But when filmmaker Rob Reiner latched onto the science about how young children develop, he not only used his moviemaking platform to convince the public of the importance of kids鈥� early years, he became a real-life policymaker to champion the cause. 

After successfully steering the passage of a 1998 tobacco tax in California to fund programs for kids from birth to 5, he chaired the statewide commission overseeing how some of the funds were spent. The entertainment community remembered Reiner鈥檚 legacy as a director this week, after he and his wife Michelle Singer Reiner were found dead in their home. But others reflected on how he kept early-childhood development in the spotlight. 

鈥淭here are plenty of Hollywood actors, directors and leaders who engage in politics, write reasonably sized checks and do their best to make a difference. That was not Rob,鈥� said Ben Austin, a former Clinton White House staffer who handled communications for the California Children and Families Commission and quickly rebranded it as First 5. Twenty-seven years later, the work continues. 鈥淭his was not a side hustle.鈥�

For an education reporter, it was a big deal. I first interviewed Reiner and his wife in a suite at what was then the Mirage Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas in 1997. Early-childhood education was my beat, and he was there to talk to the nation鈥檚 governors about his I Am Your Child campaign. He wanted to start a movement and had the high-level connections to do it. The effort kicked off earlier that year with and a featuring celebrities such as Tom Hanks and Billy Crystal. With big-name corporate sponsors like Johnson & Johnson and AT&T, the initiative included a special edition of Newsweek and a series of parent-focused videos that translated the latest science on early brain development to a general audience.  

As a new mom, I couldn鈥檛 help but feel a personal connection to the topic. I reported on the policy goals of the campaign, like parent education and improving the quality of child care, while taking in the advice about reading and having back-and-forth conversations with my infant daughter. 

It was a 1994 report called , from the Carnegie Corporation of New York, that sparked Reiner鈥檚 activism. The authors explained how the first three years of life were a critical period of both risk and opportunity. 

鈥淎n adverse environment can compromise a young child’s brain function and overall development,鈥� the authors wrote. 鈥淎 good start in life can do more to promote learning and prevent damage than we ever imagined.鈥�

Michael Levine, a co-author, remembers sitting in the Reiners鈥� home theater in 1995, presenting the research to a small group, including actor Warren Beatty, actress Kate Capshaw and then-Disney Channel President John Cooke. Reiner, Levine said, wanted to replicate a Hawaii program called , which promoted understanding of child development and parents鈥� relationships with their babies. Then Beatty spoke up.

鈥淗e said something to the effect of 鈥業’ve been listening to this whole conversation about programs and philanthropy. What we can do is sell early childhood to America,鈥� 鈥� Levine recalled.

That pivotal moment took place in the same home where police said the Reiners were stabbed to death. The Reiners鈥� young children were there at the time, Levine said. On Sunday, their son , 32, was arrested for the murder. On Monday, police said their daughter found their bodies.

Despite being a far-left Democrat, Reiner found agreement with Republican governors, like Pennsylvania鈥檚 and of Ohio, over early-childhood issues, Levine said.聽

While I Am Your Child was a nationwide effort, Reiner kept his political strategy focused on California. In November 1998, voters narrowly passed his ballot measure, creating a 50-cent tax on tobacco products, beating back a $30 million effort from cigarette makers to defeat it. The revenue would fund programs to improve the health, school readiness and well-being of young children.

Reiner鈥檚 ability to combine his creative talent with political mobilization was 鈥渦nprecedented in the early-childhood field,鈥� Levine said. 

, I met Reiner in his Castle Rock Entertainment office in Beverly Hills, where posters of his hit movies, like “A Few Good Men,” and “When Harry Met Sally” line the walls.

First 5 was facing legal challenges, including a repeal effort sponsored by the president of a business called Cigarettes Cheaper. An author, , was also poking holes in the whole idea behind First 5, arguing that Reiner was oversimplifying the science and creating stress for parents about making the most of their kids鈥� early years. Reiner brushed off the criticism.

鈥淟et鈥檚 say there is no evidence,鈥� he told me. 鈥淲ould you then say, 鈥楲et鈥檚 not invest in child care for young children; let鈥檚 not invest in health care for young children?鈥� 鈥�

The repeal effort failed and until 2006, First 5 occupied almost as much of Reiner鈥檚 time as his movies. He presided over statewide commission meetings, and could 鈥渃ode switch鈥� between directing a scene and handling First 5 business, Austin said. In 2002, Austin remembers grabbing some time with Reiner on the set of 鈥淎lex and Emma,鈥� a love story starring Luke Wilson and Kate Hudson.

鈥淲e鈥檇 schedule with the producer like 15 minutes for me to talk to Rob in his trailer about early-childhood policy,鈥� he said. 

One of Reiner鈥檚 biggest wins during that period was getting First 5 leaders in Los Angeles County to toward expanding preschool.

鈥淭his is a historic day for the children, not only of L.A. County, but of the country,鈥� he said at the time. 鈥淭his is going to be the model.鈥�

He didn鈥檛 want to stop there. In 2006, he got a measure on the ballot that would tax California鈥檚 wealthiest residents to pay for pre-K for all 4-year-olds. With 鈥渟trong will and enormous confidence,鈥� he had little patience for those who might hurt the initiative鈥檚 chances of passing, said Bruce Fuller, a University of California Berkeley professor who advised Reiner鈥檚 team on the proposal. 

鈥淩einer was not necessarily the world’s greatest listener,鈥� Fuller told me. The plan called for the California Department of Education to set standards for the program and county school superintendents to run it. Fuller thought that was a mistake because it would take kids away from private providers 鈥� an opinion Reiner鈥檚 team rejected. But Fuller described Reiner as someone 鈥渨ho committed a ton of time and had a big heart to advance the issue.鈥�

Voters rejected the pre-K plan. But today, despite , First 5 continues to fund the statewide commission and 58 county-level agencies. They pay for a broad range of services, from home visiting for teen parents to training preschool providers. In 2018, I wrote of articles marking the 20th anniversary of the ballot measure. 

Reiner didn鈥檛 agree to an interview that time. But First 5 L.A. shared some of his as he reflected on what drew him to become an early-childhood education advocate. 

He was partly motivated by his own early experiences.

鈥淎s somebody who went through therapy, I started thinking about my early years and how they affected me,鈥� he said. 

But he also saw a political opportunity. 

鈥淕oals 2000 had just come out,鈥� he said, referring to the . 鈥淭he first goal was 鈥楢ll children will start school ready to learn.鈥� And I looked at all this and I said, you know, it seems to me if you could meet that one goal, if you could just make sure that every child has what they need to be healthy and ready to experience kindergarten, maybe all those other goals would kind of fall into line.鈥�

And yet, shows that the skills needed for reading begin developing before a child is born, and that signs of reading challenges can emerge as early as 18 months old.

鈥淧eople don鈥檛 understand that children don鈥檛 start kindergarten with a clean slate,鈥� said Nadine Gaab, an associate professor at the Harvard School of Education involved in the research. Learning to read 鈥渋s a long process with many milestones that unfold over many years, and it starts primarily with oral language. Years of brain development lead up to the point where formal instruction puts it all together and enables them to read. The process starts in utero.鈥�

The human brain evolved specifically for spoken language, said Perri Klass, professor of journalism and pediatrics at New York University and the national medical director of the nonprofit . Every society across the world uses spoken language, but the transition from spoken to written language is a giant leap for the brain.  

That jump, Klass said, requires the brain to recruit structures and networks throughout its many layers and folds just to recognize a letter on a page, involving the vision and memory portions of the brain. The brain then must remember the sound the letter represents and connect that letter with others to make sounds that associate with the picture on a page. Finally, at lightning speed, the brain recognizes that those letters work together to say, 鈥淐at.鈥�  

鈥淟earning to read is a challenge for all children,鈥� she said. 鈥淎nd for some children it鈥檚 really a struggle. It鈥檚 not that you develop spoken language and then, boom, you get to school and develop written language. Spoken and written language have been developing together directly from birth, and all the exposure to language from the environment 鈥� what they hear from their parents, whether they鈥檙e read to, talked to, whether someone sings to them or holds them 鈥� are there. So, it鈥檚 the brain the child takes to school that helps them succeed at this impressive task of learning to read.鈥�

Klass points to the new Harvard research to underscore how early that 鈥渂rain the child takes to school鈥� begins developing. For years, a prevailing attitude has been that a child starts learning to read in pre-K or kindergarten. A longitudinal study by Gaab and her colleagues using MRI scans and an array of other assessments confirmed that the bases for reading skills begin to develop in the child鈥檚 brain by birth and continue building between infancy and preschool. 

鈥淲e wanted to see how early the developmental trajectories of children who later develop good versus poor reading skills diverge, because that can give us a really important clue for when we should intervene, as well as what some of the risks and protective factors are,鈥� Gaab said, 

A key finding of the study is that the developmental trajectories of children with and without reading disabilities start to diverge around 18 months, rather than at 5 or 6 years old as previously assumed.  

And yet, Gaab said, a wide gap currently stands between the time children are identified as having a reading impairment and the start of intensive intervention. This is particularly problematic for children diagnosed with dyslexia, she said, adding that researchers call this the The majority of school districts in the U.S. employ a 鈥渨ait-to-fail鈥� approach, meaning that many children are only flagged by the school system after they have failed to learn to read over a prolonged period of time 鈥� often years 鈥� even though there鈥檚 evidence that reading intervention is most effective earlier. The experience of failure can erode self-esteem, she said, and lead to the higher rates of anxiety and depression that are found in struggling readers.

The Study

The study, 鈥淟ongitudinal Trajectories of Brain Development from Infancy to School Age and Their Relationship with Literacy Development,鈥� is the first to track brain development from infancy to childhood focused literacy skills 鈥� a window into later academic attainment.     

Over a decade, Gaab and co-authors Ted Turesky, Elizabeth Escalante and Megan Loh conducted MRI brain scans of 130 study participants starting at 3 months old. Half of the children had a risk of dyslexia, with either an older sibling or one or both parents diagnosed with dyslexia, which can increase a child鈥檚 risk of reading challenges. For the first year of the study, the babies peacefully slept through the scan, tucked into the MRI machine wearing noise protection (鈥淲e got really good at putting other people鈥檚 babies to sleep,鈥� Gaab said). 

At 18 months old, the babies came back for another scan, though 鈥減eacefully sleeping鈥� was becoming a fond memory. By the time the babies were toddlers, the researchers took a break, for reasons any parent of unruly toddlers can understand. The children returned when they were a more cooperative 4 years old and every year after until age 10. 

The study also assessed such factors as cognitive abilities, literacy environment and home language. Funded by the NIH, the researchers aimed to continue for another five years and follow the participants into high school. Though the grant application had received a fundable score at NIH, future funding is uncertain due to the Trump administration鈥檚 termination of .

Building the Brain鈥檚 Architecture

Babies are born with the raw material they need to hear, see, move and remember. The nerve fibers, or axons, that connect these disparate brain regions don鈥檛 grow automatically. They are cultivated by babies鈥� environments. MRIs of the participants as infants showed predictably smaller brains that appear more solid or smooth in the images. By the time the children were 5, the scans showed a robust network of branching pathways of these nerve fibers, said coauthor Turesky.  

鈥淭he infant brain is very different compared to all other stages of life,鈥� he said. 鈥淏ut if you look at the scan of a child at 5 years and then at 10 years, you can see there鈥檚 hardly any change in [those pathways]. Those early years are a time of very rapid growth.鈥�

Though the human brain remains plastic and mutable for a lifetime, Turesky said, the scans underscore that earliest years are the busiest for building brain architecture 鈥� a fact that has important policy implications for early intervention and improved literacy curricula in preschools. 

Giving Them the 鈥楪ood Stuff鈥�

Some brains are better equipped to build the neural scaffolding that ultimately leads to reading, Gaab said, and some brains are less optimized, which means those children might struggle to read. It doesn鈥檛 mean their brains are faulty, or that there is something seriously wrong with them. 

鈥淭hey鈥檙e built differently, and they鈥檙e optimized for other things, because every brain is different,鈥� she said. 鈥淏ut it does point to the need for good early pre-reading instruction and the games and good oral language input, and home and school environment interactions that we know build these connections. Some brains just need more of the good stuff.鈥�  

鈥淐all it preventative education, just like preventative medicine,鈥� she said. 鈥淗elp these kids build these connections before they struggle and prevent them ever seeing a special educator or ever getting a dyslexia diagnosis.鈥� A large number of studies now show that early intervention and prevention are leading to better outcomes for children at risk of dyslexia, Gaab said, and the research has led to aimed at early identification and intervention. 

That includes teaching the specific skills that can close the gap between proficient and struggling readers. Those skills include phonological awareness, letter-sound knowledge, rapid automatized naming, vocabulary and oral language comprehension. This teaching takes place naturally when caregivers read aloud to their children. Reach Out and Read, the nonprofit Klass leads, has a network of clinicians who work directly with pediatric care providers to help them integrate read-aloud experiences into their interactions with parents and provides developmentally appropriate books for caregivers to take home. 

鈥淥ur tremendous advantage in pediatric primary care is that the clinicians see the children over and over in these early years,鈥� Klass said. 鈥淲e see them for a newborn visit and a one-month, a two-month visit 鈥� The schedule is sort of engraved on all our hearts, so we get to talk with the parents about reading and early literacy repeatedly during those early years of life. 

鈥淲e know that the developing brain is shaped most of all by the interactions with the adults taking care of that child, Klass said. 鈥淭he wonderful thing about this study is that it literally looks at the building of the brain and says very clearly that it鈥檚 not just that the brain is being built, but the specific structures that will allow the child to read.鈥� 

If doctors can identify young children who are going to struggle more with learning to read as they get older, they can target those families with books and other support early on, Klass added.

鈥淲e鈥檙e hoping with鈥he books the caregivers are taking home, the child is learning a motivational lesson: 鈥業 like books. If I carry a book and give it to my parent, they might sit down and talk to me in that voice,鈥欌�� Klass said. 

Klass said no one needs to tell parents to 鈥渢each鈥� this idea to their children. The children will sort it out if they grow up around books and reading. A baby doesn鈥檛 want or need an authority on literacy to walk through the door and teach them how to read, Klass said. A baby wants their parent鈥檚 voice, presence and back-and-forth interactions. 

鈥淵our baby wants to be on your lap hearing you read. Your baby will love books because your baby loves you.鈥�

Formed in 1969 by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), a nonprofit authorized by Congress in the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967, PBS has been a staple for American families for decades. 

From its earliest days airing Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood and Sesame Street to iconic shows from the ’70s, ’80s and ’90s like Electric Company, Reading Rainbow and Bill Nye the Science Guy, PBS programming has taught children to understand and express their emotions, and helped them build foundational literacy, math and science skills. And since 1999, PBS Kids has brought beloved characters like Daniel Tiger and Arthur into American through shows and digital games.聽

Today, PBS, along with NPR and funded by CPB faces an uncertain future after President Donald Trump signed a bill cutting earmarked for the Corporation.

public broadcasting has been under threat. In the 1990s, former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Newt Gingrich, led efforts to . In 1969, Fred Rogers before Congress to protect $20 million in federal funding for the newly formed Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which the Nixon administration proposed cutting in half.

鈥淚鈥檓 constantly concerned about what our children are seeing, and for 15 years I have tried, in this country and Canada, to present what I feel is a meaningful expression of care,鈥� Rogers told then-Senator John O. Pastore. Rogers contrasted his approach with the animated 鈥渂ombardment鈥� and gun violence he saw on other networks.

Underscoring the importance of programs appealing to social emotional learning and mental health, Rogers won Pastore over. “Looks like you just earned the $20 million dollars,” Pastore concluded.

Over the years, PBS has remained a media source among Americans, especially for its children鈥檚 programming. As of 2024, more than 130 million people watch PBS via traditional television; nearly 60% of all U.S. television households watch PBS over the course of a year; and PBS Kids 15.5 million monthly users and 345 million monthly streams across PBS KIDS鈥� digital platforms.

Here’s a visual history of the milestones and iconic moments from the organization that has served generations of learners 鈥� as well as a glimpse into efforts to protect it over the years:

1969

Fred Rogers testified before the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Communications to oppose proposed cuts to federal funding for public broadcasting. 

Sesame Street airs its episode in November 1969.

1970

The photos below capture behind-the-scenes moments from the first season of Sesame Street.

1971

1973

1986

’90s and Early 2000s

2005

2008

2009

Sesame Street turns 40. 

2011

2012

2013

2017

2025

The fight to fund continues. 

The study, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Pediatrics in June, involved a meta-analysis of 84 studies and found that paternal mental distress around the time of birth was associated with poorer global, social-emotional, cognitive, language and physical development in their children. 

While research on the intersection of mental health and parenthood has long focused on mothers, this analysis sought to examine whether the mental health of fathers influences child development, said Delyse Hutchinson, an associate professor in the school of psychology at Deakin University in Victoria, Australia and the study鈥檚 senior author.

The results didn鈥檛 surprise Hutchinson, she said. 鈥淚t’s still a stigma for a lot of dads, mental health, and they tend not to talk about it openly and that kind of leads maybe to a lot of men not even necessarily recognizing that they’re experiencing mental health symptoms.鈥� 

鈥淚t matters for families. It matters for supporting mums and babies. So it’s not a surprise. It’s just the affirmation and having the evidence to take to policy makers, healthcare, and say, look, this does matter. We’re gonna do more about this,鈥� she added.

The studies included in the analysis followed the development of children ages 0 to 18, though the majority of research examined development before adolescence. Hutchinson emphasized that the postpartum period, when fathers typically have more direct contact with their baby, has the greatest impact on a child鈥檚 development. 

Part of the study鈥檚 goal was to build awareness around what depression looks like for dads, since they often than women. Men might withdraw socially or feel unable to emotionally regulate themselves. They could also erupt in outbursts or anger, Hutchinson said.

While conducting the analysis, researchers found that a father鈥檚 mental state affects children in a number of ways, most notably a child鈥檚 social-emotional development, including emotional regulation and social skills. Children who grow up in a household with a father navigating mental health issues such as depression, may themselves have difficulty regulating their emotions, Hutchinson said. 

鈥淪ay you’re feeling a little bit sad and down, you tend to be less sensitive towards others, or if you’re getting agitated and frustrated 鈥� that’s a less sensitive response to an infant or a young child,鈥� Hutchinson added.

Children pick up on emotional cues. When a child experiences their father expressing anger or distress, it can lead them to develop an insecure bond with him, according to Hutchinson. This can bring a child to feel unsure that their dad can provide for their emotional needs.

Most of the existing research on how a parent鈥檚 mental health influences child development focuses either on both parents or just the mother, Hutchinson explained. That means moms and dads are grouped together when researchers look at development outcomes for children. While conducting the meta-analysis, lead researcher Genevieve Le Bas reached out to many authors of the published studies to ask if they could retrieve unpublished data on the mental health of fathers.

鈥淲hilst a very significant proportion of the data in this review is from published studies, we often had to contact authors to obtain data on fathers that wasn’t specifically recorded in those studies,鈥� said Hutchinson.

The fact that fathers were either initially left out or mixed into data about mothers is reflective of larger issues in the research field, as well as the culture of parenting, Hutchinson explained. That culture tends to push fathers to the side and neglect health services which could support them throughout parenthood.

But the role of fathers in parenting and the awareness around their mental health is changing. Dr. Craig Garfield, a professor of pediatrics at Northwestern University and a practicing pediatrician at Lurie Children’s Hospital in Chicago, has experienced that change firsthand as both a father and a researcher. When Garfield took a year off to take care of his 18-month-old son, he felt very lonely. He recalled being the sole father on the playground and in the local 鈥渕om and tot鈥� classes. Soon after, he shifted his research focus from injury prevention in childhood to the role of fathers in families.

Medical journal reviewers have long been skeptical that fathers can experience post-natal depression, Garfield said. When he worked on a with his colleagues in 2002 about how pediatricians can support fathers and recommended screening fathers for depression after their partner gave birth, he got pushback during the peer review process.

鈥淚t came back from the reviewer saying, 鈥楾here’s no such thing as this. You can’t kind of make it up and start suggesting screening dads,鈥欌�� he said. 鈥淎nd to a certain extent, that is true. There was not much in the literature, but we all knew from clinical experience that there were dads that were depressed.鈥滻t wasn鈥檛 until about 10 years ago that Garfield was able to include peer-reviewed studies on paternal mental health in his published research papers, he said. 

There are cultural norms and stereotypes working against dads, Garfield said, but it鈥檚 necessary to recognize that paternal mental health affects families every day 鈥� and to address the issue. 

Addressing Mental Health for Fathers

There are a number of efforts underway to address some of the findings surfaced by the emerging body of research on fathers鈥� mental health. Kevin Seldon, who runs Dads Supporting Dads, a network of organizations supporting fathers under the nonprofit All Parents Welcome, said the dads he works with are often met with skepticism when they express their struggles with postpartum depression. Seldon and his wife spent years trying to have a baby. During the birth of their son, his wife needed an oxygen mask and their baby emerged blue. (Seldon鈥檚 wife and now 6-year-old son are healthy.) 

鈥淚t鈥檚 very stressful and anytime I tried to address it, people would be like, 鈥榊ou didn’t give birth.鈥� But trauma is not mutually exclusive,鈥� Seldon said.鈥淸After] five years of struggling and the very traumatic birth 鈥� by the time we got home, I didn’t recognize myself in the mirror.鈥�

Dads Supporting Dads grew out of a podcast Seldon launched when he found himself feeling isolated after the birth of his son. Through his show Dad I鈥檇 Like to Friend, Seldon and other fathers were able to talk about their feelings after the birth of their children. 

鈥淢y wife had all these moms groups, right? But I couldn’t find any support,鈥� Seldon said. 鈥淚 realized that I was so far from alone, so many people were struggling.鈥� He also sought help through talk therapy, which helped him understand that his depression wasn鈥檛 uncommon, that what he experienced wasn鈥檛 a depressive episode, and that his emotions wouldn鈥欌�檛 necessarily disappear a few years after birth. 

As the podcast took off and Seldon saw demand for that connection, he started facilitating in-person gatherings for local dads and a WhatsApp community where dads could connect across the country. 

As nonprofit organizations and community groups look to connect fathers, researchers are urging policymakers to enact more and physical and mental health for fathers. Though society has traditionally pushed dads to return to work as quickly as possible to get a paycheck, Garfield believes paternity leave could help fathers better support their children.

鈥淚 took care of a family in the NICU this weekend where the baby was two days old in the NICU and dad’s back at work,鈥� Garfield said. 鈥淥ne of the most important things that we can do is really work toward paid leave for moms and for dads.鈥�

The initiative addresses these early learning gaps by supporting municipalities in prioritizing early childhood development across various sectors like education, health and housing. 

La Habra, California was the first municipality to join the initiative, which was launched in March by (First 5 OC), a public agency focused on enabling children to reach their full potential. The city signaling its commitment to prioritize early childhood development. 鈥淲e鈥檙e going to see a whole different La Habra as far as education and success,鈥� declared Mayor Rose Espinoza. 鈥淲e believe in what you鈥檙e doing, we believe in our children, and we believe in our community.鈥�

Erwin Cox, who leads family and community engagement at First 5 OC, says La Habra, which has a population just over 60,000, fits the initiative because of its size and character. “It’s a very small city, and everybody knows each other, and people tend to stay there.鈥�

But what does it actually mean for a city to be early childhood friendly? “For us, it means community partnerships, learning each other’s systems,” said Joanna Perez, executive director for early childhood development in La Habra. 

The early childhood city designation represents a fundamental shift in how municipalities think about their youngest residents, she added. Rather than viewing early childhood services as separate from traditional city functions like infrastructure, public safety and economic development, La Habra has recognized that investing in children from birth through age 5 is essential for community prosperity.

鈥淲e鈥檙e intentional about where we’re placing things, how we’re doing it, with the ultimate goal of exposing kids to lifelong learning,” said Perez.  “We want them to be able to love learning and be confident.鈥� Early childhood perspectives permeate all aspects of city planning and development. “Always having that early childhood or education person in the room, along with engineers and city council,鈥� said Perez, 鈥渕eans that everybody relates to what we’re doing. It’s also their story.”

It鈥檚 Perez鈥檚 own story too. The mother of 6-year-old triplets was born in La Habra and benefited from the types of programs she now oversees. Perez explained that she helped design her role leading the city鈥檚 , which she said is funded by grants from the California Department of Education, the California State Preschool Program and California Department of Social Services, along with federal funding for food programs.

The city鈥檚 early childhood journey didn鈥檛 start with the resolution. Tiffany Alva, First 5 OC鈥檚 director of partnerships and government affairs, described it as the public manifestation of a long process of engaging government, health care, real estate development and other business interests in the well-being of children. 鈥淟a Habra already had a strong early childhood foundation,鈥� she said. 鈥淭he initiative isn’t about starting from scratch 鈥� it’s about connecting the dots, aligning what鈥檚 already there and expanding access so more families can benefit.鈥�

, a kindergarten readiness program in La Habra, exemplifies the kind of local program the initiative supports. The program has been serving the community since 2019. It brings together educators and families for activities and learning. 

Irish Domantay, a mother living in La Habra, said Little Learners contributed to her 4-year-old son鈥檚 development. As a toddler, he had a speech delay, she said.  鈥淚 wanted him to get a little bit more exposure to the community and among his peers.鈥� She said he鈥檚 been attending Little Learner for three years, and it helped him grow. “Oh my gosh, he doesn’t stop talking now,” she said. At Little Learners, she said, 鈥渉e’s with his peers and interacting. They also have the food pantry there, and so it’s just a really great way to not only get parent interaction, but also get extra resources.鈥�

Andrea Granados, another local mom, benefited from the city鈥檚 efforts on behalf of families with young kids. When Granados moved to La Habra from nearby Buena Park, she felt overwhelmed. In Buena Park,  she said, 鈥淚 know the whole school system, I know all the school teachers, I know programs of where to go to. So coming here was like, okay, where are we going?” Granados said the Gary Center, a health clinic serving La Habra and surrounding communities provided her with the guidance she needed. 鈥淭he community liaison said Little Learners is probably a good place for you to bring your children. And we did.” Granados started taking her kids to Little Learners every Wednesday, which helped them build relationships with other families.

With the resolution, La Habra intends to help more families like Domantay鈥檚 and Granados鈥� gain access to early intervention services, peer interactions and high-quality learning opportunities for their young children. The initiative also aims to help parents find community, access resources and build the relationships that make a neighborhood feel like home. When city leaders make decisions about parks, transportation, housing and services, they will consider how those decisions will affect young children.

It鈥檚 too early to measure direct changes in EDI scores from La Habra鈥檚 resolution. In fact, Alva explained that a variety of efforts contribute to the kind of long-term impact EDI measures, but she said goals include:

• Strengthening cross-sector collaboration so city departments, schools and community partners are aligning policies and practices with early childhood in mind by 2026.
• Building parent and caregiver engagement in early development initiatives, with the goal of 50% of families participating in at least one city-supported program or event annually by 2027.
• Expanding access to quality early learning opportunities so that 90% of children ages 0-5 are engaged in some form of enriching care or preschool by 2028.

In June, the city of Anaheim and the vision is to continue expanding, explained Cox. 鈥淲e鈥檙e trying to push forward resolutions in Santa Ana and Garden Grove as well, in an effort to bring in government, and bring everybody on board to support this.”

With federal funding for PBS and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting now wiped out, one of the few trusted, equity-driven sources of children鈥檚 media is seriously wounded. challenge not only the families and educators who rely on PBS Kids, but also the broader media landscape that risks becoming even more fragmented, commercial and inequitable.

The cuts present a critical juncture and potential pivot point. How educators, media makers and policymakers respond will shape not just children鈥檚 school readiness, but the civic health, creativity and curiosity of a generation raised in the shadows of algorithmic platforms. 

To meet the moment, policy leaders and educators must move beyond screen time limits and cell phone bans 鈥� and focus instead on a long-term vision rooted in shared public interest values, powered by human connection and guided by standards that prioritize children鈥檚 well-being from the start.

Babies and Toddlers Are Using Screens 鈥� Now What?

Recent studies and scholars have the growing use of screen media among infants and toddlers. The , a study of media use for children from birth through age 8 conducted in 2024, showed that the average infant and toddler under 2 years old was spending more than an hour a day on screens, with children ages 2 to 4 using screens more than two hours daily. In Fall 2023, while I was head of learning and impact at Noggin, an interactive platform for kids ages 2 to 8, my team led a study of 400 families with children under 3 and found screen use now begins in infancy for more than 95% of families. 

For overworked and under-resourced families, screens aren鈥檛 optional 鈥� they鈥檙e essential tools for navigating daily life. Platforms like YouTube, TikTok and AI bots like are commanding children鈥檚 attention, fueled by opaque algorithms and ad-based business models that promote addictive, low-quality content. Early media exposure can no longer be considered peripheral. Reduced federal support for PBS Kids and other public media will make that imbalance more acute unless private and philanthropic sources step up.

Reimagining Early Learning Media in the AI Era

At the same time, a major disruption in media production for kids is underway, powered by fast, cheap video production, artificial intelligence and personalized learning technologies. Legacy organizations like Sesame Workshop and PBS face pressure to keep pace with viral success stories like Ms. Rachel and , which have shown how efficient, engaging content can reach millions.

I currently mentor entrepreneurs experimenting with how new technologies like voice recognition and artificial intelligence can support young kids. I鈥檝e seen promising innovations that build on the foundational equity and inclusion principles popularized by public media pioneers like Fred Rogers and Joan Ganz Cooney. The ones that shine most brightly are those that reflect the original spirit of Sesame Street: equity through innovation.

The founders are prioritizing three key principles: connected learning, personalized choice and family co-viewing. Each principle recognizes that brain development is most rapid in the first five years of life, that intention for little ones can be easily scrambled by powerful algorithms and that busy parents 鈥� like it or not 鈥� have chosen to make digital and screen media a feature of daily life. 

By designing products that stimulate curiosity and discourage overconsumption, media developers can encourage children to practice their 鈥淚 can do it鈥� moments ; use and guide language learning; and deliver 鈥渏ust in time鈥� content to drive school readiness. Some pioneers are taking a playbook from research on Sesame Street鈥檚 power to scaffold learning via to create new opportunities for intergenerational play, a critical opportunity for parent-child and healthy development.

These new models rely on modern ingredients, such as AI, real-time data and mobile-first, multi-platform design. In the wake of federal cuts, companies and organizations building tools to support young children鈥檚 early learning and development have a responsibility to leverage research on the value public media has brought to young children for decades and the opportunity that high-quality, tech-enabled learning can deliver. 

The reality is that child development experts and educators who have been studying how kids learn and grow for decades now must confront a digital revolution powered by generative AI, immersive media and increasingly personal learning companions. This wave could either democratize access to world-class learning or cement a two-tiered system: premium, voice-based tools for the wealthy; and game-heavy, ad-driven distractions for everyone else.

To prevent that outcome, we need clear public standards for AI in early childhood, informed by early learning experts and advocates. 鈥淣o AI bots for tots鈥� should be an early mantra of concern for all human-centered designs for children under age 8. We also need an industry-wide commitment to ethical and responsible development of any AI-driven product designed for children that young and transparency about how AI tools are trained, and who they are designed to serve.

A National Strategy for Children鈥檚 Media

To ensure the next generation of early learning media 鈥� now introduced into the crib 鈥� are 鈥渉elpmates鈥� and rather than substitutes for the warm, responsive adult relationships that fuel real learning, the nation needs a clear strategy for children鈥檚 media. The strategy must safeguard the development of young children, blend the trusted legacy of public media with today鈥檚 most promising tech tools, and embrace a broad cross-sector alliance.

That strategy begins with restoring adequate funding for PBS, but public dollars alone won鈥檛 be enough. To move from patchwork to progress, I propose six coordinated actions:

First, we need a new funding stream for children鈥檚 media modeled on the that created the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Backed by a consortium of philanthropies and individuals, the fund could be sustained by state and community-based financing models administered through public agencies and could galvanize public support for inclusive, research-backed media tools built for children鈥檚 developmental needs.

Second, we must establish shared standards for responsible media and AI design in early childhood. Policymakers should work with trusted early learning and development partners to create guardrails that prioritize equity and authentic learning over clicks and virality.

Third, state leaders 鈥� who are poised to wield more discretion as federal dollars devolve 鈥� should direct resources toward high-quality digital tools and educator training to better use proven public media offerings across Head Start, family child care, and pre-K settings.

Fourth, edtech leaders and investors must design learning tools and business models that prioritize trust, transparency and impact and engage in longitudinal research that tracks how digital tools close equity gaps and support healthy development.

Fifth, educators and families must recognize that they鈥檙e not just users, they are catalysts for change who can push for media that鈥檚 feedback-rich, culturally affirming and scaffolded for learning; can demand better integration between home and classroom technologies; and can shape the field by voicing what works, what fails and what鈥檚 missing.

Finally, pediatricians and health leaders must help reframe the screen time conversation from guilt to guidance. By lifting up high-quality media as a tool for overstretched families, rather than a threat, they can re-center the conversation around children鈥檚 real needs: connection, stimulation, and joy.

We鈥檝e lingered too long in the wet cement of funding debates and in a digital marketplace where profit often outweighs purpose. The recent, and sadly predictable, federal cuts to public media should be treated not only as a wake-up call, but as a catalytic moment to act.

This will take public investment, private ingenuity, and political courage. But most of all, it will take national will: the conviction that every child, regardless of income or ZIP code, deserves access to inspiring, developmentally sound, high-quality media content that sparks curiosity, fuels learning and lifts their full civic potential.

AI is dominating headlines 鈥� and rightly so. It鈥檚 reshaping industries, redefining work and increasingly influencing homes and childhoods. But as policymakers and technologists rush to prepare K-12 schools for an AI-powered future, they risk overlooking a critical window: the early years, when than at any other point in life.

My own kids, who are 2 and 4 years old, are AI natives. They follow the blue dot on Google Maps, thank the car when it welcomes us across state lines and ask Spotify to play their favorite songs. They recently had a lively conversation about a Roomba they saw vacuuming the office building across the street. They鈥檝e followed a virtual trainer through an 鈥渋ntelligent鈥� home workout. And when my son asked to see a parrot with pigeon wings, DALL-E helped make it real.

Their ease with AI is both fascinating and a little unsettling. To them, machines are as trustworthy as parents or teachers. As a tech-forward parent, I welcome these tools, but I also teach my children a critical distinction: technology is a helper, not a human.

That distinction is already blurring. Voice assistants and recommendation engines sound authoritative, even when they’re wrong. And without early education on how AI works and where its limits lie, the youngest generation is at risk of growing up to trust machines without question. This is especially concerning for children with learning differences, who may be more likely to anthropomorphize technology and treat machines as social beings, according to .

To its credit, the that inspired the pledge recognizes a real need: America鈥檚 youth must be prepared to thrive in an AI-driven world. But waiting until kindergarten misses a key window of opportunity. The foundational skills that matter most, especially in a post-AI world 鈥� creativity, critical thinking, empathy, resilience 鈥� start to take root long before formal schooling begins.

Teaching AI literacy to 3- and 4-year-olds may seem premature, but with companies like Google , it鈥檚 more important than ever to start early. Young children are remarkably capable of understanding complex ideas when taught in developmentally appropriate ways. At my children鈥檚 preschool in New York City, they鈥檝e learned about skyscrapers and even touched on the events of 9/11. When wildfire smoke from New Jersey recently polluted the air, they discussed climate and health. If I can trust their teachers to guide these complex conversations, I can trust them to begin introducing the concept of AI in ways that are meaningful to my children.

Supporting early AI literacy doesn’t mean more screens for toddlers. It means fostering the human skills that will help young children thrive in a machine-filled world. But who will teach these skills? Parents play an essential role and deserve access to helpful resources, but early childhood educators are especially well-positioned to lead developmentally appropriate conversations on these concepts. And publicly funded early childhood programs, like NYC鈥檚 Pre-K for All, can provide the structure and scale needed to ensure all young children are supported, not just those with tech-forward parents. 

The challenge is, most early childhood educators have not been introduced to the concept of AI literacy themselves. As national efforts 鈥� such as the new , launched earlier this month by the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) 鈥� prepare to train K-12 teachers, early childhood educators are being left out of the conversation entirely. 

If we want to build the strongest foundation for AI literacy, we need to start earlier. As economist James Heckman has shown, high-quality early learning programs can . Head Start, which reaches from low-income families across the U.S. through a two-generation approach, presents a powerful opportunity to advance AI literacy early and at scale.

One of Head Start鈥檚 unique strengths is its , which outlines five key domains of early learning and serves as a foundational guide for state-level early learning standards. Embedding elements of AI literacy within this widely adopted framework could help ensure inclusive access to essential digital skills. By integrating AI concepts into play-based learning, educators, children and caregivers can engage with technology in thoughtful, confident ways.

Imagine an early childhood classroom where teachers and children discuss: What can machines do? What can鈥檛 they do? Why do they sometimes make mistakes? These simple questions can grow into the digital discernment our future demands.

AI isn鈥檛 coming, it has already arrived and it鈥檚 changing how our children learn, play and create. With the right support from our early care and education system, children can be ready to thrive in a world we鈥檙e only beginning to imagine.

The crisis impacting the early learning sector is layered. Families are struggling to find affordable, high-quality care. Providers are stretched thin, often unable to make ends meet. The ecosystem of policies and funding is shrouded in uncertainty, creating chaos and instability. 

Still, through it all, bright spots have emerged. There are talented educators supporting our nation鈥檚 youngest learners in powerful ways. There are researchers, policymakers and advocates working tirelessly to improve the lived experiences of families with young children and early learning professionals. There are programs creatively tackling some of the field鈥檚 most pressing issues, like compensation, the rising cost of care and access to high-quality programs. And broadly, the public has become more aware of the need for a strong, sustainable early care and education system.

蜜桃影视 wants to help readers make sense of the sector鈥檚 complex challenges 鈥� and to highlight innovative approaches to solving them. That鈥檚 why we鈥檙e excited to introduce zero2eight, a new vertical dedicated to early care and education that will publish stories from 鈥� and for 鈥� those who see early learning as essential to setting every child up for future success.

Zero2eight will be dedicated to covering the news, practices, policies and research shaping the experiences of young children, their families and the early learning workforce. We鈥檒l examine the landscape of American child care and early childhood education; emerging research in early childhood development; and novel solutions that are pushing the field forward.

Our coverage will build upon the robust archive of work published by Early Learning Nation, an independent magazine that launched in 2018 as an initiative of the Bezos Family Foundation and joined 蜜桃影视 in fall 2024. As its readers know, Early Learning Nation has played a key role in raising awareness and deepening public understanding of American child care and early learning. Through the years its industry-leading team of writers and analysts have brought unique expertise and experience to these topics, which they鈥檒l continue to do here at 蜜桃影视. 

鈥淭he key issues affecting America鈥檚 K-12 students begin well before kindergarten and continue well beyond high school graduation,鈥� 74 CEO Steve Snyder said last fall, as he announced the merger. 鈥淥ur partnership underscores 蜜桃影视鈥檚 commitment in broadening our editorial priorities and deepening our coverage of equity, solutions and progress as we follow children from cradle to career.鈥澛�

Early Learning Nation鈥檚 six-year archive will be available on zero2eight. Over the coming weeks and months, we鈥檒l also be resurfacing some memorable 鈥渕ust reads鈥� from over the years.

It is with excitement and pertinence that we launch zero2eight. We hope you鈥檒l follow and share our work on 蜜桃影视 (bookmark our new home) and join our growing community. And, of course, be sure to sign up for 蜜桃影视鈥檚 daily newsletter.

Midway between Nashville and Atlanta, the city of Chattanooga, Tennessee, makes original use of a resource that other communities possess in abundance but fail to capitalize on: empty classrooms in public schools. 

Arising two decades ago from one principal’s creative approach, micro-centers are child care centers for the children of school teachers and other staff. The city鈥檚 12 micro-centers serve children 6 weeks old through 4 years old, when they can go to pre-kindergarten.

鈥淚t’s almost like a deconstructed child care center,鈥� says Louise Stoney of , a nonprofit focused on improving child care business models. Stoney says she鈥檚 working with several states that are trying to replicate the model.

Origin Story

In the early 2000s, school principal Jill Levine noticed that she was losing a lot of her bright young teachers when they had children. So she converted an empty classroom into an informal child care space.

To make sure the center was not an insurance risk, Levine reached out to the late Phil Acord of , a social services organization with roots in the 19th century. Acord worked with Tennessee鈥檚 Department of Human Services, which handles licensing. The agency agreed to license these sites not as child care centers but as family child care 鈥渉omes,鈥� which has a specific legal definition. Acord also found an insurance agent to add an inexpensive rider to the schools鈥� existing policies.

Katie Harbison, who now runs the initiative for Chambliss, says, 鈥淲e’re lucky that we’re one of the states that doesn’t have regulations that require that license to only be in a place where a person lives.鈥� Her latest campaign involves expanding beyond schools into businesses, hospitals and other workplaces, a step that requires negotiating with state fire marshals about these nontraditional facilities.

鈥淟icensing is rigid and unforgiving,鈥� says Stoney. 鈥淪tates tend to license centers with a huge telephone book of standards, while licensing homes with this really thin folder of nothing. And micro-centers sit in between.鈥�

Cost Savings and More

Even before the pandemic, . Micro-centers alleviate some of the biggest pain points. The host school gives them the space for free and covers utilities, maintenance and janitorial services. Chambliss pays for teachers, technology, supplies and insurance.

鈥淭heir wages are better and their parent fees are lower,鈥� explains Stoney, 鈥渂ecause they’re not padded by any facilities costs or overhead cost.鈥�

The benefits of micro-centers go beyond the financial efficiencies, Harbison explains: 鈥淧arents working in the schools can drop off their children and pay visits during lunch breaks or for nursing. And the arrangement also fosters community within the school, with staff often helping each other with pickup duties.鈥� And since the parents are school employees, their work schedules naturally harmonize with those of their child care providers.

Best of all, micro-centers are a vital employment benefit, supporting the school system鈥檚 recruitment and retention goals.

A Nationwide Opportunity

Aaron Lowenberg and Elliot Haspel the dynamics around the country that make the present moment ripe for solutions such as micro-centers, writing: 

鈥淲ith districts looking to save costs by closing underutilized elementary school buildings yet still incurring the costs of maintaining those facilities, child care providers struggling to afford rising commercial rents, and families in dire need of more child care options, it makes sense to consider allowing child care providers to make use of these existing school buildings.鈥�

Lowenberg and Haspel focus on Missoula, Montana, where population growth has stalled. In Chattanooga, Harbison notes, the situation is somewhat different, as the population is swelling, which leads to a shrinking pool of empty classrooms and long waitlists for infant and toddler spots.

鈥淧eople are moving here for quality of life and affordability,鈥� she says. 鈥淪ome are remote workers.鈥� When building a new school, the district tries to reserve one classroom for child care, but, increasingly, enrollment outpaces expectations. 鈥淲e sometimes have to leave a school and go to another one,鈥� she says.

Further, after weathering the pandemic with their workforce largely intact, Chambliss is now grappling with a low local unemployment rate, which means more job openings with less responsibility and higher pay.

The Network Behind Micro-Centers

Beyond economic and population fluctuations, it鈥檚 that fosters a project like micro-centers. 鈥淐hattanooga is known for public-private partnerships,鈥� says Harbison. 鈥淕overnment, philanthropists and companies work together. We’ve had some pretty major projects through blending of public and private dollars, including redoing the waterfront and building a public aquarium.鈥� 

In particular, Harbison singles out , a backbone organization for the community focused on literacy and career pathways, as well as an early childhood effort called that brings together 30 organizations. Chattanooga 2.0鈥檚 Smart City Venture Fund, a private social venture capital fund, helps direct local investments. She also credits the , the and .

Seeking viable workarounds. Remaining flexible. And enlisting collaborators. Every city is different, but these are the principles that generate and sustain solutions.

Correction: An earlier version of this story mischaracterized the process for opening a child care center in a Tennessee school. Principal Jill Levine had permission to open a center at her school, building on a process used by another school.

The solution seems straightforward. Give families with children living in poverty more money. Right?

According to Anna Thom, an economist and researcher for the  (PN3), it鈥檚 not quite that simple. Based in Vanderbilt University鈥檚 Peabody College, PN3 comprises a team of researchers and nonpartisan policy experts who work directly with state leaders, providing data to help the policymakers make sense of complex topics.

To that end, Thom led PN3鈥檚 in-depth analysis of how direct monetary payments, known as cash transfers, impact certain conditions that affect young children鈥檚 cognitive, emotional and social development. Published in October 2024, the  shows that these financial infusions positively impact three policy goals: increasing household resources, improving child development and improving parent and child health. Beyond reducing child poverty, the research also suggests that cash transfers can reduce racial disparities in these key areas. 

But as far as prescriptions for exactly how to approach distributing those infusions of cash, there鈥檚 no clear guidance. 

鈥淚t鈥檚 really complex,鈥� Thom says. 鈥淲e found clear evidence that cash transfers are effective, but how much (cash), the optimal frequency or whether transfers are most beneficial when they target specific groups 鈥� that鈥檚 less clear.

鈥淲hat鈥檚 exciting is that the research is clear that these cash transfers are helpful,鈥� she says, 鈥渁nd the big concerns that they might disincentivize employment or contribute to inflation were not substantiated in our evidence review.鈥�

Cash transfer programs can take many forms, such as tax credits or , but uniformly, their goal is to prevent or mitigate poverty. The research is clear that money 鈥� or the lack thereof 鈥� influences the well-being and development of young children. According to the National Institutes of Health, a growing body of evidence indicates that  affects physiological and neurobiological development and the stress of unremitting scarcity is likely 鈥渃entral to poverty-related gaps in academic achievement and the well-documented lifelong effects of poverty on physical and mental health.鈥� 

Types of Cash Transfers

Though the vocabulary of cash transfers is evolving, the center offers these definitions:

Most of the world鈥檚 developed economies provide some form of child allowance 鈥� an unconditional cash transfer targeted to all individuals or families with children 鈥� the U.S. does not (other than the temporary modifications to the federal Child Tax Credit through the American Rescue Plan Act in 2021.) 

A  of approaches to addressing childhood poverty, published in the American Journal of Public Health in 2019, reported that analyses of data from the 36 countries comprising the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) at the time (today there are 38) found that child poverty and food insecurity is more prevalent in the U.S. than in the majority of OECD countries. The study suggested that employing some of the other developed countries鈥� effective solutions 鈥� including some version of a universal child allowance 鈥� could help alleviate U.S. childhood poverty and food insecurity.

鈥淏roadly, we recommend increasing investments in families with children, particularly low-income families,鈥� the report states.

Findings From the Evidence Review

PN3鈥檚 recent evidence review looked extensively at various programs that put money directly in the hands of families, from studies of unconditional cash transfer (UCT) programs in Illinois, Massachusetts and Texas, to existing dividend-based unconditional cash transfers, to child allowance pilot programs throughout the U.S. Two of the largest and most data-rich programs the researchers studied were the Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend and the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians Payments, neither of which was intended to be an anti-poverty program but each of which have measurably reduced poverty among their constituents.

In 2021, in what amounted to the first and so far, only nationwide case study of the impact of cash transfers, the Biden administration temporarily expanded the federal child tax credit (CTC) through the American Rescue Plan Act. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the expansion lifted . For Black and Latino children,  shrank more compared to the decline in rates for white children. The temporary cash infusion also had notable benefits on , again with a greater difference observed with Black families. An additional $100 per child per month reduced depression symptoms in all low-income parents, with Black parents seeing nearly twice the reduction in depression and anxiety symptoms as other subgroups.

 found that the monthly cash difference of $313 per month led to some changes in infant brain activity, with infants whose mothers received $333 monthly showing higher 鈥渇ast-brain鈥� activity compared to babies of mothers receiving $20 monthly. The brain鈥檚 mid- and high-frequency bands are associated with cognitive skills, which indicates that cash transfers may improve development of these skills, though more research is needed to draw a direct link.

One of the most important takeaways from the center鈥檚 review, Thom says, is the power of policy to impact individual lives. Policies such as tax credits, cash transfers, paid family leave and Early Head Start programs illustrate the power of state policy decisions to affect not only an individual child鈥檚 life but ripple into communities and lift the wider economy, she says.

According to an  at Washington University in St. Louis, child poverty in the U.S. costs up to $1.03 trillion a year in loss of economic productivity, increased health and crime costs, homelessness and maltreatment. Cash transfer policies seem like a bargain in comparison by helping mitigate social challenges and reduce government spending in health and human services. 

鈥淭he return on investment is so high,鈥� Thom says. 鈥淚nvesting in young children actually strengthens our economy. We do all this spending later in life (on health and crime costs, etc.) but when we invest in this early childhood space from zero to 3, that sets children up for lifelong success in school, in life, with their health and so on.鈥�

鈥淓ven if you don鈥檛 necessarily care about individual children, families and their potential or whether they鈥檙e thriving,鈥� she adds, 鈥渢here is a fiscal argument to be made. We鈥檙e going to pay one way or the other.鈥�

Further Research

Thom says the center plans to continue studying the state child tax credits that are cropping up throughout the U.S. in the wake of the temporary expansion of the federal credit in 2021, which Congress failed to renew at the end of that year. The programs haven鈥檛 been implemented enough to provide sufficient data yet, and many of the states are not evaluating their programs with the rigor the PN3 center requires to make a firm conclusion about their effectiveness. Nonetheless, the programs are 鈥渟uper promising,鈥� she says and the researchers are looking forward to diving into that data. 

I promise this has to do with child care. What I鈥檓 describing is a silly and highly stylized version of concepts political scientists call . Predistribution is the idea that social interventions happen on the front end: They are investments in infrastructure (in this case, related to education) and conditions (for example labor laws and minimum wages) that help level the playing field prior to outcomes becoming clear. Redistribution is when the intervention comes on the back end, after income has been earned, leveling the playing field through 鈥渢axes and transfers鈥� 鈥� basically, subsidies or other direct payments such as SNAP benefits or tax credits. 

Note that one is not inherently better or worse than the other: In both towns, the public purse was used so that every resident ended up with at least 10 potatoes. Moreover, no amount of predistribution, in real life, obviates the need for ; the field can never be truly level. 

However, one is clearly more popular than the other, and here鈥檚 where this becomes a child care story: In America, child care assistance has long existed as a form of redistribution, which I believe limits its political strength.

A quick historical refresher: In 1971, Congress passed the . The legislation would have started creating a nationally funded, locally run network of child care programs, and the benefits were set up to be widespread; one version that child care services should be available 鈥渁s a matter of right to all children regardless of economic, social, and family background.鈥� 

After President Nixon the bill with strong language about how the government would be overtaking the family, opposition became an article of culture-war faith among conservatives, and liberals quickly backed off universal approaches. As political scientist Kimberly J. Morgan , the American system 鈥渋s a product of the controversies, debates, and decisions of the early 1970s. The door was closed on the notion of universally-available public child care services.鈥� Both parties embraced a welfare mentality alongside modest tax breaks for middle-class families.

Thus, if you get child care assistance in the United States today in all but a very few states, you are either low- or moderate-income, and the assistance comes in the form of a subsidy voucher that offsets the use of your own income. It is, in other words, a classically redistributive approach. Contrast this with the predistributive public spending on K-12 education 鈥� 鈥� that creates a universal system accessible to the poorest or richest American. 

Historian Sonya Michel that child care subsidies鈥� redistributive nature make them part of 鈥渨hat scholars call a 鈥榬esidual welfare state,鈥� one that offers public support only as a last resort, when applicants implicitly concede that they are incapable of supporting themselves. A residual welfare state contrasts with a proactive or affirmative state that regards public provisions such as child care as a form of collective social good designed to achieve a consensual goal.鈥�

Important for this discussion, American public opinion has turned increasingly against redistribution in recent decades. As a trio of economists , 鈥渓ess-educated voters have long favored more pre-tax-and-transfer interventions (鈥榩redistribution鈥�) in the economy and labor market.鈥� 

Scholars posit various explanations for why, ranging from a sense that one鈥檚 income prior to receiving public aid is more 鈥渞espectable,鈥� to the idea that redistributive systems are 鈥渕ore opaque, corrupt, or inefficient than more transparent policy interventions.鈥� With the American electorate realigning rather than race or other identities, redistributive proposals face an ever-steeper road to popularity.

Child care stakeholders, then, seemingly have two choices: make redistributive policies feel more like a universal entitlement, or reposition child care as predistributive. The former option is feasible: After all, certain tax credits, like the Home Mortgage Interest Deduction, are widely popular despite being redistributive. In states like New Mexico and Vermont that have massively increased eligibility for their child care subsidy programs up into the middle and upper middle class, the advances appear to be popular and durable.

That said, a more promising route may be explicitly casting child care as part of the expected level-playing-field conditions of American life, much as Americans of all stripes expect to be able to send their child to the local public school for free and to have certain protections when they arrive at their jobs. Indeed, for better or for worse, an intentional shift to such an approach is part of what enabled of universal pre-K policies.

The power of predistribution in child care can be seen in other nations. For instance, , all parents have since 2013 enjoyed a legal right to a slot in a child care program from the time their children turn 1; in Berlin, services are essentially free. Similarly, , many parents are seeing their child care bills slashed by hundreds of dollars a month as the country pours money into its child care system; it鈥檚 not a means-tested subsidy with a burdensome application, just the sticker price going down. Neither country鈥檚 system is perfect by any means, but these examples demonstrate an inverted way of thinking about child care: as pre-hoc social and economic infrastructure rather than post-hoc welfare.  

Either way, child care needs to be moved out of its redistributive welfare framing. That a combination of creating more truly universal policy proposals and encouraging elected leaders and other influencers to talk about child care as part of the American social fabric rather than a mere parental work support, along with other intentional, well-funded efforts toward cultural and narrative change. 

Until the construct shifts in the public鈥檚 mind, it will be exceedingly difficult to build the public will necessary for transformational changes. Particularly as working-class voters continue to assert themselves as a dominant electoral force, child care stakeholders would do well to flip the script and make it clear that there is no fair deal without universal child care.

Downstairs, six children are snacking on pretzels and apple slices. Chase explains that they spend a lot of time outside, adding that her curriculum is nature-based and the woods and backyard pond make it ideal for the kids to explore. 

For Chase, working in early childhood education is her 鈥渓ife鈥檚 passion for sure.鈥� She worked as an early childhood educator for 10 years before deciding to open her own program in 2015. Chase recalls that she was working 50 to 60 hours a week when she first started, which drained her, so in 2016 she hired a staff member to help. 

Her program, which serves six children ages 3 to 5 has been successful over the years. Because the , she always has a waiting list, rarely has vacancies and doesn鈥檛 have to advertise. That鈥檚 why in 2024, she decided to expand her business from a registered family child care program with one classroom to a licensed facility with two. This shift would allow her to serve 12 children full time 鈥� double the number she can serve as a registered family child care provider. The process, which she kicked off this January, will take well over a year.

Chase explains her plans for the expansion. She鈥檒l add a new room on the first floor, which will serve as a second classroom for infants and toddlers and the cubbies will move indoors. And to transition from a 鈥渞egistered鈥� child care provider to a 鈥渓icensed鈥� one, she鈥檚 required to meet a number of complicated compliance regulations. She has to upgrade her septic wastewater system which will cost $55,000; deepen her well for more water storage capacity, which will cost $14,000; spend another $112,000 to expand the space; and pay an additional $6,500 to fence in the playground. 

Chase is adamant that this investment only makes financial sense because of聽, Vermont鈥檚 landmark bill to bring near-universal child care to the state. The bill, which passed in 2023, aimed to increase access to high-quality child care and stabilize the early care and education workforce, including supporting family child care programs. Act 76 brought changes to various areas of child care and early childhood education, including significant updates to the聽, which provides subsidy payments to providers for children from eligible families. Under CCFAP, subsidy payments vary by income and the number of children that families have in child care, but providers now get a higher rate per child than what they typically charge. Since most of the families Chase serves qualify for CCFAP, this change nearly doubles the amount of money she brings in each week for each child.

There are more than  in Vermont 鈥� including family child care and center-based care providers 鈥� who could be impacted by the changes to CCFAP. One of them, Sherry Boudro, has been caring for children in the basement of her home in Windsor, Vermont for more than 30 years. Her house lends itself well to running a family child care program. It has a separate entrance to the children鈥檚 space, though it鈥檚 still connected to her main house by an internal staircase. Two fluorescent sensory swings hang from the ceiling, and the room is brightly painted and lined with bookshelves. 

鈥淏efore Act 76 I was living paycheck to paycheck,鈥� explains Boudro. Now, she has more than doubled her income. Boudro was charging families $150 per child per week; now she receives $364 per child per week 鈥� a portion of which is paid for by the state depending on each family鈥檚 financial assistance agreement. Windsor 鈥渄oesn鈥檛 have a lot of high-paying jobs,鈥� she explains, so she couldn鈥檛 charge families more money, even though she was working all the time and barely breaking even. The extra income she receives now is going toward her retirement. 鈥淚鈥檓 60 years old and I have no retirement savings,鈥� she says. She鈥檚 also planning to make some long-awaited repairs to the space, replacing carpets and fixing the ceiling tiles, which droop down.

Act 76 Benefits Most 鈥� But Not All 鈥� Providers

Act 76 is the 鈥渙pportunity and social change of our lifetime,鈥� says Aly Richards, CEO of Let鈥檚 Grow Kids 鈥� the advocacy organization which spearheaded the bill鈥檚 passage. Richards, who has become the state鈥檚 chief champion of the bill and de-facto expert on how to bring a near-universal child care program to a state, outlines the success of Act 76 thus far. In its first year, the legislation created 1,000 new child care slots, nearly 50 new family child care programs, over 40 child care centers and 220 new early educator jobs. And in 2024, for the first time since 2018, more child care programs opened in the state than closed.

While ACT 76 has been a game changer for many child care providers in the state, not all have received the benefits. Tammie Hazlett, for example, runs a family child care in Vermont near the Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center. Most of the families she serves work have well-paying jobs at the medical center and do not qualify for subsidies, so she isn鈥檛 able to collect the higher true-cost-of-care rates. Another provider, Apryl Blake, serves two children who come from a neighboring town in New Hampshire, so they aren鈥檛 eligible, and she hasn鈥檛 asked the rest of her families to apply. 鈥淚 have a problem asking them for their financial information. Not my business,鈥� she explains.

Chase says all but one of the families she serves receives a subsidy, and the one family that doesn鈥檛 feels excluded and resentful of the process. The mother is a teacher and the father works in the tech industry. They don鈥檛 consider themselves to be well-off and they say the cost of child care is still a major expense. 

For some longtime providers like Merry Ann Gilbert and Laura Butler, these changes may be coming too late. Gilbert is 59, and though her practice is winding down, she still takes care of five kids a week at her home in Milton, Vermont. She is looking to retire and spend more time with her four grandchildren but Act 76 is motivating her to stay another year or two to make additional money. 

Butler, 66, who has been a family child care provider for 33 years, is also missing out 鈥� the families she serves don鈥檛 qualify for subsidies because their incomes are too high. Vermont鈥檚 support for child care has assisted Butler in other ways though, including  she took on when she got a master鈥檚 degree. 

With a 6-month-old baby sleeping in her arms, a toddler resting on a nearby couch and another toddler playing in her living room, Butler shares that she is retiring in June and moving to South Carolina with her husband so they can be closer to her family. She says she has given the families in her program notice, encouraging them to seek out other child care options.

For years, Butler worked as an advocate in the effort to professionalize the work of child care providers 鈥� something that Vermont may be the first state to do. 鈥淲hen I would tell people I watched children, they鈥檇 say 鈥榦h you鈥檙e a babysitter,鈥欌�� she says; her work wasn鈥檛 recognized as a profession, but that may soon change. In late 2023 the聽Vermont Association for the Education of Young Children submitted an聽application to the state鈥檚 Office of Professional Regulation to make 鈥渆arly childhood education鈥� a recognized profession; a聽聽has been sent to the state Legislature for review in anticipation of introducing legislation, but Butler won鈥檛 be working in the field when it comes to fruition.

Butler has no resentment though.  She says she is ready for her next chapter and the warmer weather. 鈥淭he next generation of providers will get the benefit,鈥� she says. 鈥淚 am satisfied that I worked hard for them.鈥�

Her daughter, Ivonne Valadez Solano, was close to tears. With her newborn in one hand and her phone in the other, she frantically explained her problem. She had to leave for work but she couldn鈥檛 reach her mother-in-law, who had agreed to provide child care for her 鈥� and she had no other options because of the early hour.

Solano did not think twice. 鈥淏ring the baby to me. I鈥檒l take care of her.鈥�

Ivonne gave birth to her firstborn daughter in 2015. After her maternity leave ended, she searched desperately for child care. Center-based care was not an option because of her ; at the time, she was a supervisor at a major cafe chain and was expected to prepare the store for its 5 a.m. opening. 

With an almost hour-long commute in sprawling Los Angeles, she initially asked her mother-in-law to provide child care starting at 3 a.m. on the days she worked, but Ivonne had taken unpaid maternity leave, and with a lack of savings, she could not afford to compensate her. Her mother-in-law agreed to help for a few weeks, but was unable to take on an almost full-time child care job without pay for longer than that.

Fearful of jeopardizing her job, Ivonne turned to the person she could always count on: her mother.

The emergency 3 a.m. phone call between Solano and her daughter has led to nearly 10 years of consistent child care. Child care arrangements like that of the Solano family are considered 鈥淔amily, Friend and Neighbor鈥� (FFN) care. It is the most type of non-parental child care in the United States. It is by families of all races, ethnicities and income levels, and is particularly among immigrant and multilingual families. 

In California, FFN care is , so families who choose this type of care must know and trust the caregiver. Families who work nontraditional hours are to rely on an FFN caregiver 鈥� often a 鈥� to fill the gaps left by institutional child care, such as center-based and school settings. 

鈥淔amilies across demographics are using FFN care,鈥� says 鈥嬧�婲atalie Renew, executive director of Home Grown, a collaborative of funders focused on home-based care. 鈥淚t is particularly important to communities of color because workers of color are disproportionately [working] in jobs that have unpredictable or nontraditional schedules. 

鈥淲e need to tell the stories of families who choose and rely on FFN caregivers, and acknowledge how children thrive and benefit from that loving and culturally appropriate care. We have to confront and dispel assumptions around who鈥檚 part of the child care system.鈥�

The Case of the Solano Family

In 2005, Reina Solano immigrated to Los Angeles from Mexico. Her goal was to make money to send back to her four children, including Ivonne, who remained in Mexico with her extended family. She ended up planting roots in the city, and in time, got married and had two more children.

Ivonne immigrated to LA a few years later when she was twenty years old. She hoped to study English and further her studies in computer science and engineering, but soon found it was not that simple. Navigating the limited free adult education centers was difficult. She eventually found a program that fit her learning style, but it was almost a two-hour round-trip commute from her home via public transportation. She found a job at a fast food restaurant to pay for her transportation, but the restaurant was an hour and a half from her school by bus. 

It was all too much. Between the fixed schedule of her courses, the graveyard shift at her new job, and navigating the bus routes, Ivonne only studied a few months before deciding to drop the courses. 

鈥淚t wasn鈥檛 what I wanted,鈥� she says. 鈥淏ut I needed to move forward.鈥�

Ivonne has since worked in customer service roles. She and her partner, who she met during her first stint in fast food, moved in together before she became pregnant in 2014. 

Now, they juggle overlapping schedules that make institutional child care arrangements difficult. Ivonne works long day shifts in operations support at Los Angeles International Airport Thursday through Monday. Her partner has fluctuating hours with a pastry service Tuesday through Saturday. This leaves a significant gap in before- and after-school care for their children, which is exacerbated during the summer months. 

The couple continues to lean on Ivonne鈥檚 mother for their child care needs. Solano cares for her two grandchildren, Delilah and Mark, ages 9 and 5, in addition to her own two children, ages 7 and 13. In 2021, when the children returned to in-person schooling after COVID-19 restrictions eased, Solano began picking up short shifts at a local laundromat to supplement her income. On days her shifts cannot fit around the children鈥檚 school hours, she supervises them at the laundromat while she works. 

To this day, Solano refuses to ask for compensation from her daughter for the child care she provides, and she wouldn鈥檛 accept it if it was offered.

鈥淪he鈥檚 my daughter, and they are my grandchildren. How can I charge her?鈥� Solano said.

This past school year, Solano cared for her two grandchildren overnight from Thursdays to Saturdays. Her mornings were busy. She dropped Delilah off at the local elementary school and then walked her children to the local middle and high schools. Mark remained home with her until February, when he began , part of California鈥檚 move towards universal preschool. 

Throughout the summer months, Solano took care of her grandchildren almost every day while her daughter was at work.

鈥淚n my culture, there is a tradition for families to support each other. It鈥檚 an asset to children for their grandparents to be in their lives,鈥� Solano explained. 鈥淚 am proud to help raise my grandchildren. I am teaching them our culture, our language. I take care to build their confidence [and] their self-esteem. If their parents cannot make it to a school event, I go. When Delilah asks me about my childhood in Mexico and follows up every question with another, I have the patience to answer.鈥�

FFN caregivers often the cultural backgrounds of the families they serve, whether they are related to the children or not. As with the Solano family, this brings a of care that is preferred by families. 

鈥淎n FFN caregiver can provide flexibility鈥� They can bring cultural assets and trusting relationships,鈥� said Anna Powell, Senior Research and Policy Associate with the Center for the Study of Child Care Employment. 鈥淚n this case, grandma can provide a hot meal in her home that reflects the family鈥檚 cultural traditions. Grandma can provide bath time and bedtime, which other types of child care settings often cannot. This is in contrast to how policy and research often view FFN care, which is the worst option available or a family鈥檚 last resort. This is out of step with what families believe and value,鈥� Powell adds.

When stakeholders discuss the child care system, they often refer to institutional forms of care. FFN care is an essential part of this system, too. It should not be forgotten or excluded from conversations about the child care system and how to support families and caregivers.

鈥淚f you have a child, or you have a child in your life, you probably know what FFN care is,鈥� Renew said. 鈥淲hen we start talking about FFNs, we ask people: Who cared for you as a young child? Who cared for your children?鈥�

Pseudonyms were used above to protect the identities of children; writing for this article was supported by the Better Life Lab at New America.

Recognizing the urgency of this issue, a group of 88 state and national organizations 鈥� organized by members of the 鈥� recently sent a letter to President Trump : Prioritize child care.

Child care is one of the rare issues that resonates , from the 2019 Trump White House鈥檚 to recent . Elected leaders recognize the challenges families in their districts are facing and the importance of prioritizing initiatives that will help ensure they have the options they seek. 

But we need action. 

It鈥檚 important that we advocate for an 鈥渁ll of the above鈥� approach to expand child care options for families. This includes investments in trusted federal programs like the Child Care and Development Block Grant, tax benefits such as the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit, incentives for employer-provided care, and strategies to grow the child care supply while supporting a qualified workforce.

With a new legislative session underway, prioritizing child care gives policymakers a powerful opportunity to improve the well-being of families and enhance the nation鈥檚 economic prosperity.

By Tuesday morning, the used by Head Start and many other federal programs to process payments about 鈥渄elays and/or rejections of payments.鈥� As of Tuesday afternoon, : the White House issued a suggesting that Head Start was exempt from the freeze, yet there were reports, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) that the Head Start payment system remained down. Later, as the day wound down, a federal judge , and finally, on Wednesday afternoon although still remain. Even if this crisis subsides, it is vital to remember who loses amid the chaos: children, parents and educators.

Head Start and Early Head Start from low-income families, offering reliable free child care and wraparound supports like parent workshops and access to medical screenings. These programs , where affordable, high-quality child care options are particularly difficult for families to find. These programs are essential community assets upon which a multitude of American families rely.

Introducing chaos and uncertainty into these programs creates a cascade of negative impacts. First, let鈥檚 consider Head Start classroom educators. There is connecting child care providers鈥� well-being with the quality of care they provide for young children. It鈥檚 one thing to try to do an office job when you鈥檙e unsure about whether your paycheck will be deposited at the end of the week. It鈥檚 another to try and guide the development of a dozen 4-year-olds, especially when that paycheck may barely be enough to make ends meet. (Of note, Head Start lead educators of around $40,000 a year, though there鈥檚 substantial state variation). This fact makes the Trump administration鈥檚 decision to put the freeze into place at the end of the month, just before rent is due, particularly harmful. 

J. David Young, executive director of FRIENDS Association for Children, a nonprofit in Richmond, Virginia that operates four Head Start classrooms, said in an interview that, 鈥淭he stress, the anxiety, the uncertainty 鈥� it comes with the unknown. Staff are wondering about their jobs.鈥� While Young and his staff are committed to staying focused on providing quality care and education, he noted that 鈥渨hen you start seeing things that affect you directly, or have potential to, you start getting really, really scared.鈥�

What鈥檚 more, Head Start is already suffering from the same that plague the child care sector writ large. Many teachers are leaving, or considering making an exit, whether for a lower-stress profession or a higher-paying job. School districts often offer $10,000 or more than Head Start while, as one North Dakota Head Start director in 2023, 鈥淲almart and McDonalds pay more than I am able to for entry level positions.鈥� Since young children rely on stable relationships with caregivers, . But could anyone blame a Head Start teacher for seeking a different job instead of serving as a living political football for the next several years? 

Daniel Hains, managing director of policy at the National Association for the Education of Young Children, said, “We had a call with a number of our state leaders yesterday and heard people were concerned about their jobs in the coming weeks, concerned about their ability to keep their programs open.” Hains added, “Even if this does get resolved in a legal manner, the confusion is already causing harm.”

Similarly, the confusion adds stress for parents of children who attend Head Start programs. Many of these families, , are likely working insecure low-wage jobs. There is a strong , so many of the impacted families are already navigating pressure. Now, layer on the question of whether child care will be there tomorrow and it鈥檚 easy to imagine panic setting in. As Young put it, the funding freeze attempt represents 鈥渦nnecessary emotional strain causing emotional hardship to families already experiencing difficulties.鈥� As any parent knows, a , so a government that wants to do right by the nation鈥檚 families should be trying to reduce parental stress, not spike it.

To put it plainly, the Trump administration鈥檚 decision to disrupt Head Start 鈥� even temporarily 鈥� is harmful to educators, children and families. An administration that claims to be “” should not insert so much precarity into family life, particularly when American families . 

And that鈥檚 just Head Start. 

The administration鈥檚 move has potential implications for a huge swath of funds that impact early care and education 鈥� child care subsidies via the Child Care and Development Block Grant; the Child and Adult Care Food Program that reimburses programs for the meals they serve; child care funding for student parents via the Child Care Access Means Parents in School Program; and passed back in December. All of these operate as block grants that flow from the federal government to states. And this of course says nothing of the via funding for programs that support children鈥檚 health research, housing, community development, and nearly all of the policy areas that shape a family鈥檚 circumstances. More fundamentally, it shakes the trust between the family and the government, making the latter seem capricious and unreliable.

This move, coming just a week into President Trump鈥檚 second term, will surely not be his last foray into spending cuts. There was a political calculation here; one can speculate the administration knew that their order would be challenged and at least partially blocked. Yet the administration should not lose sight of the fact that such machinations have a human cost to the very families they purport to champion.

鈥淭he home is a warmer atmosphere for babies, infants and young toddlers,鈥� Reaves says. 鈥淚’ve had a commercial space in the past, and this is more comfortable for babies.鈥� The families she serves feel it too. Many of them stay in touch with Reaves long after their children have aged out of her program. Over the years, as the babies she cared for have grown into young adults, she鈥檚 been invited to high school and college graduations and even to baby showers.

Home-based child care is the , but these programs are increasingly difficult to operate. , Reaves has a side hustle to stay afloat: She鈥檚 a licensed insurance agent.

A pilot program funded by philanthropic dollars insulates early educators like Reaves from the income volatility that stems from challenges accessing public child care funding, such as subsidies and grants. Thanks to a guiding states to improve payment practices for child care providers, the approach could one day be scaled nationally.

Designed in 2021 and launched in 2022 by , a national funder collaborative centered on home-based care, the deposits $500 per month in the bank accounts of 45 providers in Philadelphia, in cooperation with the . Pilots are also running in and New York City, with plans for southwest Pennsylvania and Los Angeles in the works.

鈥淚t鈥檚 a guarantee,鈥� explains Natalie Renew, Home Grown鈥檚 executive director. 鈥淔olks can expect that they’re going to be paid consistently throughout the project period.鈥� 

Guaranteed income efforts such as the Thriving Providers Project only work if transferring dollars from the funders to providers is predictable and reliable. If the system malfunctions and payments don鈥檛 make it where they鈥檙e supposed to, then trust declines in public subsidies and in government as a solution. Renew recounts how the state of Pennsylvania transferred its subsidy management contract to a new vendor earlier this year, . (Missouri recently encountered a similar hiccup.) Because of these delays, she adds, many providers in Philadelphia couldn鈥檛 have paid rent without the Thriving Provider Project deposits.

Understanding the importance of selecting a reliable payment system, Renew facilitated a solicitation process for the project that included community interviews. (a civic tech organization) became the payment partner, transferring the cash that allows a solo provider to address unforeseen events that can derail operations. According to Beam CEO David Helene, the company is more than a technology platform. 鈥淭echnology is part of it,鈥� he says, 鈥渂ut program design, community empathy, showing up 鈥� these are also critical components to make these programs a success.鈥�

Nobody thinking about opening a child care business in their home should do it for the money, Reaves cautions. Indeed, profit margins are increasingly thin. , a North Carolina provider who receives funding through the Thriving Providers Project, 鈥淎t the end of the day, I am both the CEO and the janitor for my business. I鈥檓 also the cook, the curriculum specialist and the tax preparer. I have a master鈥檚 degree and run a five-star program, but after all the expenses I average about $14 an hour.鈥�

According to the , authored by the Center for the Study of Child Care Employment at the University of California, Berkeley, 43% of families of early educators rely on public assistance programs like food stamps and Medicaid. So what happens to those benefits when $500 lands in a bank account? When they enroll in the pilot, participants receive benefits counseling to help them learn about strategies that can help prevent benefits they may have, like housing vouchers or food stamps, from being interrupted. 

There are also local efforts to mitigate interruption. In Reaves鈥� state, for example, the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services collaborates with local guaranteed income projects to communicate any potential impact on public assistance benefits and eligibility to participants and County Assistance Offices. Some states have also instituted waivers to exempt participants in guaranteed income pilots, shielding them from loss of benefits while receiving the additional cash. 

Renew adds that tools like Beam were at the forefront of moving pandemic funding quickly to affected groups. 鈥淲e鈥檝e seen it work,鈥� she asserts, noting the potential for scalability across systems. 鈥淐hild care providers who operate on negligible margins often go hungry, face housing instability, are overloaded with debt and are fighting to stay afloat. If we want to maintain supply and meet families鈥� needs, then timely payments need to be a part of a toolkit of supports to the field.鈥� 

In March 2024, Home Grown published a with lessons learned from the first year of the project in Colorado. One participant of the project shared, 鈥淚 am the only one working [in my household], and I do find myself in a tight spot financially. 鈥� It has helped me a lot with bills, buying food and certainly sometimes even food for the children I care for.鈥� 

For Reaves, the money makes it possible for her to pay a neighbor to cover for her when she has a personal appointment or needs time for self-care. That could be an exercise class or a manicure. 鈥淚f you don’t take care of yourself,鈥� she states, 鈥渢here’s no taking care of anyone else.鈥� 

She also notes that the extra $500 a month constitutes a meaningful acknowledgment of the importance of her profession: 鈥淭hey鈥檙e recognizing that, wow, these people are working hard.鈥�

The partnership, initiated by the David and Lucile Packard Foundation and The Kresge Foundation, and now funded by seven other philanthropic organizations, has raised $9.6 million to date. The group was spurred by a clause in the  of 2022, which is intended to expand manufacturing in the U.S. (CHIPS stands for “Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors.”)  

The bill requires manufacturers applying for over $150 million in CHIPS funding to submit plans to provide child care for both facility and construction workers. Jonathan Hui, a senior program officer at The Kresge Foundation, credits designers of the package for 鈥渃apturing the link between infrastructure and child care that is often underlooked.鈥� 

Katie Beckmann, the national policy director at the Packard Foundation, agrees that this intersection is key. 鈥淭his isn鈥檛 only about expansion and creation of manufacturing in parts of the country that have often been left behind,鈥� Beckmann says. 鈥淏usiness begets business, which further drives the need for quality, affordable child care in these communities. Ultimately, we hope this work will strengthen our argument for additional public dollars to be put into child care. It also has the potential to enlist small and big businesses as allies.鈥�

The philanthropic partnership was announced in June 2024 at the inaugural National Child Care Innovation Summit, an event centered on the critical role of child care for working parents. During the summit, Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo said, 鈥淐hild care is not only a social issue or a 鈥榳omen鈥檚 issue.鈥� It is also an economic issue. In fact, I’d argue it鈥檚 one of the most critical economic issues affecting families, businesses and communities today. The lack of investment in our care infrastructure is costing us dearly. There鈥檚 a generation of Americans in their prime working years caught between their jobs and caring for children or elderly relatives.鈥�

The partnership aims to increase child care supply and improve the quality of care and is beginning with pilots in Arizona, Ohio, Michigan and New Hampshire. Child care is especially hard to find in these four states, and employees showing up to build or operate the new facilities will need help locating and paying for safe and supportive child care settings so that their children can thrive while they work.

The foundations are developing their plans in collaboration with leaders and advocates in each state. 鈥淲e鈥檙e coming together and co-creating child care solutions that expand child care supply and enhance quality,鈥� says Beckmann, who adds that designing solutions that meet the needs of the whole community takes time and patience.

鈥淲e need a national strategy for early childhood,鈥� Hui argues, 鈥渋n the sense that there needs to be a national commitment to investing in early childhood, but how that shows up in community is deeply contextual.鈥� 

Existing infrastructure and relationships in each state will help the partnership to identify opportunities and connect the dots among: 

• Businesses: This includes the manufacturer, child care providers and other community businesses that play a role in the local economy. 
• Governments: This includes state and local departments and elected officials who can provide guidance on the regulatory environment in which new child care programs will arise. 
• Advocates: This includes groups representing the interests of families and child care providers who can share insights that can inform investments and decisions.
• Funding Leaders: This includes, most notably, Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs), which are uniquely suited to blend and grade federal and state funding streams to get the maximum benefit out of each public and private investment.

Learning from Past Partnerships

The Investing in America Child Care Partnership intends to draw lessons from existing and emerging solutions that are already underway. For example, while not part of the partnership, a new facility on Detroit鈥檚 east side embodies the type of project that CDFIs can help usher into existence. The 15,000-square-foot McClellan Early Childhood Center features eight classrooms providing 96 new seats for early learners. This project, which took five years to implement and cost $8.75 million, offers the stakeholders involved in the partnership a road map for realizing plans in partnership with community.

鈥淭he lessons learned from building McClellan are going to be critical to how we think about blending and braiding facilities funding,鈥� says Hui.

Kirby Burkholder, president of core business solutions at , the CDFI that facilitated the , explains that CDFIs have a unique value for the ecosystem: 鈥淢anufacturers use language like 鈥榚mployee attraction, employee retention, employee satisfaction.鈥� We use language like 鈥榯ransformational community development, aligning programmatic and facilities quality.鈥� But we鈥檙e talking about the same thing. We鈥檙e the translators.鈥� 

Burkholder says CDFIs like IFF (which just wrapped up  $59 million of American Rescue Plan money through the state of Michigan that went out to 1,005 providers),   and the  organize and activate capital. 鈥淭hat鈥檚 how government money reaches Main Street,鈥� he explains. 鈥淲e鈥檙e CDFIs that have evolved a whole infrastructure, with a community and data insights team that does the needs analysis that informs decision making.鈥� 

Taking time to listen and collaborate does not detract from the urgency of the crisis that the partnership is tackling. 鈥淎cross the country,鈥� Hui notes, 鈥渨orking families are worrying every day about the trade off between providing high-quality care for their children and being able to enter or reenter the workforce or stay in the workforce.鈥� 

Successful partnerships, he maintains, will generate not just an increased supply of quality child care in the communities they are targeting but also 鈥渓ongstanding systems solutions that really change how our country thinks about child care.鈥�

At a time when government funding of all kinds 鈥�  鈥� could be under scrutiny, philanthropic support can make a difference in making sure investments work on the local level. 

Beckmann notes an additional benefit of success: 鈥淒emonstrating that government can work for its people. This is an important moment to learn about what works and doesn’t work in creating a child care ecosystem that helps children and families thrive.鈥� 

One of the philanthropic organizations that helps fund the Investing in America Child Care Partnership is Charles and Lynn Schusterman Family Philanthropies. That foundation also provides financial support to 蜜桃影视.

What these successes prove, coming after other significant wins for the issue on the ballot in recent years, is that going straight to voters is a viable avenue for advocates seeking to secure more funding for child care, particularly with no action likely to come from the federal level anytime soon. 

鈥淥ne of the takeaways from this election is that voters want action on care,鈥� said Melissa Boteach, vice president for child care/early learning at the National Women鈥檚 Law Center. 鈥淰oters want investments in child care and early education, and they are willing to raise the revenues to support those investments,鈥� she said, pointing to evidence from a conducted by her organization in April 2024 that found that more than three-quarters of respondents support spending on those priorities and funding it through taxes on the wealthy and corporations.

The issue has become even more urgent as the that the child care sector received to keep providers鈥� doors open during the pandemic is . 鈥淭hat money is not there anymore,鈥� Boteach noted. So local governments 鈥渉ave to figure out what they can do until we win federal dollars.鈥�

Boteach pointed out that measures won in states with very different political climates, such as in California and Texas. 鈥淭his is a really bipartisan issue,鈥� she said. 鈥淚t can win in red states and blue states.鈥�

What It Took To Win

In Travis County, Texas, voters passed Proposition A, a measure to increase property taxes by on every $100 of property value to raise more than $75 million. The money will create about 2,000 new child care slots and nearly 4,000 slots for older children in after school and summer camp, with the child care slots reserved for families earning 85 percent or less of the local median family income. After state lawmakers a $2.3 billion proposal in 2023 to help child care providers stay afloat as federal aid was drying up, the Travis County Commissioners Court voted unanimously to put Proposition A on county voters鈥� ballots. It of local businesses and civic organizations, led by the United Way for Greater Austin and ultimately, voters approved it by .

Voters in Sonoma County, California to raise taxes to fund child care. They passed a 25 cent sales tax on every dollar spent, which is expected to generate $30 million a year. Sixty percent of that money will be spent on increasing access to child care and preschool for low-income families, raising wages for providers, and child care facilities. The measure was a response to the of the area鈥檚 local child care slots during the pandemic and outcomes for young children declining over the last six years. It , numerous local endorsements and more than $1 million in campaign funding. In the end it passed with of the vote. 

Meanwhile, voters in Washington State beat back an attempt to repeal a tax increase designated for supporting the child care system. Three years ago, the state鈥檚 lawmakers passed a bill that a new 7 percent tax on capital gains income, or money made from things like stocks and bonds, of $262,000 or more. The first $500 million raised was for child care subsidies for families and bonuses for child care providers that offer care during nonstandard hours. What鈥檚 left over was meant for school construction. In 2023 the tax raised . , a measure that was bankrolled by and was on this November鈥檚 ballot, would have repealed that tax, but in the end 63 percent of voters shot it down. 

That 鈥渟hows that people don鈥檛 mind raising revenues and particularly asking the wealthy and large corporations to pay their fair share so that we can have investments in caregiving,鈥� Boteach said.

There were also that passed in Colorado counties that either raised or redirected revenues toward issues including child care.

Lessons Learned From a Failed Measure

Not every child care-related measure was successful this year. But there are important lessons to be learned from those that failed as well as those that passed. One interesting one to look at is a that would have increased property taxes by 0.006% each year for ten years to raise an estimated $2 million in the first year and $20 million by the tenth. That money would have made the cost of child care free for low-income families and, if there were extra funds, help defray the cost for higher-income ones. 

Councilmember Rebecca Noecker, who led the ballot measure effort, had a 2-year-old and a 1-year-old when she took office in 2015. After researching local child care issues, she came up with the idea of a city fund to help families afford care. The child care system 鈥渋s just broken, and there needs to be an injection of money into the system,鈥� she explained.

But, she noted, given how expensive child care is, 鈥淚f you鈥檙e going to make any meaningful impact on this problem you need to raise a significant amount of money.鈥� Eventually she and other lawmakers landed on the idea of gradually raising property taxes to secure the substantial amount of money necessary to make a dent in the problem. The city council could vote to raise taxes to create the fund, but Noecker wanted 鈥渟ome form of voter mandate鈥� so that the effort wouldn鈥檛 get derailed by politics, but in the end, that鈥檚 exactly what happened. 

St. Paul Mayor Melvin Carter vocally opposed the idea. The council had to override his veto to put it on the ballot, and once they did, he he wasn鈥檛 going to enact the measure even if it was passed, arguing that the numbers didn鈥檛 add up. Noecker said that that wasn鈥檛 true and that 鈥渋t was a completely funded mandate.鈥�

Noecker thinks Carter鈥檚 opposition gave some voters who were hesitant about raising taxes 鈥減ermission鈥� to vote no, especially given that city voters may be experiencing 鈥渢ax fatigue鈥� after they a 1 percent increase in the sales tax in 2023 to pay for parks and streets. Noecker also pointed out that the ballot measures that were approved this cycle were on the county level, entities that are more likely to provide social services, which may have worked in their favor. 鈥淚t was definitely an uphill battle to get people to see the possibility of a city taking a role around this,鈥� she said.

But Noecker doesn鈥檛 think it鈥檚 impossible to win in the future. 鈥淎 lot of cities are not successful on the first go round with these ballot initiatives,鈥� she said. 鈥淪o it鈥檚 very disappointing, [but] it鈥檚 not super surprising.鈥� Supporters are currently talking about what might happen next; it鈥檒l take some time to go back to the ballot, if that鈥檚 what they decide to do. But 鈥渋t鈥檚 clear from campaign engagement we did that people absolutely see this as a need,鈥� Noecker said. 鈥淭he question revolves around what should the city do, county do, state do.鈥� 

鈥淭here鈥檚 no way we鈥檙e going away, because the problem is not going away,鈥� she said.

This year鈥檚 successful measures come after other victories at the ballot for child care advocates in recent years. Voters in Multnomah County, Oregon, which includes Portland, to increase taxes on wealthy families to raise $200 million to provide free preschool to all 3- and 4-year-olds while raising pay for providers. That same year, voters in Colorado an increase in taxes on nicotine products to fund universal pre-K, which has since enrolled more than 40,000 children. In 2022, New Mexico voters a constitutional amendment that made their state the first to guarantee a right to early childhood education and also directed a large, steady stream of funding to it. 

Even with these measures in place, there is still a need for significant federal investment in child care, Boteach said. Cities, counties and states are far more limited in how much money they can spend on the system. Still, she adds, ballot measures are 鈥渁 tool in the toolbox to continue to build momentum and get real dollars into communities that are willing to vote for them.鈥�

From to 蜜桃影视, it鈥檚 now an annual tradition to share a journalism 鈥淛ealousy List鈥� 鈥� a tribute to the most memorable and impactful coverage published by other outlets. 

In short, it鈥檚 a list of stories we wish we鈥檇 covered.

At Early Learning Nation, we want to celebrate and honor the powerful stories that have shaped important conversations around our nation’s youngest children and the families, caregivers and early educators who support them.

Some of these pieces focus on the early care and education workforce, covering key issues like low wages, the challenges of subsidies, and barriers to accessing funding and benefits. Others address topics central to families, like the affordability and quality of care, the high stakes of screen time and why it鈥檚 so tough to find child care options.

Below, in no particular order, are nine stories about early care and education that we can鈥檛 stop thinking about from 2024. Kudos to the journalists who wrote them, the sources who boldly shared their experiences and ideas, and the researchers who released studies and data that informed them. 

By sharing these stories, we aim to surface (or resurface) some of the most creative storytelling, impactful practices and important research in the field. We hope you鈥檒l read 鈥� and share 鈥� them.

Sarah Carr, The Hechinger Report

Family, friend and neighbor (FFN) care is the most prevalent form of non-parental child care in the U.S. but this critical group of child care providers often goes unnoticed and many are underpaid. 

There are efforts across the country to provide more , but obstacles arise. In many states, for example, FFN caregivers often face barriers to accessing funds they qualify for, such as subsidies for children from low-income families.

From language barriers, to government mistrust to enrollment difficulties and more, Sarah Carr looks at the challenges facing this vast group of providers and why so many of them struggle to obtain the funding they are eligible to receive. And even when they can access the funds, Carr raises important issues like low reimbursement rates and processing delays that extend and complicate the series of hurdles for these caregivers.

Six women get candid on dwindling enrollment, priced-out parents, and crying kids. 

Anya Kamenetz, The Cut

When it comes to early care and education, many of the stories that resonate most are about the significant cost of providing high-quality, developmentally appropriate, reliable child care 鈥� and the tough reality that while the price is often high for families, child care programs typically operate on thin margins with providers working for very low wages. That rings true in New York City, where the that half of the city鈥檚 households can鈥檛 afford basic needs, funding for pre-K and 3-K programs is unpredictable, and child care subsidies often fall short. Six child care workers in various settings across the boroughs shared their day-to-day experiences with Anya Kamenetz, who writes about education and parenting. Their experiences, as told to Kamenetz, shine a light on the complexities of the profession as well as their passion for the young children they serve.

Moriah Balingit and Sharon Lurye, The Associated Press and Daniel Beekman, The Seattle Times

For many parents, especially mothers, the decision about whether to work has a number of factors, but often comes down to a simple question: Is the cost of child care greater than my take-home pay? 

Nicole Slemp found herself asking this question. She expected to return to her job, which she loved, after having her son. But once she crunched the numbers, she learned that most of her salary would go to child care and found that she and her husband made too much to qualify for support from the government. She felt she had no choice but to quit. 

In the U.S., where the cost of care can be prohibitive, government assistance is sparse and child care slots are limited, this story isn鈥檛 uncommon, . But while women鈥檚 participation in the workforce has increased overall, there鈥檚 a noticeable employment gap between mothers with and without a four-year degree. Moriah Balingit, Sharon Lurye and Daniel Beekman unpack that employment gap, the data behind it and the lived experiences of some of the women finding themselves faced with difficult decisions. 

Teachers this year saw the effects of the pandemic鈥檚 stress and isolation on young students: Some can barely speak, sit still or even hold a pencil.

Claire Cain Miller and Sarah Mervosh, New York Times, The Upshot

There鈥檚 been a good deal of reporting on the effects of the pandemic on older children. Less covered is the impact on the nation鈥檚 youngest children 鈥� those who were babies, toddlers and preschoolers during the height of the pandemic and are now school-aged.

Claire Cain Miller and Sarah Mervosh share findings from interviews with teachers, pediatricians and early childhood experts. The bottom line: Many of these younger children are showing signs of academic and developmental delays. There are also concerns related to a variety of areas like speech and language development, emotional regulation, social interactions, behavior, attention span, core strength and fine motor skills. Researchers suggested that a number of factors affected young children during the pandemic, including parental stress, less exposure to people, more time on screens and lower preschool attendance.

Despite these trends, some experts said recovery is possible, pointing to tools and resources that can help as well as evidence that the early years of brain development in young children positions them well to 鈥渃atch up.鈥�

Emily Tate Sullivan, EdSurge

At a time when people can make dinner reservations on an app and buy a car online, it may come as a surprise that finding child care options isn鈥檛 that easy, but that鈥檚 the reality for many families.

In most states, there鈥檚 a website with information about providers, such as operating hours and quality ratings, but enrollment data is often outdated or not listed at all. Without reliable information on vacancies, a parent might spend time calling programs that are at capacity. 

Some states 鈥� including Iowa, Maryland and Arizona 鈥� have teamed up with technology firms to develop solutions that help families find child care, reports Emily Tate Sullivan. 

By using 鈥渘ear real-time鈥� vacancy data, these efforts are saving families time and helping state leaders understand their child care systems, giving them a better sense of capacity by surfacing open slots as well as shortages. This approach, which provides more accurate data, can help state leaders, lawmakers and communities plan more intentionally, make informed decisions and direct attention where it鈥檚 needed.

Chabeli Carrazana, The 19th

鈥淔or years, American women soccer players have been at the forefront of advocating for pay equity in a sport they dominate at a global level. But child care has long been an issue they鈥檝e also contended with鈥� writes Chabeli Carrazana, adding that 鈥淪ome have argued that their pay and benefits simply were not enough to cover child care costs.鈥�

Carrazana digs into a dispute between the Angel City Football Club 鈥� an American professional women鈥檚 soccer team 鈥� and the National Women鈥檚 Soccer League (NWSL). 

After conducting an investigation into a salary cap violation by Angel City FC, and determining that the team had surpassed the cap through a number of agreements that were made with players directly and not disclosed to the NWSL, the league that it was docking three points from the team鈥檚 standings and fining the team.

While child care payments were only part of the reason the team exceeded the cap, the situation brought child care benefits for parent athletes into the spotlight, and in particular, raised a question about whether any child care payments should count against the salary cap.

Jenny Gold, Los Angeles Times

are making headlines, and the U.S. surgeon general has warning families that usage of the apps could be detrimental to the mental health of adolescents. Pediatricians have raised concerns around health and development, like behavioral challenges, issues with sleep, language delays and more.

For families with young children, a major question is: How much screen time is OK? There are for children under 5 years old, but the guidance can feel overwhelming. From time limits to quality assessment to the importance of 鈥渃o-viewing鈥� digital media with young children, there鈥檚 a lot for parents to consider, and the reality is that many families aren鈥檛 meeting these guidelines. 

Jenny Gold dives into the high stakes of screen time, whether limiting it is realistic given the world parents are raising children in today, and what families can do to make the most of their children鈥檚 screen time.

Carly Flandro, Idaho Education News and Valeria Olivares, The Dallas Morning News Education Lab

Stress. Anxiety. Financial pressure. The is weighing on parents, especially the ones who work. Teachers aren鈥檛 immune. Many parenting teachers are faced with difficult decisions about their work lives, and child care is a major factor. 

A number of schools in some states, particularly those with limited funding for early care and education, are offering high-quality, affordable child care for their teachers. This solution addresses educator retention, while aiming to help early learners become better prepared to enter kindergarten. Programs vary, but some offer care from infancy so teachers don鈥檛 have to between parenting and their career. 

Carly Flandro and Valeria Olivares dive into two of these initiatives. One is an elementary school in Nampa, Idaho that offers on-site child care, which a dozen of the school鈥檚 30 teachers take advantage of. The other is a Texas district that鈥檚 offering subsidized child care and that has two 鈥渃hild learning academies鈥� for infants and toddlers from 6-weeks-old through age 3, that serve 120 children. 

Flandro and Olivares reported that these services made a difference for teachers, whether easing the cost, helping them feel reassured their children were receiving high-quality care, or even keeping them in the classroom. 

New study reveals the extent of harms of an 鈥榦utdated, uneven鈥� Head Start funding system.

Jackie Mader, The Hechinger Report

鈥淲hen Head Start was established in 1965, it was meant to boost outcomes for children from low-income families by offering high-quality early learning and wraparound services,鈥� writes Jackie Mader. Today, she adds, the program has seen increased funding, but the way that federal funding is distributed is based in part on a formula from 1974. 

So what does that mean for children and families? Mader takes a look at the funding model and analyzes findings from a report by the Southern Education Foundation, which suggests that the formula should be updated to reflect changes in the definition of poverty, and to account for the number of eligible children and where they live.

Researchers say the best fix is to give Head Start a one-time increase to be spread across a few years, which could be used to even out the funding and then to adjust the formula. With a new federal rule to provide a raise to most Head Start teachers, Mader writes, researchers expressed a sense of urgency to adjust the formula. Paying staff more is key. So, too, is increasing access to serve more children.

As someone who has been  of large, investor-backed, for-profit child care chains, KinderCare鈥檚 move has me pondering a few questions: why did they go public, what can we learn from their IPO-related business disclosures, and what does this all mean for the future of large, for-profit child care chains and the child care system writ large? 

Why An IPO?

While uncovering the ins and outs of business decisions always requires a degree of speculation, going public wasn鈥檛 a smooth path for KinderCare or its former owner, the Swiss private equity firm Partners Group, which still maintains a controlling share in KinderCare (more on that in a minute). In 2021, KinderCare first considered, , an IPO for undisclosed reasons. Then, in the summer of 2023, it  that Partners Group was seeking bids to sell 50% of KinderCare to another investment firm. Clearly, they were unsuccessful.

It鈥檚 not just the IPO that鈥檚 important to look at, there鈥檚 another factor at play: debt. As Brooke DiPalma  in Yahoo Finance, 鈥淭he company plans to use the [IPO] proceeds to pay back debt. As of June 29, the company had $1.5 billion in outstanding debt, plus $104.2 million available for borrowing under its credit facilities and outstanding letters of credit of $55.8 million.鈥� DiPalma added that KinderCare CEO Paul Thompson said, 鈥淢ost of [the IPO proceeds are] going to paying down debt,鈥� and that was a key interest in going public. 

Even after the IPO, S&P Global鈥檚 bond ratings  KinderCare a B+, which is considered below 鈥渋nvestment grade,鈥� although thanks to the debt paydown, it represents an improvement over . This suggests that the company was overstretching itself financially, and arguably introducing undue risk into the nation鈥檚 child care system.

It鈥檚 not the first time we鈥檝e seen high debt crop up in child care. Although the U.S. has been spared to date, there have been multiple instances of large, debt-riddled child care chains collapsing, such as Australia鈥檚  and the Netherlands鈥� , before wiggling their way out of trouble with support from government or financial institutions. KinderCare itself became so indebted in the late 1980s and early 鈥�90s that . According to DiPalma鈥檚 coverage in Yahoo Finance, David Trainer, CEO of the investment research firm New Constructs, expressed skepticism about KinderCare, calling it 鈥渦nprofitable and very expensive stock,鈥� and adding that, 鈥淚t looks like a private equity bailout.鈥� 

What Can We Learn From IPO-related Business Disclosures?

This is where the fact that Partners Group retains a controlling interest comes in. KinderCare鈥檚 owners appear less dedicated to creating a sustainable business model as they are to maximizing profit. In a post-IPO analysis, S&P Global notes: 鈥淲e believe the company鈥檚 highly leveraged financial risk profile points to corporate decision-making that prioritizes the interests of controlling owners. This also reflects private equity sponsors鈥� generally finite holding periods and focus on maximizing shareholder returns.鈥�

I am frequently asked how a child care company could possibly make enough money, given the sectors鈥� difficult economics, to justify interest from investors seeking high returns. One helpful facet of a company IPO is that they are required to submit numerous legal documents, including a comprehensive detailing of company dealings known as a prospectus. The following three revelations from KinderCare鈥檚  stood out to me:

1. KinderCare is willing to close centers because they are financially underperforming. In the prospectus, under a heading called 鈥淐ompetitive Strengths,鈥� the document states: 鈥淲e believe the quality of our portfolio is also differentiated from our peers due to prior center optimization efforts, a successful acquisition track record, consistent processes and investments, and a suburban-focused center network. From 2012 to 2017, we strategically closed 380 underperforming centers.鈥� These closures, the prospectus explains, allowed KinderCare to increase revenue and enrollment at their remaining centers. 
2. KinderCare is increasingly focused on affluent families rather than serving families with a broad range of income levels.KinderCare has long stood out as one of the few large chains that  on child care subsidy. Yet in the prospectus, the company writes of, 鈥淪trong tailwinds supporting demand for premium ECE offerings,鈥� due to the growing number of U.S. households with income of at least $140,000. The prospectus also notes that targeted acquisitions of other chains in recent years have given KinderCare 鈥渁ccess to the premium ECE market 鈥� resulting in a quality portfolio with density in suburban communities.鈥� Given KinderCare鈥檚 size and growth trajectory, this suggests a future in which there are more child care haves and have-nots.
3. KinderCare benefits when the broader child care system fails. According to the prospectus, the company seeks to 鈥淚ncrease same-center revenues through improved occupancy and consistent price increases across our portfolio offerings.鈥� It says: 鈥淲e employ a multipronged strategy to increase same-center revenues through enrollment and tuition rate increases 鈥� As a scaled provider, we believe we are well positioned to benefit from the combined impacts of growing ECE demand and potential supply reductions driven by center closures as stimulus funding sunsets.鈥� In essence, KinderCare is saying that they have an interest in a child care system characterized by scarcity and the ability to charge high fees. 

What Does This Mean for the Future of Large, For-Profit Child Care Companies and the Child Care System Writ Large?

As I and  of investor involvement in child care have pointed out, the question here isn鈥檛 whether it鈥檚 inherently a problem for a company to try to make money or to try to identify customers who can pay a premium. Families making over $140,000 need and deserve good child care options, too. The question is whether profit-maximizing investment is , and what a growing investor trend means for efforts to create a universally affordable, accessible and high-quality system with well-compensated educators. 

Consider again that KinderCare closed nearly 400 centers(!) due to the fact they were not bringing in enough revenue. While we are not privy to the specifics of those decisions, that degree of closures, at a time when licensed  were spreading, should raise eyebrows if not hackles. Did the company 鈥� which, according to its prospectus, compensates its executives with millions of dollars in salary and stock options, and is backed by a  with over $200 billion of assets 鈥� do everything possible to keep those centers open and continue serving families?

It is crucially important to distinguish between large for-profit chains backed by investors seeking high levels of financial returns (be they , shareholders, venture capitalists or other forms of institutional finance) and smaller for-profit child care programs. Nearly all family child care programs are organized as for-profits, as are independent small businesses with one or two centers, and these typically do not have institutional investors. The two types of for-profit providers 鈥� small businesses and large chains 鈥� are qualitatively different, with massively divergent levels of profit-maximizing pressure. Public policy should treat them as such.

That鈥檚 why Massachusetts has set such an important precedent by becoming the first state to . For the Bay State, any for-profit provider with 10 or more licenses in the state is considered its own category for the purposes of accessing state child care grants. Other states may choose to set the bar at a different level, but either way, a distinction should be made. Since these large for-profit chains are a separate class of provider, they require specialized oversight to hold them accountable for treating parents, children and staff well; to ensure that public funds are used for the public good; and to safeguard against risky financial maneuvers that could put the larger child care system at risk.

KinderCare鈥檚 IPO proves, yet again, that these chains aren鈥檛 going anywhere anytime soon. We鈥檙e overdue in reckoning with their role in our child care system.

In word and action, the 2024 election cycle has shown that child care may be closer to an open window than our bitterly divided politics would suggest possible 鈥� if the parties are willing to accept that they now broadly agree on child care more than they disagree.

This convergence has been brewing for some time, and it represents a meaningful shift. For decades following President Richard Nixon鈥檚 of the Comprehensive Child Development Act, which would have established a nationally-funded, locally-run network of child care programs, most Republicans wanted little to do with broad-based child care reform. In his 2009 book 鈥淭he Tragedy of Child Care in America,鈥� eminent child care expert Edward Zigler that since Nixon鈥檚 veto, 鈥渁 powerful social conservative movement has thwarted efforts by child advocates to create a [federally-supported] system of child care.鈥� Instead, child care has been lumped into welfare policy, an area with low levels of government support where benefits are typically limited to low-income families.

Yet child care has been a growing pain point, even in red states, with increasingly obvious impacts on families and economies making it more difficult for Republican legislators to ignore. And , according to Moriah Balingit, early education reporter at The Associated Press, who reported in February that, 鈥淚n 2021, Congress passed $24 billion of pandemic aid for child care businesses, an unprecedented federal investment. Now, as that aid dries up, Republican state lawmakers across the country are embracing plans to support child care 鈥� and even making it central to their policy agendas.鈥�

This shift reached a new zenith during the , when Republican vice presidential candidate JD Vance said that when it comes to child care shortages, 鈥渓ook, we’re going to have to spend more money.鈥� (In fact, JD Vance and Democratic vice presidential candidate Tim Walz agreed several times during the debate鈥檚 child care section.)

At the congressional level, we have seen Republican leaders accept certain premises that would have been unthinkable 30 years ago. In 2022, Republican Sens. Tim Scott and Richard Burr to reauthorize the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act that would have made child care free for all families making less than 75% of their State Median Income (SMI) and cost no more than 7% of income for families making under 150% of SMI. The legislation drew Republican co-sponsors. Similarly, this August, Republican Senator Deb Fischer of a reauthorization bill that allows states to apply to expand eligibility to serve more working families using subsidy funds, while boosting per-child reimbursement rates up to the true cost of quality. 

On the Democratic side, there has been substantial movement to better include family, friends & neighbor caregivers (FFNs) 鈥� who collectively 鈥� and even stay-at-home parents. For instance, Rep. Ro Khanna recently that would, among other things, create a robust payment system for FFNs and offer stay-at-home parents a $300 per month stipend until their child turns 3 years old. (Full disclosure: I advised Khanna鈥檚 office during the bill鈥檚 development).

It is important not to oversell the case. There are still enormous unresolved policy questions聽

related to the streams in Kingdon鈥檚 framework, particularly around funding levels. The bills introduced by Sens. Scott, Burr and Fischer contain no mandatory appropriations, making them essentially unfunded mandates that would go through a torturous appropriations process every year. For example, expanding eligibility to serve more families across a broader range of income levels does little good if child care subsidy applications are frozen due to underfunding, as they are in . 

Some Republicans, such as Wisconsin and South Dakota , continue to question whether there is any role for the government in child care funding. And there remains as well as drastically different visions for an ideal system (and the price tag that comes along with each one). It鈥檚 important to be clear-eyed: A divided government is highly unlikely to bring massive transformation.

Yet all that being true, 2024 has brought an opportunity to move the goalposts and spike the football. It would be a sign of enormous progress if both sides can agree upon certain principles 鈥� that governmental child care supports should no longer be considered only properly targeted toward low-income families, but instead seen as a need for families across a wide income range; that programs should be reimbursed at the true cost of quality so they can pay their staff well and run a strong operation; that parents should have access to inclusive child care options including FFNs.

There has been forward movement recently. In January, a bipartisan group of family policy experts convened by the Convergence Collaborative on Supports for Working Families, a project run by , released a echoing many of these principles. Such agreement, of course, still leaves important unresolved arguments about funding levels and technical policy design, and the contours of those discussions will naturally be shaped by the election outcomes. But in any upcoming political configuration, child care as an issue isn鈥檛 going anywhere. The real question will be, can the parties stop sniping at each other long enough to realize the first steps toward a bipartisan solution may be closer than anyone realizes?