Q: Why hasn’t the U.S. built systems that support kids?

Alexander: ±őłÙ’s not that we don’t know what to do — and it’s not that we don’t have lots of organizations and people trying to make things better. But we don’t seem to be able to scale anything or change in a big way. If it were easy, somebody would’ve figured it out already. 

But other countries have figured it out.

Alexander: In almost every industrialized country in the world, the kids are doing better than they are in the U.S. And if you look at any one of those countries and how they take care of their kids, you see a different system, but the one thing that struck me is that the health and well-being of kids sat differently culturally in the minds of people there than it does here. 

In other countries I visited, in Europe, Australia, New Zealand, there was a sense of responsibility as a society to make sure kids did okay. Whereas in the United States, we see it as the family’s responsibility.

Is racism the big difference there?

Volmert: Racist mindsets do contribute to a sense of undeserving-ness. We talk about pathologizing the Black culture mindset, which leads to this assumption that there is some sort of dysfunctional culture or bad values. Which then makes it not a collective responsibility. The thing that’s required to fix that problem is those communities need to improve their own culture. And so that provides a justification for not being concerned about kids outside “our” own sphere of orbit, and particularly for Black and other children and families of color who obviously are dealing with inequities that are a result of structural problems and structural racism. 

We’re basically saying, “Hey, there’s nothing we can do about that collectively.” 

(Spotlight for Poverty and Opportunity)

And we as a country don’t like government very much.

Alexander: And we especially don’t like government interfering with family life. And it doesn’t matter how liberal or conservative you are. If you’re liberal, you tend to be willing to have government help out families that are in trouble — “not ‘my family,’ but those other families that are in trouble.” And in other parts of the world, they look to government as sort of the bedrock of the way we take care of families. ±őłÙ’s a core function of government, similar to how Americans look at the military.

Volmert: The question comes down to, how do we talk about government in ways that enable people to recognize the critical role that government can and should play in supporting children and families?

What was the research process like?

Volmert: We developed a set of frames explicitly and frontally reframe the role of government vis-à-vis families. We experimented with different frames. For example, “Government is a critical partner for families.” “Government is one of the pillars of children’s well-being alongside families and communities.” “Government is us.” And so on.

How were those frames received?

Volmert: They not only were ineffective; they actually backfired in various places. 

So what did work?

Volmert: If you talk explicitly and straightforwardly about the public policies and programs that are needed, things that government can do that are essential to provide collective care for families and children, people are very open to it and open to that conversation. So instead of attempting, “Let’s have a big conversation about government’s role,” you just talk about the specific things that government can and should do.

People will buy into something called “Collective Caregiving” more than they will government-sponsored caregiving.

Volmert: For sure. Now, we didn’t test “government-sponsored caregiving,” but I can tell you that would not work. “Collective Caregiving” gives people a sense that they are part of it. 

They sometimes struggle to think about themselves as part of government. So it’s not that you’re hiding the ball. ±őłÙ’s just that you’re talking about government policies and programs as a set of actions for providing care as a society.

Alexander: People like the programs that government provides. They just don’t like the government because they think of it as “those people that we don’t like doing things that we don’t trust.” The joke was, the more excited I got about a way of talking about government, the worse it did. 

±őłÙ’s the G word.

Volmert: You can say it, but don’t lead with it. 

In your survey of field communications, you reviewed white papers and messaging and nonprofit communications of all kinds. What did you find about their messaging?

Alexander: There are some messages that advocates are using that actually work, counter to what we think they’re doing — especially messages around vulnerability. If we want to bring more people into the tent and more people to have a common concern about kids, and really create an upswell of interest in supporting kids and families, we have to try some different things. 

Volmert: ±őłÙ’s not that the field isn’t doing some good things. We saw trends that were promising but that need a nudge to be fully effective. There has been a tendency to talk more explicitly about racial equity, and while taking that is important, the way that the field was doing it, it tended to be by dropping in the phrase ‘racial equity.’ 

I often try to use that word in my writing, but it’s hard when you have to define it, because then it’s three paragraphs later and you’ve lost the thread. What do you recommend?

Volmert: In order to provide collective care, we have to make sure that we are doing it for all kids, not just our own kids. And we are explicitly talking about race partly by highlighting the ways in which historically and currently our society doesn’t provide care evenly across groups, that we don’t extend the same kind of collective care to Black children, other children of color, that we do to white children. 

Alexander: That has a really strong positive effect on the way people think, especially Republicans. Instead of using that term equity, saying, “We do not provide care to all kids in the same way” does the same thing, but it gets people over a hump. 

It was mind-boggling to me the first time the Frameworks team showed me this stuff. You can get people to think differently by just talking about equity in a different way. 

And how about “Citizen Caregiver”? How did that arise in the conversation?

Volmert: Care is the central thing that people think kids need. So is it possible to stretch that idea so that when people think about care, they’re not just thinking about interpersonal caregiving; they’re thinking more broadly about the range of actions that we can take as a society, including public policies? 

We played around with that idea and found that it was somewhat productive, and then we asked, “How do I have a role in this collective thing?” ±őłÙ’s not something that’s happening over there or something that someone else is doing. ±őłÙ’s something that people have a personal stake in and a personal responsibility for.

Which other issues might this framing strategy apply to?

Alexander: Gun violence, for one. Don’t start talking about “the epidemic of gun violence.” Start by saying, “One of the most important ways we can care for our children is to make sure that their schools are safe from gun violence.” 

Volmert: With environmental issues, if you talk about healthy air and water, people immediately get, “Wait a minute, yes, of course that affects kids’ well-being. And there’s actually nothing that I can do individually or that families can do to solve that problem on their own. There’s nothing I can do as a parent to make sure that my kids are breathing healthy air, because this is something outside of any individual’s control.” 

And so it becomes a way to prevent people from defaulting back to this idea that, “Oh, it’s just the family’s job. This must be parents’ responsibility.” Instead they think: “Okay, wait a minute. I wouldn’t usually think of this as a kid’s issue, but it requires collective action in order to make sure that all kids have what they need to do well.” 

Early Learning Nation: I’ve seen you speak a few times, and one of the moments that always gets a strong reaction is when you show that the early childhood field makes it all more complicated than it has to be.

Marica Cox Michell: We throw all these terms at families — child care, day care, early learning, preschool, Head Start, pre-K —Ìę and are like, “Figure it out.” The response tends to be, “I don’t know what these even mean.” ±őłÙ’s too much complexity to throw at families and for the workforce as well.

So there’s a better way to talk about it.

We had to create a new lexicon to make it make sense. And so, there are two child care options. Only two. One is an Early Childhood Education Program. This can exist in a school building, a house, a condo, a church basement or community center. The other type is a Trusted Caregiver. This is essentially the family saying, “I can handle this myself.” It could be someone working from home. It could be an amazing grandmother living in a three-generation household.Ìę

Neither option is inherently better than the other.

There’s no hierarchy. ±őłÙ’s also fluid. A family, for the first six months, might want a trusted caregiver. And things might shift, and they might want an early childhood education program. Child care policies should flatten the hierarchy to better align with what families want.Ìę

That sweeps away a lot of the confusion and cobwebs. There are programs, and there are trusted caregivers, and the families themselves need to have a say in which is right for them.

I often say, “Simplicity is going to be the child care innovation.”Ìę

And then we can tackle the real problems. How does the Bainum Family Foundation view the state of child care in the United States?

Child care is under-resourced and undervalued.Ìę

Funding tends to be episodic, whether it’s philanthropy or government. This funding is bringing some long-term stabilized resources to this sector. It also allows our partners the freedom to be innovative and to develop solutions that can pave the way for systems change.Ìę

We are not episodic with our funding. We are committed to the early childhood sector and dedicated to supporting its advancement. For example, our initiative is about partnering with “proximity experts” (families and early childhood education professionals with lived experiences and specialized expertise) to define solutions and to direct our investments.

Do you feel a sense of momentum around child care right now?

I’m excited about the visibility of the discourse around child care and the diversity of who’s engaged in this conversation. Gone are the days where you show up at a national or local meeting around issues impacting young children, and you only see the early childhood advocates talking amongst themselves.Ìę

Where else do you see opportunity?

There’s also been a shift from focusing solely on the problem to focusing on the solutions. The conversation’s shifting away from, Tell us more about how bad the child care system is. Now it’s about What can we do?Ìę

±őłÙ’s about tangible solutions, whether they’re incremental or transformative.Ìę

There have been important advances in D.C., but then a few months ago they were almost lost.

Yes. Advocates were able to increase awareness, and a large portion of the D.C. Early Childhood Educator Pay Equity Fund that was not in the Mayor’s budget was restored.

It shows that you have a network of advocates ready to respond when there’s an all-hands-on-deck moment. People come together and know how to work together and collaborate.

It also shows the importance of stabilized long-term funding. It creates stability for the rapid response that we saw from the advocates in D.C. It is important for the sector, whether advocates or direct service providers, to have that level of stability to respond to the ever-changing context that they operate in.

What should our readers know about Florida?Ìę

For us, as we look at the early childhood landscape there, it reinforces the notion that early childhood issues are bipartisan.Ìę

For example, early learning is being elevated in conversations around economics and labor productivity, so the Florida Chamber of Commerce is very active, because it’s about the workforce of the future, but the well-being of young children and families is also a part of the discussion.Ìę

How did you get into this issue? What makes you passionate about it?Ìę

I started my career almost 26 years ago as an early childhood educator, and I always saw the gap between research, policy and practice. I was always committed to narrowing that gap.

You experienced the inequities firsthand.

Oh yeah, definitely. My work was as rigorous as that of my peers in elementary schools and high schools. We were on the same college campus, oftentimes taking the same courses, but our compensation and societal recognition varied. We were penalized because we chose to work with younger children. I also saw what families were asking for, and how their needs were not prioritized.Ìę

When I left the classroom, I sought to narrow that gap. To flip the script.

There’s a feeling that the stakes are high right now for child care. Things are changing, but are we going to get it right this time?

±őłÙ’s Define yourself or be defined.Ìę

I recall a quote from one of our proximity experts, who said, “I don’t want to be a victim of the future, I want to shape it.” Through WeVision EarlyEd, we are creating room for those most proximate to shape the future of child care. And as philanthropists, taxpayers, lawmakers and policy influencers we should shift our focus and funding to making their ideal real.

Swartz: How does your team determine the degree of play-based learning?

Pyle: Our Continuum of Play-Based Learning breaks down play-based learning into sub-components. Each type of play in the continuum is determined by how much agency children have and how much agency adults have. The intent behind this continuum, and all the research that we do in the lab, is really to support teachers by building on what they know and helping them do better.

Swartz: Where is the sweet spot along that continuum?

Pyle: The research points to shared agency as the point where educators can make learning really meaningful and still give kids agency and excitement.

Swartz: How did you get into play research?

Pyle: I was a classroom teacher for several years before I went back to graduate school. I had every intention of returning to the classroom, but in 2010, as I started to do my dissertation, the Ontario government started to phase in its play-based learning model for 4- and 5-year-olds. Teachers were struggling with the new reality.

Swartz: What kind of challenges were they experiencing?

Pyle: We don’t have high-stakes testing like in the States, but there’s still a real accountability lens in our system when it comes to assessment and evaluation. Teachers were asking, “How do I do that when I’m supposed to do play, so I’m following their lead?” I wanted to find out where they got the message that play meant always following children’s lead. We started to unpack the reality that, actually, our curriculum is intended to be child-centered, not child-directed. We needed to understand how to help educators recognize the difference.

Swartz: What did you learn from talking to teachers?

Pyle: They all see the social-emotional value of play. They understand it’s important for young children, especially because they need to learn cooperation, good social skills, problem solving, how to communicate effectively, how to self-regulate their thoughts and emotions and reactions to things. But there’s a group of teachers who believe that the academic piece, all the other learning stuff, happens totally separately. With this group, while the kids were playing, they would be pulling kids over. They’d be like, “Come over here and I’ll do some serious teaching with you at the table.” And then they have whole group lessons where they bring everyone together and the kids just sit and listen.

Swartz: So play and learning are separated, and you’re talking about integrating them.

Pyle: Maybe I’m just being optimistic and I do prefer to live in that mindset, but I feel really positive that actually these things can still happen in the context of play.

Swartz: Some teachers already get that, right?

Pyle: Yes, there are many who align with more contemporary notions of play-based learning. They see it as a useful approach for engaging kids, giving them agency in their own learning. They see it can be used to teach academic skills as well and social-emotional skills. So they still have that free play that’s child directed, and they don’t get involved in unless they’re needed.

But then they also thoughtfully design playful contexts or games that will help. So when it comes to fundamental literacy skills, they design games to help them learn those skills—games where they look at rhyming words or alphabet games. And then they’ll thoughtfully design contexts of play where they can interact with kids and sort of scaffold kids’ learning.

Swartz: What does that look like in the classroom?

Pyle: I visited a classroom that decided to set up a pretend veterinary clinic and observed how the teacher then infused other pieces into it. So she was just like, “You know what? We should have patient charts so you can record who came in and what they needed. We should have appointment cards so they know when they’re supposed to come back.”

Swartz: You can take that in a lot of different directions.

Pyle: One day the kids were having a heated argument about whether or not the giraffe’s leg was broken. And one of the kids finally shouts, “You can’t know that because you can’t see inside.” So the educator comes in and says, “Actually, there’s a tool for that.” And another child shouts, “Oh, I know about it. ±őłÙ’s an X-ray, because my brother had one of those because he broke his arm.”

So then it became really exciting again, and the kids were like, “Okay. Well, we need one, obviously. To solve this giraffe mystery, we need an X-ray machine.” Of course they made it out of cardboard boxes. And then the educator points out, “You need the X-rays that are going to come out of it, so let’s look up what that looks like online and you can create your own.”

Swartz: And she worked reading into the game, too?

Pyle: Right. ±őłÙ’s a bit unfair to think four- and five-year-olds are going to teach themselves really hardcore difficult skills like reading and writing, but the educator incorporated books about animals, so that kids could look things up if they needed to, and she provided direct support to students using their sounds to label the x-rays they created.

Swartz: What’s next for your research?

Pyle: We’re just finishing up a project right now that looks at creating a tool for educators to help them determine how successful their play activities are, from their children’s perspectives. ±őłÙ’s a self-reflective tool that we designed with researchers and educators in Colombia, Bangladesh and Uganda, where there’s very limited access to education and professional development for teachers.

Swartz: Do teachers in the U.S., Canada and Europe have something to learn from the teachers in the Global South?

Pyle: Absolutely, we have a lot to learn from them. I think their creativity has to be better than ours at the moment. As I worked on this project, I had a lot of humbling moments. ±őłÙ’s been very useful to try and think about how we can help support educators and create resources for the majority world, where they don’t have all of these things that we think we need in every classroom.

Mark Swartz: There’s so much to say about climate change and children. Moms Clean Air Force is about more than just air quality, right?

Karin Stein: As an organization, we fight for clean air, because air is water and nature writ large; it means fighting for healthy ecosystems and healthy people.ÌęWe focus on air because it touches all the rest. When people talk about mercury in water, it’s coming from air pollution emitted from coal plants that settles into our creeks and lakes. It then gets deposited in the fatty tissue of fish, which then gets eaten, and if a pregnant person eats the fish, that mercury keeps concentrating further in their fatty tissue. The next thing you know, it’s in the fatty brain tissue of an unborn child at much higher concentrations than when it first left the smokestack of the coal plant. Mercury in children’s brains can lead to serious developmental issues, including impaired motor function, learning impairments and behavioral problems.

Swartz: What is the relationship between Moms Clean Air Force and ?

Stein: EcoMadres is Moms Clean Air Force. ±őłÙ’s a branch that connects culturally and linguistically with a diversity of Latino communities.

Swartz: Have you always lived in Iowa?

Stein: I think of myself as a South American child, a Central American teenager and a North American adult. I was born in Colombia. I grew up in the remote eastern savannasÌęof Colombia with no electricity and lots ofÌęwild animals. I had a pet anteater and monkey. As a teenager IÌęlived in Costa Rica and continue to be involved with a rainforest conservation foundation there.

In 1980, I got a scholarship to come to Grinnell College and thought, “Okay, I’ll jump on a plane, get a four-year degree and go back.” But then life happens, and before you know it, 40 years have gone by. I live on the edge of a state park, Rock Creek State Park, and everything else around us is farmland. I have spent most of my life in rural areas around the Americas. This gives me a very strong sense of how various environments have changed as a result of the climate crisis.

Swartz: What did you study?

Stein: I have an undergraduate degree in biology and a master’s degree in horticulture.

Swartz: And you’re also a professional musician. How does that fit into the picture?

Stein: After grad school I was a researcher, but once my first child was born, I turned my musical hobby into my profession.ÌęMoms Clean Air Force recognizes that humans are multifaceted and that there are various ways in which we connect. They’ve encouragedÌęme to use music in my community engagement work for Moms, because, as a Latin American, I understand how centrally important music is to our cultural identity. Music is a trust-building language, especially among Latinos. So it’s a tool. ±őłÙ’s not the main tool I use in my work for Moms, but it’s a tool, and we need to use all the tools we can.

Swartz: So, you come to rural Iowa with a different perspective on the natural world from your neighbors, but you’ve probably learned a lot from Iowans about how they view the soil and the planet and the natural world. What kind of conversations do you have?

Stein: Iowa hasÌęa really interesting mix of people. My husband and I talk a lot to the family farmers who are still there, but they are an endangered lifestyle, encroached upon by big corporate farming operations. Family farmers tend to be interested in doing what’s right for the soil, the water, even the climate.Ìę You don’t hear those concerns expressed by farming corporations.

Swartz: Some people might be surprised that Iowa has air quality issues.

Stein: All it takes is one source of pollution and you have a problem. In northwest Iowa, we have some of the highest asthma and cancer rates in the country. Iowa also hasÌęsix of the most polluting coal plants in the whole country. I’m involved in a coalition that’s asking MidAmerican Energy, which is owned by Berkshire Hathaway, to close its remaining coal plants by 2030, because their plants are hurting Iowans, especially people of color. Another thing I’d like to mention is that in rural areas, proper air quality monitoring is often overlooked.

Swartz: I’d love to hear about a family that you’ve worked with.

Stein: I’ll tell you about two on diagonally opposite ends of Iowa. There is a woman in southeast Iowa, in the region near Muscatine. She has two boys. One of them, and this is where I start really choking up, the younger one, who is now eight, was born asthmatic. Because of bad air quality in his neighborhood and his school, he’s never played outdoors in the winter. Ever. There are a lot of children who cannot play outside during a good portion of the year because of poor air quality.

And then let’s travel to northwest Iowa, where I just recently met Indigenous leaders. There’s a big Winnebago settlement near one of the two coal plants owned by MidAmerican Energy. And it was simply heart wrenching to hear their testimony about the extremely high cancer and asthma rates in that community. And it boils down to insufficient safeguards on emissions and insisting on continuing to use technologies that we don’t have to use anymore, because we have better options now.

Swartz: It must be gratifying to help them tell their stories to policymakers.Ìę

Stein: Some of my proudest moments have been getting very shy immigrants to understand that legislators are not the police, and that the stories of their children are important, because legislators cannot know everything.

Swartz: When you’re talking about small lungs and brains, they’re resilient, but they’re very vulnerable.

Stein:ÌęChildren are developing organisms with fast metabolisms, breathing faster than adults and inhaling dirty air closer to the ground, at the level of exhaust pipes. We know that particulate matter inhaled by mothers enters the bloodstream, enters the child’s, the fetus’s organism, and can create heart, brain and lung damage before the child is born.

Extreme heat can do that too: it can lead to premature births and many other complications. And those most affected areÌęalways the people who can least afford it, the people who least contribute to our climate crisis, who can least afford to protect themselves from the climate crisis.

Anything we can do for our children while they’re developing — in terms of keeping them healthy now and in terms of slowing down the climate crisis — I can’t think of a more important job, frankly, as a mom and as a world citizen.

Casey Stockstill, Dartmouth College sociologist and author of , and Halley Potter, senior fellow and director of PK-12 education policy at the Century Foundation, want to change that. They’ve joined forces to identify successful economically integrated early education programs and document what they look like and how they make it work. I was excited to hear about their work. In my reporting, I too have explored those , including a my kids attended. So, I reached out to Stockstill and Potter to learn more about their work. Our conversation has been edited for clarity and length.

Kendra Hurley: Why do you think segregation in early education remains so under the radar compared to K-12, and what do we lose when we don’t speak about it, or address it?

Halley Potter: Part of the challenge of talking about segregation in early education is that we haven’t fixed the question of access yet. For all of the challenges in our public schools, at least we have a guaranteed right to an education for students once they start kindergarten. But in early ed, because we still need to make sure more children have access to quality early learning, that’s where most of the conversation stays. But we do need to be having the conversation about segregation as we’re having the conversation about access. If we don’t, then we can end up expanding access on the backbone of our highly inequitable and segregated system.

And that’s a big missed opportunity, because in many ways, early learning environments are best set up to take advantage of a lot of the benefits of diverse educational settings. High quality early learning is play-based — it’s about children interacting with each other— so there’s this great opportunity to have children coming in with different experiences and different vocabularies, creating a really rich learning environment.

Also, parents are talking to teachers more, and [it’s] kind of the whole family coming in to the learning environment, so a diverse community in a classroom can lead to benefits for families as well. You [might] have social connections between a parent who’s looking for a job and a parent who’s looking to hire someone, or knows about a job opening.

There’s evidence that parents are the most receptive and excited about diverse learning environments, during children’s early years. I think of that, and I think, “Let’s capitalize on that.” Getting kids in early education programs when they’re young could help families see the value in that early on, and that might influence their education choices and the ways that they show up in different educational spaces as their kids get older, too.

Casey Stockstill: For many parents, child care is their introduction to school.ÌęSo, it’s whatÌęthey get used to in terms of their child’s classmates, and how to engage with the teacher, and what to expect.

Also, teaching kids can look really different when you have segregated classrooms. In my book, I observe a Head Start classroom where you have six kids experiencing issues at home because of poverty, or they’re new to preschool because their family moves all the time because of poverty.

Teachers are dealing with those issues, and that can take away time from things like sitting down and reading a book calmly with a child. We add a list of demands to teachers when we give them a classroom of students who are all in poverty. And when you think about majority white preschools, where there’s one or two kids of color with a white teacher, sometimes that doesn’t communicate that it’s welcoming to kids of color. So, I wonder how segregation is making it harder for preschools to do this work of closing equity gaps. I don’t think separate is equal here either.

Hurley: There are so many barriers to integration in early education, parent choice being one of them. How did you choose to focus on programs that are tackling it with funding solutions?

Potter: We have this fractured early education system. We have private programs that charge tuition that is typically unaffordable to lower income families. And then we have many public programs like Head Start which are only open to low-income families, or to children who have met certain other criteria for risk factors. So, we’re set up for segregation.

The real solution is big public investments in early education that make it possible for everyone to access this together. But until we get there, we have to work with the fractured, flawed system we have, and one of the ways to do that is to create more programs that are accepting multiple types of funding streams. And then we can have multiple types of families enrolled.

Stockstill: Bringing different funding streams together (called blending and braiding funding) is the first step to increased accessibility for Black, Latino and Indigenous families. That’s because we have racial gaps in income and wealth. So, if you have a private program that is expensive and inaccessible to middle-income or lower-income families, that program is going to shut out a disproportionate share of Black, Latino and Indigenous families. There’s a hope that programs that do the blending and braiding will also consider racial equity and inclusion, and make their programs welcoming to children and families of color.

Hurley: Tell me about the project you’re working on to that end.

Potter: We’re building a list of early childhood programs that are doing different types of blending and braiding of funding, and are using that as a way to enroll children from diverse backgrounds, diverse socioeconomic backgrounds, but also diverse racial backgrounds, and in some cases linguistic diversity and diversity of ability. And part of that will be in-depth profiles of some programs. We’re hoping that showing examples of where a funding strategy has been leveraged to create diversity will help increase the appetite to do that, answer some questions about strategies that work, and also serve as an advocacy tool.

In most cases, blending and braiding really feels like pushing against the tide. If you are a Head Start provider and you want to enroll families who pay tuition, there aren’t a lot of supports to make that happen. If you’re at a private preschool and you’re interested in taking children with child care subsidies, again, it’s usually up to you to figure it out.

Stockstill: I hear quite a bit from directors who say, “We accept the subsidy, but we don’t have any families using it.” And if a family goes through an income loss or can’t make a payment, there are programs that want to be able to continue supporting them. And what I tell them is, “Having a [mixed] funding structure is the answer.” So, there’s this appetite for inclusion, but there are these missing links.

And there are parents who would like a diverse early learning environment. You just usually can’t find one, because we know two-thirds of these programs are segregated. I see it as being helpful to certain programs to offer an integrated program, and to kind of sell that as a plus to affluent parents who basically have more choice.

Hurley: What about the big chain child care programs like Kindercare, Bright Horizons and Primrose? Few of their centers take subsidies or vouchers and their tuition is often quite high, making them inaccessible to many families. Yet they’re capturing a bigger and bigger share of the child care market. Are you planning to look at what they might do to diversity their funding and families?

Stockstill: This category of child care that are chains that do franchising charge the highest tuition, and they do not pay teachers more. For them, it’s profit-seeking. And the administrative cost of blending and braiding funding streams, and also accepting the subsidy rate does not lend well to profit.

There’s always a gap between the subsidy rate — which is what the government offers you to provide care to a kid on the subsidy program — and what programs actually need to serve that kid well. And a lot of the successfully diverse programs like or All Five in Menlo Park, California, make up that difference, through fundraising, or they’ll charge affluent families even more and let them subsidize the diversity. But all of that takes a commitment and an administrative savviness that I don’t see the chains being interested in.

Hurley: Casey, you’re working on program profiles for this project. What have you seen on visits to diverse child care programs that makes you hopeful?ÌęÌę

Stockstill: My favorite thing is hearing the stories of continuity of learning and care for the children. The Auraria Early Learning Center at the Auraria Higher Education Center in Colorado, serves student parents who are eligible for Head Start alongside faculty who pay full tuition. When the students graduate, they suddenly earn a higher income.

So they’re now past eligibility requirements for Head Start, but they can’t afford the $1,200 a month for care. If a family went to a pure Head Start program, they would have to move centers because they’re no longer eligible for Head Start. But because the program has mixed funding, their children can stay as they increase their income or the reverse, like if someone loses the job. It’s like, “you still get to be in this school; you still deserve to come here; it’s not about how much money your family makes.” I love that.

Are you a teacher or parent in a diverse child care program? Reach out to Halley Potter and Casey Stockstill by writing to potter@tcf.org.Ìę

So Early Learning Nation asked leaders and experts, “How can parents and caregivers make this a playful learning summer?” Here are their responses.

“Summer offers a more relaxed time for children to use their imaginations and get creative with whatever materials may be found around the home or in surrounding outdoor spaces: cushions and cloths, for example, can be used to build forts or to dress up; natural materials found outside, like sticks and pebbles, can be used to construct designs, practice number awareness and one-to-one correspondence. We encourage caregivers to offer these open-ended, no-cost, playful opportunities to children, allowing their imaginations to lead the way in play that bolsters language, mathematical and socio-emotional development!”

—Molly Scott, associate director of ; and Cynthia A. Wiltshire, assistant professor of early childhood education, and director of the

“‘The best teacher in the world,’ said Fred Rogers, ‘is the one who loves what he or she does, and just loves it in front of you.’ How can parents and caregivers make this a playful summer? By loving what they love — whether it’s painting or playing the guitar — and bringing their kids along for the fun.”

—Gregg Behr, coauthor of “When You Wonder, You’re Learning: Mister Rogers’ Enduring Lessons for Raising Creative, Curious, Caring Kids”

“My view right now is that we have to start working on adults. Find one thing today that’s playful and see how it makes you feel. Skip to the next place you’re going. What would it be like if you took one minute to notice what’s on the sidewalk rather than walking so fast that you don’t even notice it?”

—, professor of psychology, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, and coauthor of “”

“Turn off the phones, the screens and the noise from the world. And dive into the world of imagination and play with your child! Who knows, you may end up taking a ride into outer space in a rocket ship made out of cardboard, or turn into a dragon breathing fire on a castle. Your child and you will learn alongside each other, not just about the world but about each other, and what a beautiful moment that will be!”

—Binal Patel, chief program officer of

“Take some time to observe and ask children what they find enjoyable, while also thinking about what you find enjoyable. What can bring joy to the whole family, as children find joy in experiencing things with loved ones? Opportunities where children get to have agency and direct the activities, whether it is picking the song to sing or dance to master, book themes to read, place(s) to visit, which hill to climb and so much more would spark fun and joy. Finally, finding time for rest and being silly makes for a joyful summer.”

—Iheoma U. Iruka,

“We encourage families and caregivers to gather a collection of loose parts to create, tell stories, problem-solve and innovate. Tap into the interests and imagination of a child. For example, a simple paper towel roll can become a telescope for a fun game of Eye Spy; and then become a rocket ship where stories are told about travels in outer space; or a tunnel for a marble run they have created. The possibilities are endless!”

—Nadia Kenisha Bynoe and Angelique Thompson, authors of “”

“This summer, embrace outdoor play and nature as a vehicle for learning, whether that’s a trip to a local playground, a box of sidewalk chalk or a playful walk in the sunshine. Parents and caregivers can also raise their voices and advocate for equitable play spaces in their community so every kid can get the benefits of playful learning.”

—Lysa Ratliff, CEO of

“Embrace every day by bringing your children outside to play. Invite your neighbors to play. Step back and let the children take the lead; only assist with access to balls, books, dress-up clothes, sidewalk chalk, water, etc. and watch the magic of play.

—Pat Rumbaugh, founder of

“Parents and caregivers should find ways for themselves to play, both with their children, but also on their own. Play begets play.”

—Peter Wardrip, assistant professor of STEAM education, University of Wisconsin

“Play is an evolutionary strategy that strengthens our capacity to simultaneously experience joy, uncertainty and connection.  Listen to the laughter around you: Set down your phone and play!”

—Matt Karlsen,

“Play is a joyful constant in children’s lives. It is how they connect, grow and learn. This summer, embrace all these possibilities by giving children the time and space to play freely alone and with others, including you. Parents are important and valued play partners so play with children by following their lead when they jump in puddles and join their imaginary scenarios as they transform into pirates searching for buried treasure. But also invite them into playful activities that allow them to experiment and learn things like how to make paper airplanes that can fly long distances, building bridges that connect two pieces of furniture or building a fort big enough to snuggle in and read books together.”

—Angela Pyle, Ph.D., director of University of Toronto

On an upcoming webinar, Lloyd and Shaw will highlight learnings from the recently released study, covering the historical role of public agencies and academia in supporting research on Black families; the implications; how Black family demographics have changed over time; and the ways in which research, policy and practice must shift to attend to historical and contemporary challenges important for Black families. Dr. Shauna M. Cooper from the , Natalie Williams from the and Dr. Brenda Jones Harden from the Ìęwill share their responses to the findings.

Mark Swartz: How did you pick this topic for your research?

Chrishana Lloyd: I try to write the papers that I myself want to read or to cite. This project emerged from the observation that, historically, much of the work about Black families has been problem centered.

Swartz: Can you say more about that?

Lloyd: A lot of the work has been funded by the government, and the government has an interest in ensuring the well-being of citizens, so when you examine research about Black families, you’re seeing papers about poverty, crime, that kind of thing. Someone is saying, “We’ve got these Black people who are not doing very well, and what can we do to fix it?” That’s certainly the case with the 1965 [Daniel] Moynihan Report, . Sometimes that has worked against the interests of Black families. A lot of times, actually.

Swartz: Research costs money. How do funding issues influence research?

Lloyd: The resources shape and set the tone of what gets researched and how it happens. The money has to run through organizations like universities and think-tanks, and those entities have or bring people in to do the research.

As a result, the voices of the communities often get lost. I am very intentional in my work to ensure this does not happen. For example, in a current project, I am collaborating with a community member who is a primary investigator with me. We’ve worked side-by-side on everything from conceptualizing the research design to the final stages of the project.

Swartz: What’s the alternative to focusing on families and their problems?

Lloyd: W.E.B. Du Bois wrote in 1899, which precedes volume I of this review and he set the stage. He started teasing out systemic issues and noted that societal norms, values and social standards were based on the lives and experiences of white America. There was an idea of what a family is and what it should look like, and that was the ideal. When you didn’t fit that ideal, you had a problem.

Swartz: Stereotypes lead to bad research, which leads to bad policy — is that right?

Lloyd: Yes. Historically, a lot of our social policy is based on research on and ideas about one type of Black family: urban, poor and matriarchal. And that certainly is not what all Black families look like.

Swartz: The U.S. census is a valuable research dataset, if only to shed light on the biases in its design.

Lloyd: It definitely shows us that racial categories change over time. In 1920, the options were white, black, mulatto, Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Filipino, Hindu, Korean and “other.” The census taker, known as an enumerator, would show up say, “Okay, there’s a Black guy, or there’s a white guy.”

I discovered that I have a great-great-grandmother, an indentured servant, who was white, but everybody else in that home identified as Black. So if she had been the one to answer that door for the enumerator, that family would have been counted as white.

Swartz: You highlight a number of scholars, Black and white, who put forth iconoclastic perspectives on family issues. Who are some we should know about?

Lloyd: Melville J. Herskovits identified commonalities between African and African Americans back in the 1930s, an uncommon perspective that at the time was refuted.

And Oliver Cox conducted research around marriageable Black men, anticipating the work of William Julius Wilson in many ways. Cox was phenomenal in his thinking and his rigor. He actually drove people crazy. In the education space, there were scholars such as Horace Mann Bond, Cecil Sumner and Charles Henry Thompson who challenged the accepted notions around intelligence testing.

Swartz: Much of the work you discuss takes place against the background of major historical trends such as the Great Migration and the Civil Rights movement. How do researchers gain perspective on what’s going on in their present time?

Lloyd: You could say the same thing about COVID today. It will take years or decades to come to terms with what we lived through, but including community voice is one important way to ensure context is not neglected.

Swartz: How does examining past research help point to a way forward?

Lloyd: We’re looking at the type of research that was happening as well as the people who were conducting it. And I just had an interesting epiphany, because I also do some work with a group of young Black scholars at historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs). I was at , and heard about faculty members who wear so many hats in addition to being scholars.

I went to an HBCU myself, and I’ve seen this firsthand and I have also experienced it. Mentoring students and staff, taking on administrative responsibilities, serving as the equity representation all things that take time and are typically are unfunded. Understanding this fact in the context of the research that gets produced is important. Black scholars have been key in putting forth broader perspectives of Black family life, including examination of systems that are barrier to their progress.

Swartz: They have one hand tied behind their back.

Lloyd: Research requires the luxury of sitting back and reflecting and coming together as a collaborative. It took about 18 months for this project to be completed because of other demands. We got there and tried to model the reflection and collaboration with this project, but it was not easy.

“Young children are the best of us: hopeful, idealistic and driven by unconditional love. We owe it to them — and to the world they will inherit and improve — to nurture and protect their developing brains and bodies, as well as their instincts and talents and hearts.”

—Dr. Dana Suskind, founder and co-director of  and author of “”

“What inspires me to work on behalf of our youngest children and families is that we are seeing the promise of our future fulfilled before us and living into our values every day.”

—Anne Mosle, executive director of

“State policy choices matter! The research is clear that state investments in young families and caregivers lead to a lifetime of benefits for children and society. ±őłÙ’s inspiring to work toward policy solutions that will enhance well-being and equity.”

—Cynthia Osborne, executive director of

“I’m inspired by family child care educators! I’m so grateful for their endless commitment as teachers and caregivers. Every time I watch them fostering curiosity, wonder and joy in young children, I am re-energized and ready to redouble efforts to get them the recognition they deserve.”

—Jessica Sager, co-founder and CEO of

“I’m inspired to work on behalf of children because securing our children’s future isn’t just a moral imperative; it’s the most crucial investment we can make. Every child deserves an equal opportunity to fulfill their dreams, and it’s our job to dismantle barriers that stand in the way of those dreams and create pathways for their success.”

—Marquita Little NuMan, executive director of

“The years of early childhood are the most consequential period in all of human development, holding the potential to put children on the path to lifelong success. But if the moral obligation isn’t sufficient rationale, think of the money. Our nation continues to spend an untold fortune on the results of our failure to act in accordance with the science of early development. ±őłÙ’s time we got smarter.”

—Dan Wuori, strategic advisor on early childhood, , and founder & president of

“When I was younger, I knew I wanted to be a super-engaged mom and also have an impactful career, but our public policies and workplace structures were not at all set up for that. I’ve been working for the past several decades to change the status quo—to make it easier for people to parent, work and care, because all of our children, regardless of where they come from or what they look like, should be able to count on safety and nurturance from their parents, early educators and community as a whole.”

—Julie Kashen, director of women’s economic justice and senior fellow at

“I’ve been inspired by children’s capacity and life stance, of course, but especially by the very young children with significant needs and disabilities whom I worked with long ago, and whose lives and opportunities have been very uneven. I’m inspired by them and by the millions of children who need significant supports to thrive and grow, the tireless work of their caregivers and educators and the promise of even more social progress to build a better future for the next generation and the world.”

—Nonie Lesaux, co-director of the at the Harvard Graduate School of Education

“Being a child advocate is not someone else’s responsibility. It calls on all of us — lawyers, doctors, teachers, environmental specialists, and spiritual leaders — to keep the best interests of children and families in mind in our work, to stand up for improved conditions that will help children and families thrive, to listen and be guided by the work of communities, and to leave the earth in better shape for the next generation.”

—Joan Lombardi, senior fellow at the at Georgetown University

“Kids are who inspire me! The urgency to honor childhood, the right to be a child— their full authentic selves, to play, to be loved, to be respected, to be free, that’s what fuels my work.”

—Shantel Meek, founding executive director of the at Arizona State University 

“When I think about what inspires me, the answer is simple: my daughter. Through my own lived experience as a young single mom, and as a Black woman, I quickly came to understand the significance of Dr. King’s quote: â€˜Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly,’ and that my daughter’s destiny would be strongly connected to the success of her peers. ±őłÙ’s what’s led me to community organizing, advocacy and public policy work, and on this journey, I’ve met thousands of children and young people who give me hope for our future.”

—Kim Janey, president & CEO of economic mobility pathways

“Young children inspire me with their joyful and curious approach to our world. Protecting that genuine wonder drives me to ensure we are doing everything possible to foster their joy through inclusive learning environments across all settings in partnership with educators and families.”

—Michelle Kang, CEO of the National Association for the Education of Young Children (

“The hardworking educators who undertake the often-underappreciated tasks of educating, nurturing and loving our children provide tremendous inspiration for my work. Their tireless efforts support families and, in turn, sustain the vitality of our city. I am equally inspired by the families navigating the complexities of child care in hopes of giving their children the strongest possible start in life. Ultimately, I recognize the profound impact of high-quality child care on society. Prioritizing children’s well-being isn’t just morally right; it’s also an investment in creating a brighter future for all of us in New York City.”

—Jocelyn Rodriguez, director of child care quality innovation at  

“Every day, young children are on a journey to learn something new about their world, and the early educators who care for them encourage this by creating joyful, affirming and nurturing spaces. I am inspired to support these early educators because the children in their programs hold so much hope and promise for our future.”

—Erica Phillips, executive director of the

“The foundations of a just and good society that allow persons to reach their full potential are established in the earliest years of human life. I work for young children and their families because I care deeply about building a society where human dignity is respected and individuals have every opportunity to flourish.

​—Joe Waters, co-founder and CEO at

“I am inspired in my work by the joy and creativity of young children as they explore the world, and the brilliance and thoughtfulness of the teachers and caregivers who help shape the environments in which they learn.”

​—Diana Mendley Rauner, president of

“As Too Small to Fail celebrates its 10th anniversary promoting early brain and language development, I continue to learn and feel inspired by the children and families that I meet through our work in communities across the country. I’m particularly inspired by the parents and caregivers who give so much of themselves to provide their children with the best start possible.”

​—Patti Miller CEO, , Clinton Foundation 

“As a child, I dreamt of making changes to the systems that impacted me, driven by a desire for fairness and equity. Now, as a mother, my greatest sense of purpose and joy comes from advocating for children’s rights and well-being. Navigating a fulfilling career alongside the challenges of rising child care costs has made me acutely aware of the obstacles many families face. As a deeply devoted mom, I am driven to create a better world for my children and all young ones, where they can thrive and reach their full potential.”

—Allison Gilbreath, senior policy and programs director at  

“There is something profound about a young child’s joy, curiosity and unlimited potential that compels me to build a world that keeps those intact for as long as possible.”

—Kai-ama Hamer, director of  

Cal Newport, computer scientist and Georgetown University professor, is billed as “one of the world’s top productivity experts.” He also has a new bestselling book, “Slow Productivity,” which extolls the virtues of doing less, working at a more natural pace and obsessing over quality. Doing so can reduce burnout and yield better work, and Newport includes tips along the way to make such work applicable to many different environments, even people who don’t have complete agency over where and how they work. His approaches include adopting a seasonality approach of intense periods followed by rest, limiting the number of ongoing projects at any one time to reduce the amount of administrative overhead, even taking an afternoon off to see a matinee while justifying that the extra time spent checking email on off-hours entitles one to some free time during the workday.

Newport points to greater thinkers, doers and creative geniuses of the past several hundred years with evidence that their ability to slow down and focus on the nuances of their ideas allowed them to produce lasting, brilliant work, including Jane Austen writing Pride and Prejudice, Lin-Manuel Miranda staging Into the Heights, Georgia O’Keefe painting at her summer cottage.

What’s fascinating about Newport’s slow productivity model is that it does seem to work; it’s reminiscent of the state of “flow” that Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi described, and many of us can attest to producing better work when freed of the frenzied pressure and distractions that get in our way. But the slow productivity model regards work as largely the product of the individual – optimizing how to get work done without acknowledging the systematic barriers in place that prevent other people from achieving it.ÌęThere is little discussion of the role of child care plays, even though we know that a lack of child care is one of the , and has been estimated to in lost wages. Even remote work, which has helped , Newport advocates, should be done outside of one’s house. He cites examples of iconic writers and their eccentric workspaces, explaining that this system works better because “the familiar snares our attention, destabilizing the subtle neuronal dance required to think clearly.” Indeed, it does. Yet without child care arrangements, all of this remains off-limits for many.

Early Learning Nation magazine connected with Newport about this and what role he feels caregiving plays in our work. Specifically, how can we still relish in the space of “slow productivity” while still dealing with the unproductive and yet necessary task of raising humans or caring for family members? (Disclosure: Newport and Rebecca Gale both live in the D.C.-area, where their kids overlap at school). A lightly edited Q and A follows.

Rebecca Gale: A theme I noticed in your book is that so many of these people could experience the coveted slow productivity only when freed of other work and care responsibilities. But the lack of social structures in place—paid family leave, subsidized child care, paid sick days—prevent that for many people. Your book largely focuses on the actions of the individual, but what role do you think those structural supports have in facilitating our current work environment?Ìę

Cal Newport: Slow productivity is not a state that you experience (like a flow state) but instead a new approach to thinking about knowledge worker effectiveness. The current status quo in this sector is what I call “pseudo-productivity” which focuses on visible activity as a proxy for useful effort. Pseudo-productivity is particularly difficult for those with care responsibilities as its demands to always be communicating and to always be saying “yes” to requests, provides little schedule flexibility or ability to recharge.

Slow productivity, by contrast, moves the focus away from activity in the moment and toward quality results over time. It acknowledges the need for variation in intensity and prefers doing a small number of things well than a large number of things poorly (and frantically). This is a much more sustainable way of thinking about effectiveness for those with overlapping responsibilities, as it provides more autonomy and freedom to fit work into complicated and varied lives.

In this way, I like to think that in the context of knowledge work, a shift toward slow productivity could complement other more structural solutions, such as paid family leave and subsidized child care, in helping to make these jobs more tolerable. In my book, I give a lot of advice for individuals to begin moving toward this concept of productivity, but longer term, I’d love to see it adopted at the organizational level as well.

RH: I was a writer long before I was a parent, but once I had my first child, a lot of my workplace-related writing shifted to covering the challenges parents face, particularly how caregiving responsibilities interfere with work-related ones. I know you’re a working parent as well, so how have caregiving responsibilities influenced your own work? Has it changed the way you’ve thought about how to manage time and external distractions? And when you speak to people about the need for slowing down to be more productive, how do you frame caregiving needs in the conversation?

CN: Caregiving was one of my most important personal motivations for writing this book. I have three boys, and when they all recently reached elementary school age, it became clear that they needed as much “dad time” as I could possibly give them. At the same time, I was reaching the peak of my powers professionally. This led to a clear and urgent question: how can I still produce work I’m proud of while keeping this part of my life contained? Slow productivity was formulated, in large part, as an answer to that question.

RG: One of the great tenets of your book (which is also reflected in Adelle Waldman’s new novel, Help Wanted) is how people are hard-wired to take pride in their work. In our own work at Better Life Lab, we capture a great deal of narratives from people who continue to work in suboptimal situations because they have pride in what they do. Yet many outdated structures disadvantage people with caregiving needs, such as unpredictable scheduling, zero paid time off and the lack of thoughtful promotion structures that don’t penalize people — usually women — from taking time off. What have you seen that motivates such workplaces to make changes to prioritize such things?Ìę

CN: One of the more insidious side effects of pseudo-productivity is that by centering visible activity as the primary generator of value, it casts any attempts to take time off, or work a reduced or alternative schedule, as a clear loss. By contrast, when you move toward slower definitions of productivity, it becomes more natural to value individuals holistically — not just for the sheer number of hours they can perform visible labor, but for their expertise, their leadership, the rare and valuable projects they will complete during their career. A lot gets better when we stop trying to reduce the value created in complicated and creative knowledge work to the raw hours spent performing busyness.

RG: You give the suggestion of auto-scheduling tasks, for example, sending invoices on Monday, reviewing grants on Friday, et al. But much of the essence of caregiving is that lack of control as a call from school, a sick kid or a snow day can derail even the best scheduled plans. Even in egalitarian relationships, one parent has to make a shift, and people who parent alone have even less flexibility. How have you found that people can maintain the aspects of slow productivity when outside responsibilities encroach on their well-designed plans?

CN: A foundational principle of planning-based approaches to organization is that your goal is not to try to stick to your plan perfectly. This rarely happens, as things come up: meetings take longer, kids get sick and so on. The goal instead is to do your best to have intention for when and how you want to get things done. You make the best plan you can. If something comes up, you change it the next time you get a chance, and then follow that new plan. The key is to keep returning to intention. The alternative, which is to go through each day in an ad hoc and reactive fashion, may seem easier at the moment, but is far more stressful and will create much more work for you in the end.

RG: You’ve documented a lot of historical changes and improvements in the way we work, along with some of the downfalls (days filled with Zoom calls). Where do you see work going, and what do you think things will look like a decade from now? Do you see a situation where the type of slow productivity you advocate will be available to more people in our economy? If so, what do we need to do to get there?Ìę

CN: Slow productivity is a concept that in both its motivation and details is very specific to the knowledge sector. (It wouldn’t make sense, for example, in the industrial sector, or the service sector, which have different structures and incentives.) I definitely hope that something like this more humane approach to productivity becomes wider spread in knowledge work in the years ahead. Even more important, however, is the hope that its opposite — pseudo-productivity — becomes rarer. I concluded my book by saying slow productivity was one of any number of possible alternatives to pseudo-productivity. The key here is less which alternative succeeds than that some alternative succeeds.

The result of lively and sometimes heated exchange among its seven co-authors, the report underscores ways that Arizona can better serve its youngest residents and their families. Early Learning Nation magazine interviewed Dr. Meek about the challenges the state’s early learning landscape faces and the opportunities to learn from other states.

Mark Swartz: This is your third “Start with Equity” report, right?

Shantel Meek: Yes, we published our first, in 2020. It dug deep on a national scale on discipline, inclusion of kids with disabilities and dual language learners. We looked at the data on how kids are faring and at the research into what works to support and address some of the disparities that we’re seeing. The report also included a policy agenda and recommendations. Later the same year we came out with Start with Equity: California, which coincided with the state’s creation of a , and a lot of our recommendations either aligned with or, indeed, informed that initiative.

MS: CEP is based in Arizona State University, so this report is a homecoming.

SM: I actually grew up in these systems that we’re talking about. I went to public schools my whole life, including through my graduate degree. I have my own kids now, one in the K-12 system, and one in the early care and education system. And so that certainly raises the stakes, increases my focus, makes me angrier.

MS: Where are the gaps in Arizona?

SM: I’d say we have major gaps across all three big domains we focused on in this report — equity, access and quality — all stemming from poor policies and chronic underinvestment. When Jan Brewer became governor in 2009, they zeroed out funding for child care in the state’s general budget. And we’ve never recovered until the 2019 infusion of resources from the feds came in, and then the pandemic funding.

After years of outdated, stagnant child care reimbursement rates, Arizona saw a plummet of contracted providers with the state, probably not surprisingly, which results in families having fewer choices, which may result in kids who are using subsidy, likely being served in more segregated settings because there’s fewer of them. We don’t have a public pre-K system in the state that meaningfully provides access to three- and four-year-olds.

On the quality front, we’re behind on basic policies like ratios and group sizes and overlook entire populations of kids, like dual language learners, which make up nearly half of the state’s young children. So I think all of those are underlying challenges.

MS: What about the state’s Quality Rating and Improvement System (QRIS)?

SM: The QRIS captures important dimensions of adult-child interactions. But it also ignores many of the issues that disproportionately impact kids from historically and contemporarily marginalized communities. Almost half of the young children in the state are dual language learners, but our QRIS doesn’t even mention them.

Communities like the one where I’m from and across the borderlands have a much higher percentage, but practices and policies that really impact their early experiences — like dual language instruction and building their bilingualism — are not really considered as part of the broader quality system. Inclusion of kids with disabilities is not measured or required as part of participation in the quality system. Exclusionary discipline policies, which disproportionately impact Black children, are not part of the system.

At the end of the day, what we “count” in rating systems, is what we value, what we resource. And if we don’t “count” the structural or process-oriented dimensions of quality that really matter to children with disabilities, to emerging bilinguals, to children of color — then the system wasn’t built for them. And that’s a problem.

MS: It doesn’t sound like the state is doing enough to support dual language learners.

SM: I’m Mexican-American, grew up on the U.S.-Mexico border speaking English and Spanish. My kids are growing up bilingual a couple hours north of where I grew up. So this is certainly very close to home. We have mountains of evidence to suggest that bilingualism and biliteracy is associated with a host of positive short- and long-term outcomes — across cognitive development, social emotional development, academic, school-family partnerships, college-going, earnings, even health. We know dual language education, where children learn English alongside a partner language — usually and ideally the home language, is associated with a number of academic advantages.

Still, an early learning program operating in my hometown of Nogales, where maybe 90% or more of children are growing up speaking Spanish exclusively or in addition to English, can offer instruction exclusively in English and be considered of the highest quality — five stars. It doesn’t matter that it’s wildly out of alignment with research because what you don’t count doesn’t matter.

MS: And this is in a state where one-third of the residents are Latino.

SM: Arizona is the last remaining English-only state in the nation. That applies to K-12 systems, not to early education, but it does create a climate where in most cases, early education has to transition these kids to English-only kindergarten.

There’s a disincentive to build on their home language — whether it’s Spanish or an Indigenous language — because of the fear that you’re not preparing them from this harsh, monolingual system that they’re about to transition into. The state superintendent for education recently filed a lawsuit because several school districts, including the one where my daughter goes, allow English learners into bilingual education or dual language programs. ±őłÙ’s a really hostile, center-stage issue in the K-12 space that certainly trickles down to early education. Not surprisingly, these policies have created a system where our English-learners are not set up to succeed, resulting in some of the worst graduation rates in the country.

MS: The report also sounds the alarm about children with disabilities.

SM: Yes, there are gaps across the system when it comes to serving children with disabilities. Take licensing, for example. There is no prohibition on excluding children with disabilities from child care settings. Programs often cite toilet training policies as a reason to exclude children with disabilities from their programs, as these kids are sometimes potty-trained a little bit later than their peers without disabilities. And training to support and serve kids with disabilities isn’t required in licensing.

While there is an inclusion coaching program in the state as part of the quality improvement system, it’s optional, so most of the regions in the state choose not to fund it. On the child care front, less than 1% of child care subsidies are going to kids with disabilities when the CDC says that about 1 in 6 kids has a developmental disability.

MS: How do you define equity?

SM: First and foremost, everything we do is informed by history, by an understanding of the roots of contemporary inequities and disparities. Then, at a systems level, we look at three things: access, experience and outcomes. Equitable access comes down to who gets in the door in the first place. Experience encapsulates everything from the teacher-child interaction to discipline, to praise, to the language of instruction. And “outcomes” refers to what our investments in programs and services make possible across various demographic groups.

MS: How about quality?

SM: We titled our QRIS report “Equity Is Quality, Quality Is Equity.” They are one and the same. You can’t have quality if you’re not paying attention to the experiences of kids from historically marginalized communities — who are the majority of kids in some places and the vast majority in some places.

Take, for example, a child care program that is informally excluding kids with disabilities by saying, “Oh, we’re not the right place. We don’t have the right services.” They’re turning away kids, but they could have a five-star rating. Across the country, there needs to be more understanding of the Americans with Disabilities Act in the child care space, because you’re not allowed to do that.

Think about a program serving all dual language learners and providing instruction exclusively in English. If we don’t count language of instruction as part of the rating system, this program could be rated a five-star and be unaligned with research on best practices for dual language learners. A program could conceivably be rated five stars and be expelling or suspending children, but if we don’t count that as part of our rating, families looking for information would never know that.

MS: What are the reasons for optimism in Arizona?

SM: There are state policy makers in office right now who have expressed support for child care, who have expressed an interest in equity, who have expressed an interest in really doing more for kids with disabilities, for kids who are bilingual and growing up bilingual, on discipline and other issues where we see racial disparities.

So I think that is promising and I think that’s exciting. The silver lining of being behind other states is that we can learn from them — what they’ve done right, what we want to avoid. There’s still time to build a mixed-delivery, high-quality birth-to-five system that meets the needs of all our kids.

Each state deployed the American Rescue Plan Act funds to stabilize their child care sectors. The success of the American Rescue Plan stabilization funding provided the impetus for select states to dedicate their own resources to continue the investments. Whether the product of years or organized lobbying, or a decision to reroute surplus funds back to families and educators, 11 states and the District of Columbia have taken concrete steps to shore up their own child care sectors.

from The Century Foundation, authors Julie Kashen and Laura Valle-Gutierrez detail the how and why of states deciding to invest in child care. Kashen was kind enough to share some of her insights from the report with Early Learning Nation magazine. A lightly edited Q&A follows:

Rebecca Gale: It took the American Rescue Plan to show what so many advocates of robust social policy have been saying for decades: government investment works and can make a difference, stabilizing industries and lifting people out of poverty. But the moment the funds ran dry, many policymakers were satisfied to return to the status quo. What do you think changed from their initial support of ARPA to their unwillingness to continue what has been shown to positively impact so many lives?Ìę

Julie Kashen: First, let’s acknowledge how bad the status quo was. Before anyone had heard of the COVID-19 pandemic, families struggled to find quality, affordable child care, and child care providers grappled to retain staff and afford basic necessities.

There were a lot of policymakers who were not satisfied to return to that status quo. In fact, the House of Representatives in November 2021, passed historic legislation proposed by President Biden — the Build Back Better Act — which included that would have lowered child care costs for nine out of 10 families with young children, while giving parents the choice to find the right program for their family in center-based, home-based, family-based, school-based and Head Start programs.

It would have expanded free preschool for three- and four-year-olds, raised wages in the early education sector and supported the cost of high-quality care. In fact, when ARPA passed, many envisioned that when the funding expired, there would be the foundation of a sustainable child care and early learning system in place. Unfortunately, that bill, with no support from Republicans, , and so did not become law.

When the funding expired, and both called for $16 billion in emergency child care funding to address the immediate needs caused by the child care stabilization funding cliff. So, I would argue that we have quite a number of policymakers fighting hard for change at the federal level, but being blocked in their progress by partisan politics.

RG: D.C. and the 11 states that opted to invest in child care are overwhelmingly “blue” states (D.C., California, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Mexico, Vermont, Washington) with a handful of “red” or “purple” ones thrown in (Alaska, New Hampshire, Kentucky). to find affordable child care, despite party affiliation. What do you think sets the states apart that opted to direct extra funds to the child care sector?

JK: All of the states that deployed their own resources for stabilizing their child care sectors experienced the positive impact of the ARPA stabilization funds and saw the benefits to communities and local economies of putting resources into children and families. Most of the states had long-term organizing campaigns, including grassroots organizing and union campaigns, that combined with a moment of greater awareness of, support for child care and political leadership that helped them succeed.

±őłÙ’s also worth noting that there are a number of “red” and “purple” states that took additional action leveraging federal funds. While we did not include them in our list of states that put their own resources in, the results of their leadership are similar using federal dollars. In , for example, after Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers’ multiple attempts to move $356 million through the state legislature were blocked by legislative opponents, he reallocated $175 million in Federal Emergency Management Agency funds to cover half of this gap. Missouri, Ohio and North Dakota are just some of the

RG: Ten states went through their state legislatures to take action, but New Mexico went through a ballot initiative to create a permanent fund which has the potential to offer some of the longest lasting impact (D.C. took action through the Office of the Mayor). Have you found that social issues like support for child care could do better at the ballot box than in state assemblies?

JK: We know child care is popular among voters regardless of political party. In fact, from GQR and the Child Care for Every Family Network shows four in five Republican parents of children under 18 (79%) support guaranteed child care, as do 83% of independent parents and 97% of Democrat parents. So, ballot initiatives are often a good route.

But it’s worth noting that more states improved their child care systems and invested in child care in 2023 than we have seen in any recent time, much of it because they finally had the federal resources to help. So, we now have clear evidence that when the federal government and states come together to take action, children, families and local economies all benefit.

That said, a concerning trend we also saw in 2023 was that when states found themselves with significant surpluses, rather than invest in families, that primarily benefited wealthy households and corporations. These tax cuts will reduce state revenues precisely at a time when more revenue is needed to invest in child care. The amount of lost state revenue will grow over time and make it even harder for these states to invest needed funding on child care and reap the economic benefits of those investments. Not only have these short-sighted tax cuts reduced states’ abilities to invest in child care programs, this lack of investment can induce further collapses in state revenues, since we know child care investments support local economies.

RG: Child care is an industry where the math will never quite add up. Your report quotes Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen as saying the current state of the nation’s child care is “the textbook example of a broken market” since existing market forces cannot solve it. What about the nature of child care makes it both different from other market services, and makes it hard for people and policymakers to understand why federal investment is needed?

JK: Families across all income levels share the same determination to provide the best possible foundation for their children, especially in their early years. Two-thirds of children under age 6 have all of their parents (either solo or coupled) in the workforce. Parents need the freedom to afford child care and to have peace of mind that their children are safe and nurtured while parents go to work or to school and make the best choices for their families.

Most families don’t send children to fourth grade with a check to cover the cost of their teacher’s salaries or to maintain the school building. The same should be true for child care. Our shared interest in making sure our children thrive shouldn’t start when they turn five. Like public education, public libraries, safe food and clean drinking water, child care benefits all of us. And child care and early learning investments are as essential to economic growth as physical infrastructure or energy.

Most parents need child care at a time when they can least afford it because they are early in their career. This has particular impacts for families of color due to, at least in part, ongoing systemic and structural inequities that perpetuate overrepresentation of communities of color in jobs paying lower wages, the ranks of those experiencing higher unemployment rates, and families living below the federal poverty level. Unlike college tuition, which is also too expensive, parents don’t have eighteen years to plan and save. To access child care, families are forced to pay an amount put together patchwork solutions that create instability for their work lives and for their children, or be one of the fortunate few who receive child care assistance.

Meanwhile, will continue to put upward pressure on prices as child care businesses will have to raise wages to attract early educators – or go out of business. Even before the pandemic wreaked havoc on the child care sector, data from the Center for American Progress showed that more than half of families with young children live in a child care desert (a census tract where there are more than three times as many children as licensed child care slots).

Underlying all of this is the devaluing of care work in American society. One of the many legacies of slavery is the shouldering of care responsibilities by the people in our society with the least power and fewest resources. In the early twentieth century, white lawmakers excluded care workers—who were overwhelmingly Black women—from fair wages and labor protections to preserve the status quo. To this day, our culture and policies continue to undervalue caregiving, leaving caregivers underpaid or unpaid, and without the support they need to thrive.

This history has also contributed to the expectation that family care is an individual responsibility, rather than a communal one: if you struggle, there’s something wrong with you. In reality, care has been a universal need and a public good that requires public-policy-supported solutions, and now more than ever must be treated as such. This is why the pandemic removing the invisibility cloak from all of the hard work of caregiving that had been going on all along was so important.

RG: Even the most generous state support — like Vermont and New Mexico — is not a substitute for robust federal support. From a policy perspective, what could that federal support look like, and what do you think is possible in the existing political climate?

JK: The Build Back Better Act is the closest we’ve come to the robust, comprehensive child care and early learning system we’ve needed since . Build Back Better would have made sure that every family who needs it could find child care that works for their families, nurtures their children and doesn’t break the bank.

The, reintroduced in April of last year, took many of the lessons of the Build Back Better fight and the American Rescue Plan implementation, and built on a solid foundation to become an even stronger approach.

While Congressional champions, advocates and organizers work toward the next big opportunity, the immediate need is significant. The hope is that a combination of an increase in existing child care and early learning programs through the FY24 appropriations process and supplemental emergency child care funding will both make it through Congress as soon as possible.

RG: You’ve been researching and working on social policy for the better part of two decades, yet it took the COVID-19 pandemic to finally give child care its moment in the sun. As we move further away from the emergency lockdown phase of Covid, how do you think people will remember this time in our country’s evolution on public policy? Do you see this as a turning point?

JK: The turning point is that 1. People saw clearly the value of caregiving; 2. The government took historic action that worked and we can now point to as evidence of the value of these investments.

The pandemic underscored the importance of investing in our care infrastructure — it crystallized how caregiving makes all other work possible, and how our failure to treat care as a public good burdens families and stifles our economy. The U.S. investments in children and families during the pandemic demonstrated the life-changing and economy-sustaining power of equitable policy. The investments in child care, the child tax credit and increased home and community-based services for older adults and disabled people were historic, serving millions of families, reducing poverty and supporting more people to age with dignity at home.

I remain optimistic, but the ease with which many of these policies have since been allowed to sunset, or roll back, or be eliminated altogether shows the extent to which bias, discrimination, and inequity are built into our economic system and structures. Two steps forward, one step back — it’s frustrating, but it’s progress that we can keep building on.

“I’m the president of a special group that helps kids under 8 years old like you! I’m so thankful because I get to help kids be healthy from birth, go to affirming and good schools, eat yummy vegetables, use the internet safely, read fun books with kids and families that look like them, breathe clean air and drink clean water, be seen as kids and play outside with friends in their neighborhood. I want all kids, especially Black and brown kids, to have a happy and joyful childhood where they can be their energetic selves!”

—Leah Austin, president and CEO,

“I’m thankful, particularly in the absence of congressional action, that state policymakers are taking the lead for young children — in red states and blue. What do North Dakota and Vermont have in common? This year the answer is transformative, bipartisan investments in child care.”

— Dan Wuori, senior director of early learning,

“I am grateful for every single adult who plays a loving role in the life of a child. Whether they know it or not, they are helping to build kids’ brains and lay the foundation for a life of learning.”

—Dana L. Suskind, founder and co-director, the Ìęand author of

“I’m fortunate to live in a state where the needs of children and families continue to be prioritized by policymakers, advocates and our resilient workforce. From historic state investments to early learning, to volunteer Chicagoans who continue to tirelessly provide supports to our newest arrivals, Illinoisans have demonstrated their commitment to ensuring that young children have the opportunity to thrive.”

—Julissa Cruz, senior director, community-based advocacy,

“I’m thankful that more children in California will be able to go to preschool and will have the opportunity to learn more than one language thanks to our organization’s efforts in partnership with fellow early learning advocates and leaders in our state.”

—Carolyne Crolotte, director of dual language learner programs,

“I am incredibly grateful that the narrative is shifting around early learning. Specifically, an understanding that our economy doesn’t work without child care; it is fundamentally an economic issue.”

—Chastity Lord, president and CEO,

“I am thankful for teachers who take the time to learn. Teachers who continually perfect their craft are an asset. My actual 5-year-old daughter says, ‘I’m thankful for school because my teachers make me smart.’”

—Danielle Grant, educator, Joseph Lee Elementary School

“I am most thankful for everyone working to build a society where children and families have everything they need to be safe and cared for in their homes and communities. As a society that truly cares about children and families, we should expect nothing less, and I’m grateful for everyone doing the work to make this vision a reality.”

—, editor,

“Here’s what I am thankful for: For Ani, Mari and Liza (teachers at my son’s day care) who provide my son with love, comfort and plenty of opportunities to learn and explore. For the few green areas and mulch in the parks near our home where my son can get dirty while learning about nature. For my colleagues who are working hard to build a future where all young children and families are supported, healthy and happy.”

—Ankita Chachra, senior fellow,

“My family grew this year, and, more than ever, I’m grateful for the early childhood professionals and caregivers who nurture my kids. These folks help our entire family to thrive. And they make it possible for me to work to help other families access quality early care and education.”

—Erica Meade, senior policy manager, at New America

“I’m grateful that more and more in the early childhood field are recognizing the importance of centering parental economic mobility in programs to help improve child outcomes. Parent income is an incredibly strong predictor for child outcomes, ranging from early literacy and health to college attendance rates. In our work at EMPath and with our partners in the field, we see firsthand how integrating an economic mobility lens has the potential to help families thrive and, ultimately, to have a positive impact on children’s lives.”

—Kim Janey, president and CEO, (Economic Mobility Pathways)

“I am thankful for the teachers who help the next generation to learn more deeply, feel more engaged and thrive both in their mental and physical health. I’m so grateful that the conversation around early learning now emphasizes resilience, coping and well-being as well as academic skills.”

—, author of

Mark Swartz: What can people expect from this year’s NAEYC conference?

Michelle Kang: I think people will find the joy, hope and community that we all need to sustain us in doing the difficult and demanding work of early childhood education day in and day out. This is our second annual conference back in person since the pandemic.

Our virtual gatherings were — and continue to be — great ways for far-flung educators to connect, but our members are also clear that they find so much value in coming together in person to solve challenges and celebrate success.

So, whether you’re working with infants, toddlers, preschoolers, kindergartners or adults, in colleges and universities, in centers or schools or family child care homes, you can expect to find your people. That’s the community of belonging we’re striving to create, at NAEYC and at this year’s conference.

Swartz: The workforce needs each other. How does NAEYC foster community?

Kang: Community is the core of our work. As a professional membership organization, we center the voices and lived experiences of those who are doing this important work with young children every day and in every setting — family child care, small centers, large centers, rural communities, Head Start, military child care programs, as well as faculty members in professional preparation programs and so on.

We know how isolating the work can be, but our membership community alone is 60,000 strong, and it’s a place where people can share, grow and advocate together, and where they receive resources, supports and professional development.

We see it happen through our 51 around the country. We see it happen through our , where people come together around shared interests and identities. And we see it happen at conferences, where people experience the depth and breadth of this community, and the joy that comes in being part of something larger than themselves.

Swartz: What does the landscape look like for your members today?

Kang: Even before the pandemic, our members have had to navigate this entirely untenable system where educators are paid wages that do not reflect the value of their skilled and impactful work while parents pay more than they can afford. Today’s inequitable landscape is defined by staffing shortages worsened by the pandemic and, unfortunately, the ending of federal child care relief.

It is clear that our country needs to sustainably invest more public dollars in child care and early learning — and particularly in the education and compensation of the early childhood workforce—at a time in a child’s life when the brain is undergoing the most rapid development.

Early childhood educators build brains and this country’s workforce: they are the workforce behind the workforce. But we can’t help communities thrive across all states and settings unless parents have affordable, high-quality, early childhood education options where their children can be safe and supported by well-prepared and well-compensated early childhood educators.

Swartz: The workforce showed incredible resilience before, during and since the pandemic.

Kang: As a working mother, I came to deeply appreciate early childhood educators and high-quality early learning programs. When our first son was an infant, we lived far away from family, and I remember feeling so overwhelmed. ‘How can I take care of this small human? How am I going to make sure that he is loved, cared for and nurtured?’

It was the early childhood educators in our life and the early learning program that we had that became part of my family. And when my son became a toddler, it was the early childhood educators in our life who said to us that he might be a different kind of learner. We were able to get him support and care as someone navigating the world with autism, so I will always feel grateful for the knowledgeable, caring educators in our lives, not only to support my oldest, but then my other two children as they came along.

At the time, my husband had a crazy schedule, and I really was the primary caregiver. The educators understood that and supported our family in the ways we needed it. Their resilience helped me find my own resilience as a parent as well. They are a true partner in this incredible journey of a child’s development.

Swartz: ±őłÙ’s not for the faint of heart.

Kang: Educators are very special people, and it’s very humbling to be the leader of an organization that speaks with and on behalf of those who are doing this incredibly hard work every day.

I am so grateful for the skills and expertise they have, and I know our NAEYC staff, Governing Board leaders and Affiliate leaders are working each day to bring our skills and expertise to the service of supporting and lifting them up.

Swartz: What skills and attributes are needed to become that kind of partner?

Kang: Kindness and empathy, of course, along with deep knowledge of how children learn and how to structure that learning. Educators build these strong, reciprocal, respectful relationships with the children’s families, including mom or dad or grandparent or aunt. I recently visited a faith-based program in Pennsylvania where it was evident that the educators are continually thinking not only about how to support children, but also how to engage with their families.

The parents told me how transformational the educators had been in their lives. One of the parents suggested that one way to garner more public support for funding early childhood education would be to take a classroom of toddlers to the legislator’s office so they could see exactly how complex the work is!

Swartz: What are some of the ways your membership gets involved in advocacy?

Kang: Whether they are taking their first step toward engaging with their elected officials, or are seasoned and experienced advocates, a core part of our work is providing equitable and accessible opportunities and pathways for our members to collectively engage with policy and advocacy at the local, state and federal levels.

From testifying in Congress to sharing their stories through our ECE workforce surveys, from making calls to joining Affiliate advocacy meetings to participating in our ever-growing annual public policy forum, our members know their voices are centered and their experiences are amplified in all places of policy- and decision-making.

Just this past year, 63% of participants at our public policy forum were first-time attendees, so we are really hopeful about the powerful future of our growing advocacy movement.

Swartz: How has NAEYC responded to criticism of its (DAP) publication?

Kang: Developmentally Appropriate Practice is a bedrock of the early learning field, and there has been some unfortunate negative attention in political circles based especially on misinformation about DAP and about NAEYC. The publication itself is not a book for children, but it is an important resource for teachers who are looking for research-based guidance to help them support all children in partnership with families.

We have worked to clarify and raise awareness of what DAP is and to rally the educators and families who rely on it to join a large chorus for whom this is an essential support in their work to ensure all children and families can have equitable access to high-quality early learning.

Swartz: How does being the child of immigrants affect your leadership style?

Kang: When my father emigrated from Korea, he had $200 and one suitcase full of belongings to chase the American dream. I admire the courage it took for my father and mother to pick up their lives and move to a country where the language wasn’t their own, the culture wasn’t their own. Their experience has helped me to see how leadership can mean having the courage to try something new, to believe in what you see as possible.

Swartz: Which other leaders do you admire?

Kang: I’m inspired by people who stand for important things.

I think of Malala Yousafzai, who had the courage of conviction to stand on behalf of the principle that girls and women deserve the opportunity to be educated. I find the poet Amanda Gorman inspirational for the impact she has had with her words.

Swartz: How do you know you’re making progress?

Kang: We see educators realizing and stepping into their own power and voice. Progress isn’t always linear, but we all can see the ways in which child care and early learning have garnered more attention and support from policymakers, the press, philanthropy, business leaders and the public than ever before.

±őłÙ’s wonderful to see our members rising to this moment, taking a seat at the table — even amid the challenges they face — to find that their experiences and their voices do matter and that, together, progress can be made.

The conversation explores taking a loving approach to the work, thinking about intentional equity and community partnerships that are grounded in respect for culture.

Mark Swartz: Early Learning Nation focuses on young children and their parents, educators and advocates. What would you like our readers to know about the Children’s Bureau?

Aysha E. Schomburg: The Children’s Bureau has always prioritized our partnership with early childhood education. Young children are at the highest risk of maltreatment. A high-quality early-education program can act as prevention for child abuse and maltreatment.

Swartz: On his first day in office, President Biden released his . How is the Children’s Bureau making good on this promise?

Schomburg: One of the first things that I did in this role was send a letter out to the jurisdictions of the nation to talk about equity. Foster care, which disproportionately impacts Black and brown children, is family separation, and that should only be a last resort. We’re really focused on not only prevention, but also on leveraging our tools to help families get what they need and helping states help families get what they need.

At the Children’s Bureau, we’re trying to move in a direction so that we have less to do on the intervention piece, because we are doing more on the prevention piece. And we have a long way to go, but we’ve come pretty far. For example, we want jurisdictions to spend more federal dollars on prevention. I’m happy to say that to date, we have approved 44 prevention plans, which includes 3 tribes, meaning 44 jurisdictions have opted to take advantage of the of 2018.

Swartz: Can you describe your strategy for advancing equity?

Schomburg: One thing is listening to folks with lived experience. I was in a meeting with impacted parents, and a parent said, “Let us tell you how we would spend the money to answer the problems that we have in our community.” That was well over a year ago, and I knew that when I had the opportunity to use some discretionary funds, I would try to do that. I heard what she had to say, and in response, we issued a . Field initiated, meaning we have asked the community to tell us how they would use the funds to address racial bias in the child welfare system — as opposed to the federal government prescribing how the funds should be used. This is our first field-initiated grant in at least 20 years, maybe 30.

Another strategy is strong and intentional collaboration with other agencies at the federal government and our sister offices in the Administration for Children & Families. In June we issued a notice of funding opportunity, , to invest $2 million to enhance collaboration at the jurisdictional levels or at the state level between your child welfare division or office and your early childhood education partnerships. We collaborate with Housing and Urban Development, with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and so on.

Swartz: How did the pandemic affect the foster care system?

Schomburg: The pandemic generally exacerbated inequities. Most of us are acutely aware that there are inequities throughout the country in various different ways, particularly when it comes to the haves and have-nots. When the pandemic started, I was working for the New York City Administration for Children’s Services. Right away, it was like, okay, everything is closed. People were unable to work. So those folks who were, for example, food insecure, now literally had no food. There were lines, several blocks long, of people waiting to get into a food pantry. Not everyone had access to Wi-Fi and the things that they needed to be in communication with each other.

Swartz: How did you get up to speed, going from a city role to a federal role?

Schomburg: One of the great things about this role is that I get to see so many different places, and every time I go somewhere, I have an aha moment. There’s so much beauty in this country. But then I happen to have this role where I’m constantly dealing with challenges, trying to prevent child trauma, trying to help families stay together by ensuring they have access to whatever they need. There are 574 federally recognized tribes. There are some issues and challenges that are particularly related to tribes, and in this role, I have had the privilege of learning specifically about challenges experienced by tribes and by folks living in rural areas. Whenever I travel, I make it a priority to speak to community members, impacted families, impacted young adults.

Swartz: What lessons has the Children’s Bureau drawn from the pandemic?

Schomburg: When I came into this position during the pandemic, we wanted to create more flexibilities with our federal funds, so we could be able to say to the states, for example, “You can use to give cash assistance to young people, to use for whatever needs they may have.” We try to interpret a law to be as flexible as we can.

Swartz: What motivates you to do this work?

Schomburg: The number one reason I do what I do is because I love the children and the families that we serve. I don’t feel like we talk about love enough. I’m taking a loving approach to doing this work, to thinking about intentional equity, to thinking about community partnerships that are grounded in respect for culture.

Swartz: How has your own personal story shaped your commitment to children?

Schomburg: I grew up in Brooklyn, and I’m one of five children. My parents worked. I had a two-parent household, and we were in a beautiful neighborhood, in a beautiful home. I don’t ever remember being hungry. We went on vacations. This is how I thought families were. We’re all together, eating at the dinner table every night.

It makes me want that for every family. That’s my inspiration and motivation. In this country, we have enough resources for every family to have everything that it needs, and in my opinion, we just have to decide that giving families what they need is more important than anything else.

Swartz: Could you tell us about your experience as an ?

Schomburg: When I was invited to participate in Aspen, I had also just been appointed to this role and wasn’t sure if I had the time for an 18-month fellowship, but I’m so happy I made the commitment. Not only did I learn so much about what’s happening nationally, but I also made lifelong connections. It has been one of the best decisions I’ve ever made.

Mark Swartz: What is the overall goal of the New Practice Lab?

Erica Meade: We are working to improve public benefit access for three million families with young children over the next three years. Part of that involves our improving policy design and how it’s delivered on the ground. Additionally, we’ve just started an extended period of engagement with families with young children across the country.

Swartz: What does that look like?

Meade: The first step is a series of co-design workshops where we ask, ‘What does a thriving family life look like to you? What would you need to have that happen, not just from the government, just in your life?’ Then from those workshops, we kickstart an extended diary study so we can continue following up with the families over time.

Szartz: How are families currently accessing information they need?

Meade: It’s a maze, and we’ve discovered that there’s a lot of variation among states. There are some outliers that have a streamlined point of entry and that tell families, ‘Here are the things you may be eligible for, here’s how you apply.’ But then there are others where it’s a real struggle to get information. This report really illuminated the need to streamline information and take a multi-pronged approach to meet families where they’re at.

Swartz: Does that go for all the benefits available to families with young children?

Meade: For the more mainstream traditional safety net programs (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Earned Income Tax Credit, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), some states are getting better at saying, ‘Oh, you might also be eligible for this.’ That certainly has come a long way, but what doesn’t receive as much attention is child care, Head Start, early intervention services, preschool benefits. These are still very much fragmented and, more often than not, left out of the overarching movement of streamlining access and information.

Swartz: How did we, as a society, end up with this situation?

Madee: We got here by updating the system piece by piece by piece. If you were to build the government today, you might have a Department of Children and Families, but instead this is the work of many agencies. Ultimately there’s an underlying issue with the whole structure: it is focused on programs, not the people or communities they serve. We have lost sight of how all these programs and services interact to reach the children and families they are intended to serve.

Swartz: And the families that can afford it least are paying the price.

Meade: In many cases, yes. The people with the fewest resources do spend an inordinate amount of time trying to navigate complex systems that were likely not built to prioritize human navigation. Until recently, navigability was never a top concern.

Swartz: Is it paranoid to say it was designed not to work for families?

Meade: It was not designed to work for families.

Swartz: You worked in government, right?

Meade: Yes, I was with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for 12 years.

Swartz: So, tell me if I’m mischaracterizing this, but the government doesn’t think like Walmart thinks. “If you’re buying Triscuits, you might also want peanut butter, so we’re going to put the peanut butter nearby.” Walmart has experts on how consumer minds operate. That probably hasn’t been a strength of government historically.

Meade: The government was built in a truly different time for a different time. Historically, the government hasn’t brought the lens of the consumer to its work but I think they’re getting better at it in recent years. Also, control is often given to the states, and some states are more innovative than others. There is definitely space for that sort of human-first, consumer mindset to be more layered into these programs and services.

Swartz: Which states are innovating?

Meade: South Carolina’s has an eligibility screener for about 40 programs and services. They changed the experience for the consumer for accessing it and getting information about it. South Carolina has been able to make leaps in this area without having to actually go through that process of restructuring the government on the back end—which is the route New Mexico, Oregon and Colorado are going.

Swartz: In addition to being better designed, the system needs more money. Or is there a way that design will unlock more money?

Meade: One would hope. There’s a lot of talk about evidence-based practices and designing policy around what we know works and doesn’t work. The idea, of course, being that resources are directed to the practices that are proven to lead to better outcomes for children and families. But then we see situations where there’s clear evidence of positive outcomes from a policy design innovation that didn’t result in more funding now, though maybe it will in the future. One existing funding opportunity is in the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund dollars from the American Rescue Plan.

Swartz: What kinds of solutions are you seeing?

Meade: Of the $350 billion total, we found 700 projects and $3 billion in care investments. Two-thirds of that was on child care-related projects. We see this funding stream and these projects as little pilots to build that base even more and to help make the case moving forward, for continued investment. We have seen places that are using the money to address family access, and there are others that are using the funds for care, workforce and development subsidies.

Swartz: Both of those are valid, as far as you’re concerned?

Meade: Definitely. In an ideal world, state-level implementation would allow for tailoring to the population and the specific needs, and the lessons from making these changes would be looped back into the future of how things get designed.

How did NBCDI arrive at its Eight Future Outcomes?

NBCDI’s Eight Future Outcomes are the result of years of reviewing academic research, engaging in national and statewide advocacy, and listening to the needs of our National Village Network. We learned from the lived experiences of parents of young Black children who are actively working to secure a better future for their families.

Our Eight Future Outcomes reflect the well-being, culture and perspective of Black children, including the positive attributes they bring to the classroom, how they see themselves and, more broadly, engage in a global society. These outcomes motivate the work of NBCDI and will be an important guidepost to create a world that experiences the strengths Black children have to offer. Our current stubborn racist systems and constructs must be dismantled.

How will you measure progress toward these goals?

We will provide resources and tools to our members and partners, host events and advocacy opportunities to ignite movements, and mobilize around creating an equitable and just future for Black children and families. Ultimately, we want to build a network of millions of NBCDI members that are thought partners, organizers and informed advocates that mobilize around our Eight Future Outcomes and our mission to improve and enhance the lives of Black children and families through education and advocacy.

That’s how we plan to measure progress: if people are noticing our work, sharing our resources and social media posts, mentioning us in thought leadership pieces, referencing our op-eds and publications and joining our efforts. We want to see changes in Black children’s actual experiences in childhood, which the data and indicators will show are evidenced with significant improvement across our eight outcomes; that is the benchmark of progress for us.

What changes has NBCDI undergone in the wake of the pandemic?

Black and brown people experienced higher fallout from the pandemic from increased rates of infection, lack of access to quality childcare and unsafe working conditions. Many of us still showed up to our professions, day-in and day-out, but without the sick time and other adequate support to make it through the pandemic and adjust afterward. Now Black and brown people are disproportionately impacted by inflation, the inability to return to the same level of employment, rent, and interest rate hikes and lack of quality child care. The pandemic amplified our work and purpose.

What about George Floyd’s murder?

George Floyd’s murder was agonizing, inhumane and dastardly, but unfortunately not rare. The murders of Black children, men and women because of systemic racism plague our nation. NBCDI as an organization was born out of the Civil Rights era, and it is unfathomable that we need to intensify our efforts to advocate for racial justice half a century later. We have made significant strides toward equality and are experiencing some setbacks, but more partners and allies are involved, which has helped tremendously to maintain momentum.

Most of my staff are parents, and we are all children and siblings, so these tragedies hit close to home for us personally and professionally. While we acknowledge the mental toll, and I encourage my staff to prioritize self-care and take time to process, we are more motivated than discouraged about our ability to effect change. We feel a sense of urgency like never before, which may be the most significant change.

What is NBCDI’s National Village Network? How do the sites in the network communicate and collaborate?

Our National Village Network is the heart of NBCDI. In more than 24 communities across the nation, these volunteer-driven villages partner with children, families and community-based organizations to implement culturally relevant and evidence-based programs promoting literacy, health and wellness and parent engagement, while advocating for better, stronger and more effective policies for Black children ages birth to eight at the local, state and federal level. The network celebrates the strengths and talents of Black children by fostering a sense of community and belonging, where Black children feel supported and valued.

Our job at the national level is to ensure the Network has the channels and resources they need to communicate and collaborate. That’s why we convene our Village Network regularly, providing time and space to share experiences, brainstorm ideas and troubleshoot challenges.

What are the plans for National Black Child Development Week (NBCDW)?

NBCDW is a time to raise community awareness about important issues impacting Black children and families. During NBCDW 2023, the National Village Network will host a series of events to celebrate the pillars of the Black community by honoring leaders who champion NBCDI’s Eight Future Outcomes.

How about the conference in October?

For the past 52 years, the NBCDI National Conference has convened families, educators, advocates, policymakers, and more to fellowship, brainstorm, advocate, educate, and fight for equity, equality and justice for our children and families. This year’s conference is in Charlotte, North Carolina, October 13-15, 2023.

Our conferences provide rich opportunities for everyone to engage, recharge and rally around policies and educational advancements for our earliest learners. This year’s theme is Unleash the Promise and Genius of Black Children and Families. Our main sessions will highlight women and men in the early childhood education space who are moving the needle on our Eight Future Outcomes. We want folks to work alongside us as we convene around these goals and learn from one another as advocates for Black children and families.

What do you wish more people understood about Black children?

Oftentimes, across public discourse in literature, film and media, Black children are painted in an adversarial light. The stories that are told about Black children are stories of struggle, trials and tribulations. Our nation needs to understand the inherent brilliance, unfettered joy and everlasting prosperity that Black children possess. Our new vision for NBCDI will focus less on deficits and more on our commitment to highlighting the assets Black children bring to our communities.

What are the most promising opportunities for this approach?

Black children are an important part of our nation’s future. Along with Hispanic children, they will make up the majority of our nation’s future workforce and bring their unique talents, knowledge and expertise to our ever-changing economy. As such, it is our job to advocate for the rights of Black children now, so they can live prosperous lives in the future.

Despite the challenges of systemic racism that plague our country, Black children continue to prove their ability to lead happy lives — achieving everyday milestones and making important contributions to American society. In many ways, their success can be attributed to the unwavering support of their families and communities who provide them with the necessary love and guidance to navigate a world that often marginalizes them and threatens their very existence.

What are some stories from your own childhood that inform your work today?

I spent time with my dad’s family in Bowling Green, Kentucky. every summer until I was 12 years old. The time spent with my Aunt Ersa was pivotal in creating the person and professional I am today. Aunt Ersa was a third grade teacher and helped me define what it truly means to be an educator. She was confident, knowledgeable, serious and well-dressed! She would never say, “I’m just a teacher.” For her, being a teacher should be the most highly regarded profession, comparable to a lawyer, doctor or politician. With this insight I also became an educator, teaching kindergarten, first and third grade during the earlier part of my career. I left the teaching profession with a deep understanding and admiration for teachers and students. I’m imprinted by my classroom experiences.

So, in every role I’ve held since, I’ve considered that point-of-view and made it my mission to consider the impact my work will have on educators and children. At NBCDI, one of our outcomes is that every Black child has access to schools that affirm and expand them. This is how we define a high-quality education. We want all children to have educational experiences that affirm them. One that says, “Who you are is wonderful and amazing. You should be proud.”

How can readers participate?

By . Additionally, or nearby, then get involved and participate in NBCDW events. Lastly, follow us on and !

Mark Swartz: How do geographic and cultural differences manifest themselves in different First 10 Partnerships?

David Jacobson: As different as our rural and urban communities are from each other, we find that they have success with many of the same practices as long as they are tailored to meet their specific needs. In fact, in many cases, our rural and urban communities learn from each other. I can tell you about three First 10 Partnerships that are showing impact and promise — York, Pennsylvania, Russellville, Alabama and East Providence, Rhode Island.

Swartz: Let’s start with York.

Jacobson: In York, we have a champion in Andrea J. Berry, Superintendent of Schools, who talks about Bearcats from Birth. Bearcats are the district mascot, and she’s saying that as superintendent, she includes babies and toddlers in her vision. The district plays the role of backbone in that particular community, helping to convene these different partnerships. The United Way, the Community Foundation and a coalition of local county funders all support the countywide commitment to the work. The has played a critical role in bringing these funders to the table. The library system is involved, along with Head Start and community-based early childhood centers, the city Bureau of Health, and other health care providers.

Swartz: Russellville must have a very different culture, even if the concerns are similar.

Jacobson: This is a small, rural community in northwest Alabama that is working hard to serve a growing immigrant community. About half of the student body are relatively recent Spanish-speaking immigrants.

Similar to what we discussed in York, Dr. Heath Grimes, the superintendent in Russellville, talks about Golden Tigers from birth. This commitment inspires principals in First 10 communities to tell community-based preschool and Head Start directors, “These children are all of ours from the time they are born.”

Last April, we had our first joint professional learning for pre-K, Head Start and kindergarten teachers, as part of our transition to kindergarten plan. The room was abuzz with animated conversation.

Swartz: Can you describe the meeting?

Jacobson: We met in a large boardroom, and all the teachers were at mixed tables, with at least two kindergarten teachers and several district pre-K, Head Start or community-based teachers at every table. We compared pre-K and kindergarten standards. We looked at similarities and differences. What’s hard to teach about these strategies? What teaching strategies work well? How can we better align?

At the end, the teachers said, “This is so valuable. We can’t believe we haven’t always done this. Why haven’t we always been doing this?” The principal of that school said, “We always made sure that our second grade teachers met with the third grade teachers in the next building, but it never occurred to us to have our pre-K and kindergarten teachers meet.”

This is a community that is not only bridging early childhood and K-12, but it is also broadening its partnership to include health care, social services and churches.

Swartz: This local enthusiasm can reach state administrators.

Jacobson: Yes, and Alabama has the vision of creating a pilot school-community partnership in every county in the state, starting with 19 new First 10 partnerships this fall. It is also combining a strong statewide push on early literacy with a focus on the transition to kindergarten.

We recently worked with the State of Alabama on a that the Department of Early Childhood Education is now, very thoughtfully, rolling out statewide.

Swartz: How about East Providence?

Jacobson: This is an urban community — about 47,000 residents — that’s part of a larger metropolitan area. This partnership began with a focus on the transition to kindergarten between the school district, the Head Start and a few community-based programs.

They developed a comprehensive plan and did outreach to community-based preschools. They created new opportunities for children and families, and they brought their pre-K and K teachers together for joint professional learning.

Swartz: How do they find families?

Jacobson: The district teamed up with the (EBCAP), which also runs Head Start, and the home visiting program. EBCAP places family navigators in the elementary schools that serve the highest proportion of families and households with low incomes.

They started implementing school-connected play-and-learns to reach younger children well before they get into school. Libraries and elementary schools host the groups. Each has a caregiver learning component, and each deliberately connects families to health care and other services in the community. The East Providence Public Schools, the library and EBCAP are pooling talent and learning from each other, something we love to see in all our communities.

Swartz: What part does the state play?

Jacobson: The Rhode Island Department of Education rolled out this work and has been deliberate about recruiting communities that have the highest concentrations of families and households with low incomes.

Rhode Island is a small state, but we’ve now reached the one-third of communities that have the highest proportion of households with low incomes.

Swartz: ±őłÙ’s all coming together, then.

Jacobson: When school districts and elementary schools come together with early childhood programs and other community agencies, and when they have success implementing concrete strategies, that’s when the partnerships deepen and grow.

In part I of this interview, David Jacobson, who designed and leads the initiative, discusses the tenets of the model and their context. .

Mark Swartz: How does the First 10 initiative approach early education?

David Jacobson: First 10 begins with a commitment to educational and racial equity and the whole child. We summarize this in the expression All children learn and thrive. We convene partnerships that take joint action around three core strategies.

1. The first is to collaborate to improve teaching and learning. A key component of this collaboration is to develop and implement a comprehensive plan for transition to kindergarten.
2. The second strategy is to coordinate comprehensive services across schools, health care organizations and social service agencies.
3. And the third is to deepen partnerships with families. This is about elevating family voice, conducting outreach to culturally specific groups and creating culturally responsive structures.

Swartz: How does First 10 compare to other cradle-to-career initiatives?

Jacobson: Whereas most of those initiatives create separate teams to work on kindergarten readiness and early-grades reading, First 10 partnerships come together around quality across the full early childhood to elementary school continuum, beginning with prenatal care and extending through elementary school.

Swartz: How did First 10 get started?

Jacobson: I had done technical assistance and applied research on this kind of work for years, and then the Heising-Simons Foundation funded a study that came out in 2019 called . Since then, communities in six states have embraced the approach. The W.K. Kellogg Foundation provides support for the First 10 Network, which brings communities together to learn from each other through monthly webinars.

Swartz: Can you describe how a First 10 Hub or Community Partnership launches? Does First 10 show up and start organizing the stakeholders?

Jacobson: In some cases, we work with states to recruit interested communities, and then we support these communities as they convene a partnership, and develop and implement a First 10 plan. In other cases, the communities reach out to us directly. We begin by examining the work under way in each community and assessing assets and needs. We then develop a plan that draws on the practices of exemplar First 10 communities. Once a First 10 team has developed its plan, we divide into work groups to carry it out.

Swartz: Who carries out the projects in the communities? Is it First 10 staff or local participants?

Jacobson: The local participants carry out the projects with our support. We facilitate the First 10 teams as they design their strategies, and we provide practical tips based on our experience working in other communities.

Swartz: Along with all this alignment work, First 10 also catalyzes joint action, right?

Jacobson: Absolutely. For example, as I mentioned, all of our communities implement comprehensive transition to kindergarten plans, which is that connecting piece between pre-K or Head Start and kindergarten. In addition to improving orientation experiences for children and families, we bring Head Start, community-based pre-K, district pre-K and kindergarten teachers together regularly to compare standards, curricula and instructional approaches.

We work on social-emotional learning, early literacy and early math. Teachers exchange teaching strategies and motivate each other’s innovation and improvement. We also organize school-connected play and learns, in which young children and their caregivers engage in fun, developmentally appropriate activities. There’s reading, songs, arts and crafts for the children and adults to do together as well as learning opportunities for the caregivers.

And we connect these families to services. We also promote community-wide parenting campaigns, where all the organizations that touch the lives of children and families come together around a set of common messages. Through all of this we have a bigger impact.

Swartz: What is some recent research that informs your work?

Jacobson: For one, , a 2021 study by the Diversity Data Kids project, which is housed at the Institute for Child, Youth and Family Policy at the Heller School for Social Policy and Management at Brandeis University. The study finds that neighborhoods have a big impact on children’s outcomes and developmental risk, independent of family socioeconomic status.

The authors make a strong case for local coordination and alignment at the neighborhood and community levels. There are particular implications for neighborhoods that were hit hard during the pandemic.

Swartz: Can you provide some context about how this fits into federal and state policy—especially in terms of funding?

Jacobson: A significant step at the federal level is the program for state and local system building. Alabama, Michigan, Maine and Rhode Island are all using these state system-building funds to support partnerships at the local level that bring together elementary schools and school districts with Head Start programs, community-based early childhood programs and health and social services. ±őłÙ’s important that states have their own pilot projects.

The U.S. Department of Education is funding full-service community schools grants, and those grants include a very significant early childhood component. both bring together states to work on early childhood—elementary school collaboration and the transition to kindergarten.

Swartz: And at the local level?

Jacobson: Children’s cabinets are an important policy-making structure. State-supported county collaborations like foster communication among district officials, principals, early childhood leaders and families. We are finding that Children’s Cabinets and county collaboratives can work hand-in-hand with on-the-ground initiatives like First 10 that focus on implementing strategies in neighborhoods and communities. A little bit of magic happens when we bring this work to our districts and neighborhoods, and states and counties can play key roles in supporting these efforts.

Early Learning Nation spoke about the newest funding opportunity with Dr. Ola J. Friday, director of the collaborative, which includes the Ballmer Group, the Bezos Family Foundation, Buffett Early Childhood Fund, David & Lucile Packard Foundation, Foundation for Child Development, Gates Foundation, Heising-Simons Foundation and Stranahan Foundation.

Mark Swartz: How much is the collaborative investing in boosting salaries and benefits of lead teachers and other early childhood education professionals?

Ola J. Friday: The total funding will be approximately $10 million over up to three years. The amount depends on the need being met and where the project is in the development process.

Swartz: How is this round of grants different from , which focused on eliminating structural inequities in the preparation of the early childhood education workforce?

Friday: Whereas the initial investments promoted teacher preparation, this time we’re looking to give educators a raise. In the RFP, we quote the Center for the Study of Child Care Employment’s : “The average wage of $13.31/hour for early educators in birth through age five settings undermines their quality and diminishes the benefits to children, families, and our economy.

Additionally, compared with their K-8 colleagues, early educators face poverty rates on average of 7.7 times higher.” Too many teachers are leaving the field, just when we need them most. Also, low wages deter new practitioners from wanting to do this work. Ultimately, women, and disproportionately women of color, are kept in poverty wages and families experience a lack of continuity of care for their children. ÌęAs a society, we have to do something.

Swartz: What’s the solution to these wage challenges?

Friday: As Dr. Sara Vecchiotti, vice president at the Foundation for Child Development, , “For too long, ECE financing of programs within fragmented public and private systems has not supported the true and fair cost of high-quality ECE.”

By funding innovations in financial systems and by working with government partners, the collaborative hopes to support long term increases of compensation for the ECE workforce. The partners can be state, local, municipal, territory or tribal governments. Eligible projects must include both the administer of child care funding and the budget person.

We call out this partnership because too often we’ve seen the lack of coordination among the fiscal leadership and the program leadership as an obstacle to leveraging all the funding that may be possible to support ECE efforts, including workforce compensation.

Swartz: That might be two people who work in the same office building but have never sat down together.

Friday: Exactly, and they come to that meeting with two very different kinds of expertise. The education program administrator will know about things like curricula, social-emotional learning and licensing. The budget officer will know how to pool various funding streams, which could be, for example, the typical Child Care and Development Block or Title I grants. They’ll put their heads together to figure out innovative ways to drive more resources towards ECE financing and long term compensation increases, not only short term fixes.

Swartz: What about just handing out bonus money?

Friday: With a bonus, one dollar gets you one dollar, and then it’s gone. It can be very short term. Financial systems that leverage existing sources of revenue, both typical and atypical funding streams, and promote new sources of revenue, on the other hand, can support sustainability over the long term. Those are the solutions we’re excited about.

Swartz: What else is new or different about this funding opportunity?

Friday: ECE professionals don’t always get to be there when important systems and financial decisions are made. That’s why we’re requiring an advisory body made up of workforce members, and they will play an active role in project design and implementation.

Swartz: How did the collaborative arrive at this approach for supporting educators?

Friday: We spent last year doing research and learning from the field, including speaking to system administrators, practitioners and ECE finance experts. We heard too many stories of agencies operating in siloes, and funding that isn’t fully leveraged. Governments are leaving money on the table. This is an opportunity to use fiscal expertise to leverage program expertise.

Swartz: Where does that fiscal expertise come from?

Friday: Sometimes it’s already there, and all we need to do is get the experts to sit down together. Too often, however, the fiscal expertise is outsourced, which means the knowledge walks out the door when the project is over. Just as we have an educator shortage, we have a shortage of people who understand ECE financing and budgets and can use their skills to build systems. One of them said to me, “There aren’t enough of us.” We need to build that internal capacity. I heard that message loud and clear.

Disclosure: The Bezos Family Foundation provides financial support to Early Learning Nation.

According to Joe Waters, co-founder and CEO of , “Dr. Perera’s work helps us to see more clearly that dangerous planetary change is the most pressing global threat there is to healthy human development in the earliest years of life. Mitigating climate change, adapting to its unavoidable impacts, and building the resilience of societies by building the resilience of our young children is the human development challenge of this century.”

I spoke to Dr. Perera about her work, the dire challenges ahead and her reasons for cautious optimism.

Swartz: What makes children more susceptible to air pollution and climate change?

Perera: Both factors are dangerous, and together, even more so. Take for example, mothers exposed to heat and air pollution during pregnancy. Their babies have a much higher risk of being born too soon. The same synergistic effect can be seen with asthma hospitalizations. We’ve just started to learn about the ways that these two fossil fuel-derived threats combine to increase risk.

We’re seeing 50 million children forced from their homes due to climate-related events. That’s three times more than from armed conflicts and violence. Think of the disastrous floods in Pakistan last year that displaced nearly 8 million people.

Children are not just little adults. There are many biological reasons for their vulnerability. ±őłÙ’s why we need to protect their development, from the time they’re in utero through their early years and even into adolescence.

What do you wish more people understood about the crisis we face?

Children bear the brunt of the damage but lack the economic and political levers to force action, and not enough adults have been advocating for them. It should be shocking that the United States never ratified the Convention of the Rights of the Child. Other countries have formally recognized the fundamental rights of children to demand that their governments reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

How has your personal journey shaped your climate awareness?

As a child, I was always interested in the environment because I had the opportunity to live in different ecosystems. I started off in the suburbs and then moved to a farm in Vermont, where I realized how very dependent we were on natural systems and how interconnected we are, which I think many urban children don’t know. They don’t have access to nature in the way that I would hope they would.

As a researcher, I started off looking at a class of environmental carcinogens that come from fossil fuel burning, generally called (PAH). We identified DNA damage from these pollutants as a risk marker for cancer. And to my surprise and dismay, we were seeing the same DNA damage in newborns and young children. And I thought, well, this is really something we need to look at, in terms of health effects in children, not just cancer but other effects. In our research over the years we have shown that prenatal PAH exposure is harmful to the developing brain and other organs.

What actions do you recommend for parents, educators and advocates?

First, we all need to be armed with the facts, because there’s quite a lot of confusion and misinformation. But 99% of scientists will agree with the data in my book. We can use these facts and narratives in the book to educate and engage others.

Second, we can take action both as citizens and voters to make sure that we’re represented by people who understand the science and take this problem seriously and will act to protect the most vulnerable. And when I say most ‘vulnerable,’ I’m referring to children as a group, but also to children in communities of color who are even more vulnerable because they don’t have the same supports that more privileged children have against these threats. They live in ‘urban heat islands’ or coastal areas most vulnerable to flooding and storms.

Third, we can lead by example. In the home, we can do a lot to conserve energy. Not so much heat in the winter, not so much air conditioning in the summer. Install solar panels on your own roof or convince your landlord if necessary. It’s been found that if homeowners start putting solar panels on their roofs, then others in their neighborhood will follow. The same goes for things like using mass transit instead of driving cars. We can shift to diets that are less climate intensive. I’m thinking of plant-based meals and avoiding waste. We now waste 30% of the food that is raised. That’s pretty shocking, isn’t it? Neighborhood gardens are a wonderful way to reduce the carbon footprint.

The heavy lift does have to be done by government. We need strong international action. As adults, we can support those initiatives and make sure that we have the right representation.

What gives you hope?

We achieve a lot when we reduce and eventually eliminate our dependence on fossil fuel. The is an encouraging example of policymaking, in this case removing coal-burning electricity generating units from 12 eastern states, replacing them with cleaner fuel. The result was much cleaner air and improved child health. You can see other examples internationally in London, in Copenhagen and even in China, with the shutdown of a single coal plant.  Hopefully we’ll see more good news stories as results from the Inflation Reduction Act and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

Groups like , and  have been tremendously effective. is an example of an attempt of young people to force the government to take action on climate change. I joined several other authors on a paper that supported their demands in terms of the science on the harmful effects of climate change on the young.

My book’s chapter on power and voice was one of the most fun to write because I was able to talk about the youth but also the fearless grandmothers who have joined them. Religious leaders of various denominations have come on board and basically are saying we must be stewards, we must protect the most vulnerable and we must act.

I have retained optimism. I refuse to believe that we will not be able to take the action we need to avoid the worst catastrophe. At least our children will have a chance of a future that will be viable for them. And so I’m not giving up.

“My hope for 2023 is to bring all the deep reflection and insights from the pandemic forward into living a life that is more intentional,Ìęand appreciating all that we can do now that we couldn’t do during the pandemic.”

—Tiffany Shlain, artist, author and filmmaker

“There are certainly tremendous challenges confronting the field of education these days, but I believe that the pressure of these issues is pushing all of us toward increased collaboration. This is the only path forward — and I am profoundly hopeful because it is happening. Using all of First Book’s educator-driven models, we’re able to advocate for and deliver the critical books and resources that educators need to do their jobs and further equal access to quality education.”

—Kyle Zimmer, president and CEO of First Book

“I am hopeful for a continued acknowledgement of the value of the early education workforce that results in their increased wages and benefits. I am also hopeful for sustained investments in the early education workforce that go beyond the important, but limited, short-term wage increases some have experienced since the start of the pandemic.”

—Ola Friday, director of Early Educator Investment Collaborative

“2023 is a year for two ‘must-dos’ in the early learning arena. Must-do No. 1 is to make sure that investing in quality child care, preschool, family leave and preventive health re-surface as top priorities for policymakers. The U.S. has fallen down on these commitments compared to all of our economic competitors. Must-do No. 2 is to accelerate innovation in the field, especially around the use of tech and media that can now effectively connect and enhance learning at home, in communities and schools.”

—Michael H. Levine, senior vice president of learning and impact at Noggin

“I have two hopes for 2023: one, that young children get the support and skills they need to thrive in school, and two, that we can better support and elevate early childhood educators so they feel valued and rewarded for the incredible work they do.”

—Megan McClelland, Hallie Ford Director for the Center for Healthy Children and Families at Oregon State University

“There is a growing awareness that attainable property ownership (or lack thereof) affects community stability and growth—and that children see and feel these factors. After hearing , Sen. Jeff Merkley [of Oregon] recently introduced legislation meant to restrict the number of homes that corporations can own. It’s not going to solve the issue of predatory speculation, but it’s a step in the right direction, and it gives me hope when people in positions of power listen, learn and act.”

—Majora Carter, real estate developer and author of

“I’m always astonished how capable our young learners are when we give them challenging but achievable tasks and activities. My hope for the future is that we begin to recognize that children’s enormous potential lays outside their socio-economic status, and that we seeÌęallÌęchildren as highly able to achieve beyond our expectations.”

—Susan Neuman, professor of childhood and literacy education at New York University

“We must continue to prepare resources and curriculum,Ìęboth insideÌęthe classroom andÌęthroughÌęmedia like Noggin, that will teach and reach the positive,Ìępowerful forces within little children in the early years. Who they are and what they are to become are already in there,Ìęand we must create the opportunities for that potential to develop.ÌęWe must listen and learn as they learn, in order to guide and provide the best environment for physical and mental well-being.ÌęEducation aids in this transformation!”

—Darryl “DMC” McDaniels, rap legend and literacy champion

“Early childhood education has a beautifully profound impact on children’s learning, both through high-quality classrooms and media programming like Noggin Knows! My hope for 2023 is that even more children will be able to gain accessÌętoÌęour work. But, to be successful in nurturing all kids, we need to further support the early childhood workforce, so that the number of effective educators increases. Early childhood learning builds the future of a child. Through my work in educational media, I hope to help shape the futures of millions of children’s lives.”

—Emmanuel Carter, host of host

“I feelÌęhopeful and motivated whenever I talk with our partners in the — providers around the country creating beautiful, inclusive early learning environments for our youngest community members and their families. These playful, joyful, equitable learning environments should be every child’s birthright, and I hope we are even bolder in 2023 as we build momentum toward this vision.”

—Ellen Roche, chief media & philanthropy officer for Trust for Learning

“America took a step to a return to decency and civility in 2022 with many of the midterm election results. My hope for 2023 is that we continue this march against the grain and celebrate leaders and citizens with the courage to set aside tribal political differences, get to know one another, respect one another and get things done together.”

—Rye Barcott, co-founder and CEO of With Honor

“My hope for the new year is that people realize that some of the best education resources for their children are free.”

—Sal Khan, founder of Khan Academy

“I am hopeful that we will listen to, learn from and depend on the wisdom of diverse leaders in the field of Early Childhood. I am hopeful that the impacts of climate change and technology on young children will grow in importance and cultural relevancy will be the centerpiece of discussions on quality.”

—Leah Austin, president and CEO of

“As we look forward to 2023, I ask that you please remember the number 15. Multiple studies indicate that approximately 15% of the population has physical or cognitive special needs. If you do the math, the numbers of children and adults needing help are huge. Thus, the opportunities to assist fragile individuals among us are innumerable. My fervent hope for 2023 is that we continue to achieve success toward creating a movement that focuses on a more-inclusive world.”

—Gordon Hartman, founder of Morgan’s Wonderland

“My hope for this year is that more people engage in caring for the needs of others in their own communities, that more people see each other as neighbors rather than strangers. I hope there will be an explosion of compassion in this country and that my work—my organization’s work — can be a bridge where people from across vast ideological divides can work together, ensuring that everyone in their communities is safe, sheltered and nourished.”

—Lynette Johnson, executive director at The Society of St. Andrew

“I am so encouraged by the sea change in the way that policymakers, the media and families view the urgency of building and financing care systems that work for all of us, whether we work in the care professions, provide care to loved ones, or need care for ourselves or family members. I am hopeful that in the coming years we will build a powerful movement that will win transformative public investments in care for all with respect and equity.”

—Anna Shireen Wadia, executive director of Care for All with Respect and Equity Fund

“My hope is that we broaden our appreciation for how intertwined our lives are with each other’s and stop seeing investments that advance racial, gender and economic equity as zero-sum, when they are, in fact, good for us all. All communities benefit when families are guaranteed access to qualityÌęcare provided by people with good jobs (including parents and other caregivers using paid leave to care for loved ones), because care fuels our economy.ÌęHopefully, more people will appreciate that a more prosperous and just world can and should go hand-in-hand.”

—Indivar Dutta-Gupta, president and executive director at the Center for Law and Social Policy

“I’m thankful for Cynthia, the crossing guard outside my younger daughter’s elementary school who greets every single child every day with a hug or a high-five. These everyday acts of kindness and connection are what keep us going and after the pandemic, I’ll never take them for granted again.”

—Anya Kamenetz, author, The Stolen Year and advisor to the Aspen Institute’s

“I am so incredibly grateful for the stewards of humanity, who over the years have continued to challenge, call out, and work in the spirit of advancing science, truth telling and justice so that society — including our youngest and those who are marginalized — are set up to thrive now and in the future.”

—Chrishana Lloyd, senior research scientist at

“I am so grateful for the early childhood champions all around the world, from Delhi to Denver, from Dhaka to Detroit, who are standing up for young children, families and those who care for them. Despite the odds, hope remains as communities come together and work for change.”

—Joan Lombardi, Chair of the Leadership Council at the

“I am thankful for life, treasured memories, my supportive family and friends who surround me with love, hope and joy. I am also thankful for following through with God’s plan for me to be a ‘Guiding hand to H.E.L.P.’ families, educators and my community.”

—Marcia Gadson-Harris, owner and operator at Marcia’s Little Rascals

“I am incredibly grateful that the spotlight is finally on early care and education, specifically the workforce behind America’s workforce—those who directly impact children, families and communities. Although there is work to do, there is traction on professionalizing the field and appropriately compensating those who do one of the most important jobs—caring for and educating our future leaders.”
—Erin Arango-Escalante, fellow at

“I am grateful for all the caregivers, many facing social isolation, financial strain, grief, stress and illness, who helped their children feel loved, safe and hopeful about their future.”

—Stephanie Reich, professor at the University of California, Irvine

“At KidVantage, we are grateful for all the people who believe that one person can make a world of difference. Every person who shares the clothes or toys their children no longer use, every person who gives a couple or 20 hours a week to sort items or package bundles, every quilt or toy maker who gives of their talent, every donor who gives financially, every dedicated staff member who has worked untold hours to fill every request, has made a difference in the life of a child. What you do may seem simple and small, but together, the impact is profound.”

—Helen Banks Routon, director of development & community relations at

“We are grateful for the dedication and persistence of early childhood education advocates that spend their time and energy making sure the youngest members of our society are being cared for and represented, laying the foundation for a better future. Thank you for ALL that you do!”

—Helen Shwe Hadani and Rachael Katz, authors of The Emotionally Intelligent Child

“I am thankful for our heroes and champions—the parents, grandparents, caregivers, educators, innovators, advocates, researchers, funders and policy makers—who are building a bright and joyful future for each and every little learner.”

—Isabelle Hau, executive director of the

“I’m thankful for the tireless energy and dedication of parents, who I see in both my surgical practice and my research center doing everything in their power to make sure their children get a shot at reaching the promise of their promise—often against tremendous odds. And when I say parent, of course, I mean any caring adult invested in the raising of a child—grandparents, aunts, uncles, teachers: We all parent.”

—Dr. Dana Suskind, pediatric surgeon and co-director of the 

“I am thankful for all of our parents, educators, social workers and community leaders who advocate for early childhood systems-change. Each day, our partners provide direct services and support to families with young children, while tirelessly advocating for equitable and high-quality programs to improve health and educational outcomes.”

—Charrise Hart, CEO of

“I appreciate the child care providers that put their trust in Wonderschool and allow us to assist them in improving their businesses. I appreciate our government partners’ commitment to enhancing child care infrastructure. I’m also grateful to the dedicated Wonderschool team that works hard to realize our company’s vision each and every day.”

—Chris Bennett, CEO of

“I am thankful for the empathic and caring support that my Head Start teachers, Yolanda and Ramona, gave me when I was a vulnerable child growing up in tenement housing in New York City’s Chinatown. Through the power of their quality care, Yolanda and Ramona formatively re-aligned my life trajectory in a profoundly positive way.”

—Kelvin Chan, managing director of early childhood at

“I am thankful for my daughter. She has been my light through the hard times like the pandemic. I am thankful to be able to watch her grow and be happy. I am thankful for every opportunity that comes my way that allows me to speak on and improve student parents’ journey to education, and I am thankful for each and every day that I wake up.”

—Mikah Jorgensen, 2023 Parent Advisor for Ascend at the Aspen Institute’s

“I am thankful for the many early learning practitioners, caregivers and leaders who have dedicated their lives to strengthening early learning and care systems alongside Indigenous children, families and communities. I am especially humbled by the transformative contributions of the Indigenous Early Learning Collaborative — Wiikwedong ECD Collaborative, Wicoie Nandagikendan, Daybreak Star Preschool and Keiki Steps — for taking their place in the work of community-based inquiry. I celebrate their/our visionary ideas, courage, distinct voices and clarity for grounding change in our own questions and cycles of living. Informed by Indigenous knowledge systems, we create, build and learn, so that our children, for generations to come, can be their full Indigenous selves.”

—Tarajean Yazzie-Mintz (DinĂ©), co-founder of

“I’m thankful for my good fortune to live in the United States, that our republic endures, and our constitutional government persists. I’m thankful, for these are the conditions that enable us to do the work of perfecting our union and promoting the welfare our people, beginning with our youngest citizens.”

—Joe Waters, cofounder and CEO of Capita

“I’m thankful for every single early childhood educator, director, advocate, organizer and champion. In some ways 2022 has been harder on the sector than 2021 because of the staffing shortages and lack of federal child care action, yet these individuals have been working tirelessly on behalf of kids and families, notching some big wins at the state level, and continuing to lay the groundwork for America to finally have an early care and education system that works for everyone.”

—Elliot Haspel, senior fellow at

“I’m grateful to have the privilege of working with so many talented and passionate colleagues at Start Early and across the field who work every day on behalf of our country’s youngest children and their families. I’m also grateful to live in a country that values free and fair elections!”

—Diana Rauner, president of

“I’m thankful to the support for creating quality early learning settings in vulnerable communities in Egypt. Every child should have access to pre-K to unleash their potential and to drive systemic change.”

—Amina Elgamal, cofounder,

Mark Swartz: How do you explain your job to people outside the early childhood policy world?

Elliot Haspel: This is a broadening of my child care work — and let me be crystal clear, I’m still fully in that fight! — because I think there is a generational need and opportunity to address the early childhood-climate connections, and thereby strengthen both movements. The effort, which we’re currently calling the Childhood Climate Fund, will grant both within the U.S. and globally. While the details are being fleshed out, we will likely focus on helping child-serving systems adapt to the impacts of climate change (think: air quality in child care programs, or doula access for pregnant women in climate-threatened areas), strengthening parent climate movements, and ensuring via communications that young children and their families are centered in the public mind around climate.

The Fund is only being incubated at Capita for the next 12 months — Capita isn’t designed to be a major philanthropic funder—and then it will spin off to be its own entity, likely living underneath a philanthropic fiscal sponsor agency like other major pooled funds from the to the .

Swartz: What’s different about Capita?

Haspel: Capita is a wonderful think tank that focuses on the big questions about the future of human flourishing. They have a particular focus on young children and their families, and two of their major work streams surround child care and climate change, so it was a natural fit for building out the Fund concept. I’ve collaborated with Capita for many years and you’d be hard-pressed to find a more thoughtful, future-oriented team.

Swartz: What do you wish the philanthropic sector (and/or the media) understood better about the intersection of ECE and climate?

Haspel: The climate change era puts a ceiling on everything else we’re trying to do to improve young child and family well-being. Addressing it from an early childhood perspective can also bring enormously important attention and resources into the early childhood field. ±őłÙ’s part of how we win a better child care system, by tying together the fates of caregiving and our climate future.

The first thing I wish more philanthropists understood was that young children — I’m talking from prenatal to age 8 — are uniquely vulnerable to climate change in ways even tweens and teens aren’t. I didn’t know all this until I started digging in, but a ! They also breathe in and out three times more often per minute than you or I. They experience worse psychological damage from natural disasters and displacement. Evidence is increasing that . Add the sensitive developmental period we know early childhood to be — plus the communities we know get hit hardest — and you quickly start to put the picture together.

If you’re a philanthropy that cares about, say, school readiness, you can’t look at heatwaves, wildfire-driven air pollution, climate-enhanced storms, and go on about your business.

Swartz: What do you accomplish by combining forces between early childhood and climate?

Haspel: One of the untapped ways we can combat climate change is by activating parents as a mass force for change, since those kids are too young to be doing climate strikes. That’s my pitch to climate funders: there is a shockingly latent power base made up of tens of millions of parents, but we’re going to have to enter through the door of kids and childhood to reach them. At the same time, a strong, mobilized force of parents of young children — hmm, that sounds pretty useful for fighting for an effective and well-funded child care system, doesn’t it?

Similarly, we have an opportunity to bring new constituencies into the early childhood fold. Greening child care programs and schoolyards, ensuring good shade and park equity, creating what Tim Gill calls “” with lots of green car-free zones where children have safe mobility—you don’t have to start as an early childhood stakeholder to care about those things, and they end up hugely benefiting young kids, entire communities and the overall climate. We can look to some international early childhood advocates for guidance here. In particular, theÌę(ARNEC) andÌęÌę(AfECN) have been leaders on the intersection.

Swartz: How do we fight climate fatalism?

Haspel: I think we have a more hopeful story to tell than most people think. We can hold both ideas at once: that this is the most urgent threat of our lifetimes and the greatest threat to our children and future generations, and that and we have an opportunity to create a world that is more family-friendly and promotes human flourishing. This is doubly true for parents who can easily get overwhelmed and experience cognitive dissonance thinking about the impact on their kids. If you asked people, just based on climate coverage, what direction U.S. carbon emissions were going in, how many would be able to tell you ? That many of the truly worst-case scenarios are increasingly unlikely? How many folks understand that renewables like solar are becoming vastly more competitive by the day? That major cities like Paris and Lima have started to or as they pursue a more sustainable future?

Swartz: At least people are paying more attention.

Haspel: That’s been a real shift in just the past few years. The older youth are incredibly active around this issue. Companies and nonprofits and philanthropies are all realizing they are going to have to reckon with climate. ±őłÙ’s a heady time in that respect. There’s a quote I like from The Atlantic’s Robinson Meyer, who that “the fight against climate change is going to change more in the next four years than it has in the past 40. The great story of our lives is just beginning. Welcome aboard.”

±őłÙ’s tricky to hold both ideas, of course—you can slip very easily into unwarranted techno-saviorism (‘oh this is fine, we’ll just engineer our way of the problem’)—but I think the more we explain the urgency and the hope in the same paragraph, the more parents will find a role for themselves in the movement.

Swartz: What if, in getting more serious about climate goals, we lose sight of other priorities — equity, access, etc.?

Haspel: I think we have to approach this from an abundance, not scarcity, mindset. As I laid out earlier, I think there is huge upside for the early childhood movement in allying with a powerful, better-funded climate movement. And making the necessary changes for adapting and mitigating climate change will be major boons for child development. Whether we like it or not, climate change is . Not just the impacts on kids themselves, which are massive, but damage to the child care infrastructure itself: when programs flood out or burn down, that’s a huge blow. And we know which neighborhoods are most susceptible to flooding, for instance.

On the flipside, the communities and organizations the Fund will support are primarily those most impacted by climate change, so this effort will naturally flow resources to communities—both in the U.S. and globally, especially in the Global South—often shut out from substantial philanthropic support.

Swartz: How do you make sure you’re adding value to the philanthropic efforts of both early learning and climate change?

Haspel: One of the big ideas behind the Childhood Climate Fund is that we don’t want to distract philanthropy — either early childhood or climate funders — from the good work already under way. The nexus of the two shouldn’t be an add-on or afterthought; that won’t help. The most effective path is having a funding vehicle dedicated to the intersection of early childhood and climate change, and which can thread learnings and lessons back to each movement. While we’re not going to grant our way out of the climate crisis or the child care crisis, I truly believe that targeted philanthropy can catalyze huge change and galvanize a new force for good.

I spoke to the courageous women on both sides of the camera. Clarissa Doutherd and Tamara Perkins were both solo parents when they met at an Oakland nonprofit that connects parents and families with child care providers.

Filmmaker Perkins had visited because she had been laid off from her job — thus losing her health insurance — when she was nine months pregnant. “I had never accessed any social services until I was suddenly thrown off the cliff and had to figure out health care,” she says. “I was in this very raw state of trying to understand how this had happened to me.”

She adds, “The stories that I told have been really tied to my own life experience.” Her other projects include and , which both deal with the consequences of mass incarceration.

At Bananas, Perkins and Doutherd commiserated and compared notes about the obstacles for single mothers trying to obtain benefits. “In Europe,” Perkins says, “All of this support is just expected. And here we are shaming the parents who need these services and subsidies to survive.”

For Doutherd, the story was all too familiar. She and her two siblings grew up in Sacramento with a single mother who relied on public benefits, and she still remembers the stigma and the challenges. Much of the time, her grandparents, who had escaped extreme racial violence in the deep South by joining the military, provided the child care. “They instilled in us our sense of history and purpose. I also learned how to address poverty and racism and gender injustice through humor and through art.”

Doutherd had first come to Bananas for a child care subsidy and was waiting to meet her case manager when an organizer from Parent Voices Oakland, which is located in the same building, approached. “She asked me what I thought about the child care system,” Doutherd recalls. “How is it working for me as a parent? And that was really the first time anyone had asked me a question about what I thought or felt about any public service.” She volunteered with the organization for two years before joining the staff and now serves as executive director.

What originally politicized Doutherd, she explains, was “someone else making decisions about the health and well-being of my son. I was enraged by the fact that I didn’t know about services that were actually life preserving for my son and me. All I wanted to do was make sure that we were stable, that we had housing, that we had access to food, that our most basic needs were met.”

Doutherd discovered a network of what she calls in the movie “bad-ass, beautiful, fierce mothers” — including one named Tara, who took care of her son when he was sick and had no one else to watch him. “These women are really holding up society and not acknowledged or compensated for this labor. They do so much more than just babysit.” Parent Voices Oakland aims to build and nurture this community as well as organizing for policy reform.

The film captures Doutherd’s balancing act as an organizer, recognizing that while her experience of homelessness when she first had her son was a trauma that qualified her to speak on the issue, she had to build power in order to persuade voters and elected officials. She pushes herself through exhaustion and a diagnosis of high blood pressure, knocking on doors and speaking to organized labor and other stakeholders across the county.

Doutherd’s son Xavier steals the show nearly every time he’s on camera. We see him making calls for Parent Voices and interrogating his mother about her work. “He got pretty used to the cameras, but mostly he got used to me campaigning,” Doutherd says.

Clarissa’s Battle ends on a cautious high note, and though a well-funded anti-tax group has challenged the measure in court, Doutherd expects her side to prevail. Meanwhile, Parent Voices continue to organize. “As long as child development centers attached to schools are closing,” Doutherd says, “as long as more providers than ever are having to close their doors because they can’t pay rent, we have to ramp up our organizing to protect public institutions and the social safety net. We still have to fight very hard.”

Mark Swartz: Why did Robin Hood launch FUEL in 2016?

Kelvin Chan: Our greatest and most critical developmental stage takes place between infancy and age three. This short window is where we are set up for success for the rest of our lives. Today, New York City is home to at least 100,000 children ages 0-3 who are living below the poverty line — these children are extremely vulnerable to the damaging effects of the stresses of poverty. This is why we must invest in and improve every element of our society that interacts with our young children. The opportunity to lead the incredible work of FUEL is truly a career highlight for me and my team to bring about scientifically grounded, data-driven, culturally responsive approaches that quantifiably promote early learning and development in 0-3’s.

Swartz: What is FUEL’s goal?

Chan: We aim to turn New York City into an early learning metropolis where low-income families can give children the best possible start to their lives. FUEL uses the science of early brain development to find and fuel innovative and sustainable programs to support children ages 0-3.

Swartz: How is it going so far?

Chan: To date, FUEL has dedicated over $50 million to promote infant and toddler language, and socioemotional and cognitive skills, by focusing on catalyzing community-grounded and systems-level changes to disrupt the intergenerational transmission of poverty, inequity and injustice. Since its inception, FUEL has successfully transformed government systems to lay the groundwork for systems change in support of our youngest children.

Swartz: What are some examples of impact?

Chan: In partnership with — the nation’s largest public safety net hospital system—FUEL’s 3-2-1 Impact program is integrating health care systems by bringing an intergenerational approach to health care to integrate mental health, pediatric and maternal health care to improve outcomes for mothers and babies from pregnancy to birth and beyond. FUEL is also improving child care quality through a partnership with and the building out equitable support systems for child care providers to deepen the sector’s capacity to provide high quality, responsive care to the youngest New Yorkers.

Swartz: What other partnerships are showing promise?

Chan: FUEL supported a pilot program with the and the at Yale University, to bring mental health supports to over 100 mothers in shelters across the city. The goal is reducing depressive symptoms in caregivers and improving child functioning. We’re also leveraging relationships with the and the , reaching into all five boroughs and working in partnership with the Department of Homeless Services to build out learning environments for 18,000 children living in shelters through Baby Brain Building Hubs.

Swartz: Robin Hood just announced the first awardees of the initiative (). What is the objective?

Chan: We aim to support young children’s learning and development through programs focused on their parents and caregivers. In March of 2022, we awarded 50 organizations with $25,000 in unrestricted funding, access to expert workshops and support, and opportunities for up to $1 million in funding over the next two years. All in all, we’ve reached over 72,000 New York City families, but we have plenty of work left to do.

Swartz: In what ways does your FUEL work make you reflect on your own upbringing?

Chan: My passion and dedication for promoting quality early learning and equity for children and families stem from personal experience of high-quality early learning. I grew up in squalor in New York City’s Chinatown. From birth, “home” was a one-bedroom railway apartment in a tenement building, where my mother, father and seven other adults — including my paternal grandparents, aunts and uncles — were stacked on top of each other every day and night. Nevertheless, my family sang to me, told stories and buffered me from the stressors of poverty, racism and injustice.

To this day, I fondly remember the names of my Head Start teachers — Yolanda and Ramona. To me, they are exemplars of what it means to be attuned, warm, responsive and nurturing early care and learning professionals. Despite the poverty and racism that characterized the socioeconomic tensions of the Lower East Side of NYC in the 1980s, Yolanda and Ramona created a veritable oasis for me and the lucky few they cared for to thrive in. In their classroom, the challenges of my family circumstances melted away so that I could finger-paint with abandon, sing new songs in English and in Spanish, and make friends with people outside of my Cantonese bubble! Most of all, under Yolanda and Ramona’s care, I never felt ashamed of who I am; embarrassed about being poor; or frustrated with my interactions in an English-speaking environment as a, then, strictly monolingual Cantonese kid.

Swartz: What’s next for FUEL?

Chan: FUEL 2.0 will focus on large-scale systems change, drawing on the groundwork laid out with FUEL 1.0, so that children 0-3 are supported physically, mentally and emotionally; prepared for kindergarten and beyond; and poised for economic mobility from poverty. We’ll continue focusing on bringing a child-centered approach to any and all institutions that support parents and caregivers so that New York City adults are poised to provide the strongest foundation for the children in their lives.

We’ll also work to tackle inequities in home-based child care and fund professional development for those providers so that every child has access to high-quality care. And, finally, we’ll work to influence and leverage city and state budgets and funding to scale early childhood interventions because we know that the most impactful investment we can make is the one we make earliest in a person’s life cycle. Our goal is to double our reach to 120,000 children and families in New York City over the next five years. And, ultimately, to redesign the early childhood landscape in New York once and for all.