Exploratory Factor Structure

Early psychometric evaluations employing principal axis factoring with promax or varimax rotations routinely extract a strong primary factor that accounts for a substantial proportion of the total shared variance (frequently 35% to 45%), confirming the validity of reporting an aggregate Global Environmental Quality composite score. However, secondary factor extraction consistently reveals a multidimensional two-factor or three-factor latent structure:

• Factor 1: Materials and Structural Environment — Encompassing items predominantly from Space and Furnishings, Personal Care Routines, and physical activity items from Activities. Item factor loadings on this latent construct typically range from λ = .54 to .82.
• Factor 2: Socio-Emotional and Interactional Care — Comprising items from Listening and Talking, Interaction, and the relational dimensions of Program Structure. Factor loadings here range robustly between λ = .58 and .86.
• Factor 3 (in three-factor solutions): Health, Safety, and Parent Partnership — Loading items focused on sanitary handwashing, safety precautions, diapering protocols, and formal parent communication channels (λ = .48 to .74).

Confirmatory Factor Models and Fit Indices

Subsequent psychometric investigations (e.g., Castle et al., 2016; Vu et al., 2018) modeled the scale using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to compare alternative hierarchical formulations. A bifactor structural equation model—positing one overarching general factor of Global Quality alongside distinct specific group factors (Materials/Provisions vs. Relational/Pedagogical Processes)—consistently exhibits superior fit to the data compared to a strict unidimensional model.

These fit metrics substantiate that while researchers and policy officials can reliably compute a single aggregate composite score for regulatory and benchmark purposes, diagnostic coaching and professional development interventions benefit substantially from isolating individual subscale and factor profile scores.

Instrument / Measurement Tool

The FCCERS-R is an objective, standardized observational assessment battery that evaluates early care and learning environments over a sustained period of daily operations. The technical profile and operational properties of the instrument include:

• Assessment Type: Structured, third-party observational rating scale supplemented by a targeted caregiver interview.
• Target Population: Family child care homes, home-based daycares, and registered childminding settings serving mixed-age cohorts of children from birth through 12 years of age.
• Total Number of Items: 38 comprehensively defined items organized under 7 primary developmental subscales. (An optional 8th subscale, Provisions for Children with Disabilities, contains extra specialized items scored when children with documented special needs are actively enrolled).
• Observation Window: Requires a minimum continuous observation period of 2 to 3.5 hours, strategically timed to capture core interactive morning routines, child-selected play, outdoor gross motor activities, and at least one personal care routine (such as snack, lunch, diapering, or handwashing).
• Provider Interview: A structured 20- to 30-minute post-observation interview is conducted immediately following observation to collect evidence on items not directly observable during the visit (e.g., emergency evacuation drills, parent conferencing procedures, professional development, and naptime protocols).
• Response and Scoring Metric: Each item is rated on a 7-point Likert-type scale with descriptive anchored benchmarks:
  • 1 = Inadequate: Care does not meet basic developmental, health, or safety needs; practices may pose developmental risks.
  • 3 = Minimal: Basic custodial care, health, and safety regulations are met, but educational and interactive stimulation is limited.
  • 5 = Good: Developmentally appropriate care, responsive interactions, intentional curriculum materials, and safe routines are actively present.
  • 7 = Excellent: High-quality individualized care, individualized scaffolding, rich materials, and warm collaborative partnerships are deeply integrated.
  • Intermediate Scores (2, 4, 6): Awarded when all conditions of the lower anchor are satisfied along with at least half of the indicators for the subsequent odd-numbered level.
• Scoring Rules and Stop Protocol: Scoring follows a rigorous hierarchical step-up algorithm. Within each item, specific observable indicators are categorized under levels 1, 3, 5, and 7. The observer evaluates indicators from left to right:
  • If any indicator under Level 1 is true/observed, the score must be marked 1 (unless specific “except” qualifications apply).
  • To achieve a score of 3, all indicators under 1 must be false (not checked), and all indicators under Level 3 must be true (checked).
  • To advance to a score of 5, all indicators under Level 3 must be met, and all indicators under Level 5 must be checked.
  • To advance to a score of 7, all indicators under Levels 3 and 5 must be met, and all indicators under Level 7 must be checked.
• Data Aggregation: Subscale scores are calculated as the arithmetic mean of all completed items within that subscale. The Global Composite Score is calculated by averaging all applicable item scores across the entire instrument (range: 1.00 to 7.00).

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Family Child Care Environment Rating Scale-Revised Edition was formally published in 2007 by Teachers College Press (Columbia University, New York), succeeding the original Family Day Care Rating Scale (FDCRS) originally introduced in 1989. The scale, along with its comprehensive scoring manual and companion expanded score sheets, is fully protected under international copyright law held by the authors (Thelma Harms, Richard M. Clifford, and Debby Cryer) and Teachers College Press.

Licensing and Purchasing Terms: The FCCERS-R is not an open-access or public-domain instrument. Evaluators, academic institutions, and government agencies must purchase official bound scoring manuals and standardized carbon-copy scoring booklets directly from Teachers College Press (https://www.tcpress.com/) or authorized educational book distributors. Repurposing, translating, digitizing into commercial software platforms, or redistributing items in proprietary electronic formats requires formal written permission and licensing agreements from the copyright holders.

Observer Certification and Training: While informal self-assessments may be conducted by reading the manual, high-stakes evaluators utilizing the FCCERS-R for research studies, QRIS star ratings, or regulatory accreditation are expected to achieve formal inter-rater reliability certification. The Environment Rating Scales Institute (ERSI) provides multi-day intensive field-training courses. Evaluators must demonstrate a minimum reliability agreement threshold of 85% within one point against an anchor master trainer across multiple concurrent live observations to be certified as high-reliability field assessors.

References

Below are primary foundational references and empirical psychometric studies establishing the development, structural properties, and predictive validity of the FCCERS-R:

• Bredekamp, S., & Copple, C. (Eds.). (1997). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs (Rev. ed.). National Association for the Education of Young Children.
• Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv2607144
• Burchinal, M., Howes, C., & Kontos, S. (2002). Structural predictors of child care quality in family child care homes. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 17(1), 87–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0885-2006(02)00132-7
• Burchinal, M., Vandergrift, N., Pianta, R., & Mashburn, A. (2010). Threshold analysis of association between child care quality and child outcomes for low-income children in pre-kindergarten programs. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25(2), 166–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2009.10.004
• Castle, S., Williamson, A. C., Young, E., Durant, S., & Solari, E. (2016). Assessing quality in infant-toddler family child care: Exploring factor structure and associations with children’s outcomes. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 36, 170–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2015.12.012
• Clifford, R. M., Reszka, S., & Rossbach, H. G. (2010). Reliability and validity of the Environment Rating Scales. Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
• Cryer, D., Harms, T., & Riley, C. (2003). All about the ECERS-R. Kaplan Early Learning Company.
• Harms, T., Clifford, R. M., & Cryer, D. (2007). Family Child Care Environment Rating Scale-Revised Edition (FCCERS-R). Teachers College Press.
• Kontos, S., Howes, C., Shinn, M., & Galinsky, E. (1995). Quality in family child care and relative care. Teachers College Press.
• Vu, J. A., Jeon, H.-J., & Howes, C. (2018). Formal and informal family child care quality: Measurement invariance and factor structure across structural and process quality. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 32(3), 329–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2018.1464529

Items of the Scale