The child care closure at UNO is reflective of a concerning trend: Across the country, universities, school districts and hospitals are shutting down affiliated child care programs at an alarming rate as the cracks in America’s child care system begin to widen into fissures.

Since the beginning of 2025, a growing number of institutions have closed or put forth plans to close on-site child care programs that serve employees and, in the case of universities, student parents. These include universities such as , , and the , along in Washington, Arizona, and Kentucky. During the same time, public K-12 districts — including in Michigan, in Missouri and in Colorado — have announced similar closures, as have hospital systems in , and .

In almost every case, administrators are pointing to rising costs as a key culprit. Indeed, absent public funding, large institutions cannot run a sustainable child care business, particularly as most institutionally-affiliated programs offer tuition discounts to employees. In the case of Baptist Health, a nonprofit health care organization in Arkansas, the system said it $2 million a year operating two of its child care centers.

While there may have been a time when such losses were manageable, these institutions are being buffeted by other headwinds. Many colleges, universities and school districts are dealing with declining enrollment numbers that have . A key federal funding program that helps colleges and universities subsidize child care for student parents — Child Care Access Means Parents in School (CCAMPIS) — has been held flat, which is a functional decrease in the face of inflation and rapidly rising child care costs.

Meanwhile, hospital systems are struggling with Medicaid cuts, rising labor costs, and tariffs increasing the costs of imported medicines and supplies; The American Hospital Association a “perfect storm of financial pressures.” 

The rash of institutional closures should be a stark warning about the future of employer-sponsored child care. That term usually conjures the concept of private companies offering on-site centers or subsidies for child care as a workplace perk. But in practice, these institutions function similarly: They operate on-site child care for their community members, such as staff, students or patients — and in many cases, the programs have been around for decades. In a sense, we might consider institutionally-affiliated child care programs the best-case version of employer-supported care. The institutions are often anchored in public missions, subject to greater accountability and backed by generally reliable funding streams. Yet, even these programs are disappearing.

If institutions designed to serve the public can’t sustain employer-linked child care, it raises a larger question about how realistic it is to . 

It seems clear that, reluctant as the decision may be, child care quickly finds itself on the chopping block when budgets tighten. Often, it is viewed as a nice-to-have for institutions, even while ����’s a must-have for families. When programs close and families lose subsidized care, they’re often forced into a wild scramble for a spot among scarce options. With the aforementioned headwinds only projected to worsen, more closures are, unfortunately, likely on the way. 

To be clear, the closures don’t signal that on-site child care is inherently flawed. In fact, the passionate reaction of families and providers show just how valued these programs are. The question is, how should such programs be funded? A model that relies on institutions themselves bearing the cost seems to be breaking down. Similarly, depending on a single funding stream, like CCAMPIS, is clearly risky, as it keeps programs in a constant state of vulnerability — just one unfavorable grant cycle away from collapse.

What’s needed, instead, is a way to wrap institutionally-affiliated child care into a broader publicly-funded system, as is done in nations like and . 

The child care sector may well be entering a phase where Band-Aids like incentivizing employers to offer child care benefits like on-site programs or stipends can no longer hold back the bleeding. If universities and hospital systems — to say nothing of Fortune 500 companies like and — are increasingly unable or unwilling to maintain their child care programs despite evidence of their positive impacts, then a course correction is needed. 

Policymakers are rushing to incentivize employer-sponsored child care at a moment when the American economy is slowing down and financial headwinds are picking up. If there’s any good news, ����’s that about five thousand years ago humans invented a way to pool individual resources and redistribute them for collective benefit. In other words, the antidote to institutional child care closures is the same as the antidote to mom and pop child care closures: tax dollars. 

Every child who starts at Lemay Child and Family Center in St. Louis County receives a developmental screening during their first month of attendance.

Based on these screenings, kids can receive speech or occupational therapy at the center, and staff can connect families with community support like help sourcing healthy food.

“The economy right now is just really challenging,” said Denise Wiese, the center’s executive director. “So we feel that those extra supports we give parents and children are really critical.”

More than 60% of the children the center serves qualify for a state subsidy program that helps cover the cost of day care for low-income and foster children.

But if lawmakers approve a proposed $51.5 million cut to that program, Wiese told The Independent, the center could be forced to roll back services or reduce scholarships that make child care more affordable.

The cuts are part of a laid out by Republican state Rep. Dirk Deaton of Seneca, chairman of the House Budget Committee, that would eliminate incentives the state currently pays on top of the basic child care subsidy rate.

Deaton told the committee the enhancements were created before the state started paying market-rate costs for child care.

“When those were put in place, the rates weren’t, in some cases,100% of market rate,” he said. “In a lot of cases, we’re already paying the market rate. So why would we be paying more than the market rate?”

For child care providers, Wiese said, losing these payments will be “devastating.”

“That increase for us over the standard daily rate is critical because we welcome any child, regardless of the family’s income level or the child’s developmental level,” Wiese said. “…If those enhancements get cut, we will have no choice but to reduce some of the services that we provide for these children.”

Casey Hanson, deputy director at Kids Win Missouri, told The Independent the proposed cuts would have an outsized effect on the state’s most vulnerable children.

The funding enables providers to cover losses if foster families need short-term or irregular child care. It also helps train staff to work with kids who have experienced trauma.

“Some people think, ‘Okay, that funding just gets cut, and so they still get paid the market rate. They don’t get this extra bit,’” Hanson said. “But ����’s not an extra bit to be able to provide that additional therapy or additional support.”

With the cut to their bottom line, child care providers may have to turn families away.

“What decisions do they have to make?” Hanson asked. “Do they have to lay off staff? Do they have to close?… Do they just quit taking foster families?”

Some facilities already hesitate to take on those families, Hanson said, and the proposed cuts would “de-incentivize that even more.”

The cuts come during a period of instability for the program. At the end of 2023, the state changed software providers to manage the subsidy payments, and technical difficulties led to a backlog of missed payments that .

Some day care providers closed under the pressure, and the stress continues today.

Demand for child care subsidies has , exceeding the amount of money appropriated to the program this fiscal year.

With available funds shrinking, the state’s education department launched a waitlist for the program at the beginning of March. Children under state care, like foster children, are exempted from the waitlist. Those who qualify based on their income, though, will have to wait until funds are available.

“Our system is already at or over capacity,” Hanson said. “We don’t have enough resources to serve the children and families that are qualified with this current [funding] structure.”

Despite mounting pressure, providers are expected to see a long-awaited change in the way subsidies are paid that state officials promise will be initiated by this summer.

Currently, child care providers submit attendance logs and are reimbursed based on the number of days subsidy children are in their care. In May, the department plans to pay subsidies at the beginning of the month based on enrollment, not attendance.

Gov. Mike Kehoe championed the switch in his inaugural State of the State address last year.

“We will not allow late payments, or technology issues to put these small businesses at risk of not being able to provide for families in need of child care,” he said.

The governor is still supportive of paying providers based on enrollment, but Deaton’s proposed budget could prevent this change.

Deaton’s budget plan includes instructions to pay “solely on a child’s actual attendance and shall not be made prospectively, on authorization, enrollment, contracted slots or any other non-attendance-based methodology.”

State Budget Director Dan Haug told the House Budget Committee Monday that the state would hold off on paying by enrollment in May if Deaton’s suggestion is signed into law for next fiscal year, which begins in July.

“I don’t think it would make sense to make a change in May and then go back on July 1,” he said. “That would not be good for the providers, moving them around with how they’re being paid.”

Paying on enrollment gives flexibility to providers, Wiese said. A family may need to miss 10 days in a month, but the center can only get paid for five absences.

“If a family wants to spend their day with their child, that’s the best thing for the child,” she said. “If [the state is] paying us based on authorization, that slot is paid for whether that child is here or not.”

With budget amendments forthcoming, Hanson hopes to see edits to benefit child care providers.

“We know that (lawmakers) care about children and families,” she said. “But sometimes these decisions don’t reflect that these [cuts] are going to be really painful for children and families in our state.”

The Independent’s Rudi Keller contributed to this report.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: info@missouriindependent.com.

After struggling for months to sustain her child care business at home, Minerva Caba Toribio thought she would have to close due to rent increases and high costs. But now, she’s able to operate out of a classroom located on Granite Street in Worcester at the Guild of St. Agnes, the largest early education and care agency in Central Massachusetts. Caba Toribio has space for 10 children, with five currently enrolled and three others that will soon be joining.

“We serve Brazilian families, Latin American families, immigrant families,” she said. “They feel comfortable to see that we can speak the same language and we have the same traditions.”

Caba Toribio will be able to use the space rent-free for two years. By saving on rent, utilities, meals, and other expenses, she hopes to restart her home-based child care service once the time is up.

It’s all part of a pilot program called the , formed in partnership by the Guild of St. Agnes – which serves almost 2,000 children across roughly 150 child care establishments — and the Worcester-based Seven Hills Foundation — which provides supportive services to children, adults, and seniors with disabilities and other life challenges. Their new family child care incubator — only the third of its kind in the nation — provides two classroom spaces that were empty due to a lack of staffing to two licensed educators to operate their child care businesses while they prepare to later offer the service in their homes. The program is meant to provide more child care slots in an area where demand is high but supply is low, while also making it easier for family child care entrepreneurs to get their start.

“In addition to expanding care to more children and families by using classrooms that were otherwise empty, we are able to share services such as transportation, healthy meals, and business support to the resident educators as they establish their new businesses,” said Sharon MacDonald, president and CEO of the Guild of St. Agnes.

The program, which can accommodate up to 20 children, was modeled after in Boston, which was the first of its kind in the Commonwealth and provides short-term program space, resources, and training for newly licensed family child care entrepreneurs. The other incubator program in San Francisco in 2019 and has trained and established more than 100 new child care businesses, creating over 800 new child care slots.

“I was thinking about closing my business, so when I heard about the incubator, I thought, ‘That can’t be possible. I will have a space where I can keep working with the same families that I had at my home?’” Caba Toribio said.

The other resident educator, Eva Fajardo Marroquín, is a newly licensed provider who will lead the second classroom with 10 children.

Around 59,000 (70 percent) of infants, around 43,000 (43 percent) of toddlers, and around 10,000 (5 percent) of preschoolers in Massachusetts live in a child care . The state defines this as areas where for every three children there is only one child care slot, though there are regions in central Massachusetts where the ratio is greater than ten children to one slot.

Granite Street is in the heart of one of Worcester’s child care , according to Leslie Baker, program director for the Seven Hills Foundation’s Center for Childcare Careers.

The children’s tuition is covered by state subsidies, meaning the Guild of St. Agnes and the Seven Hills Foundation are not responsible for the educators’ salaries. A $1 million grant from the Health Foundation of Central Massachusetts allows them to pay for the building, the classroom equipment and supplies, and a full-time project coordinator who provides case management, business training, and professional development support for the two educators. (The foundation also provides grant funding to CommonWealth Beacon.) The educators will soon establish savings accounts so the coordinator can document their progress towards their long-term business goals.

Cost isn’t the only barrier that aspiring educators face in trying to open family child care businesses. Many, including Caba Toribio, face landlord resistance and struggle to find homes or apartments that allow family child care to operate. Others struggle with navigating the licensing process with the Massachusetts Department of Early Education and Care.

Many of the families served by the Guild’s child care programs qualify for (CCFA) vouchers from the state. But that system remains underfunded even after the Legislature approved Gov. Maura Healey’s proposal to change the income eligibility threshold from 50 percent of the state median income to 85 percent last year. That move added 4,000 low and moderate-income families to the program, but more than 30,000 children were on the statewide waitlist for the program at the end of 2025.

“It’s opportunities like this that are making sure we are creating pathways for early educators, because the more classrooms we can fill with great educators, the more slots that will become available for the littlest learners in our community,” said Sen. Robyn Kennedy, a Democrat representing Worcester, at the pilot program’s ribbon-cutting event on Monday.

The Commonwealth’s early child care system continues to suffer from a due to low earnings, a lack of employee benefits, and subsequently high turnover.

Among family child care program owners and employees, just over 40 percent receive paid time off, around 25 percent receive paid sick leave, around five percent receive discounted child care, and less than 8 percent receive dental insurance and retirements benefits, according to a 2025 published by the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation. Just 4 percent of employees receive health insurance compared to 15 percent of owners.

“I don’t think we often think of childcare as a business,” said Sen. Michael Moore, a Millbury Democrat who represents Worcester. “You can’t be successful if you can’t operate it, put the business model together, and be able to afford it.”

Caba Toribio said many families prefer home-based family child care over center-based child care because it is often less expensive, more flexible, and tightly knit.

“We have a small group. Some parents prefer that. The children have the opportunity to feel like they are part of a family,” she said. “Here in the center, I keep the same concept. Because it’s a small group, they feel safe.”

Baker and MacDonald want to ensure that the program is sustained after the educators move out in two years.

“As they eventually launch their business, part of the project is to backfill it and continue this on,” MacDonald said. “One of the questions, obviously, is: What does it cost to do that without the grant funding?”

They are confident that eventually, other cities and programs across the state will pursue their own incubator projects.

“We’re trying to develop a model that could be replicable by other family child care systems,” Baker said. “We’d like to be that resource for other systems that are interested in developing this.”

This article is part of CommonWealth Beacon’s ongoing coverage of early childhood education issues and is funded, in part, by the .

This first appeared on and is republished here under a .

Child care during nontraditional hours — including early mornings, evenings, nights and weekends — is a growing need for American families. Flexible care with variable hours from week to week is also in demand.

In many homes across the country, work happens outside of 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. The best available data, drawn from the past decade, suggest that in some states live with a parent who works nonstandard hours, and that accommodate those schedules — though these figures rely on data collected before the pandemic. These data also indicate that work outside traditional hours is common in families that have lower incomes. 

Expanding access to equitable child care options requires careful attention to the diverse child care needs of working families. For a parent who starts a shift as a nursing assistant at 7 a.m., works overnight as a hotel receptionist or drives for a ride share service as a second job on the weekend, , as many licensed child care programs follow a more conventional schedule. Challenges also exist for parents who work jobs with rotating shifts, who not only require care outside of normal business hours, but also need the hours to be flexible. 

To ensure that working families can thrive, the child care sector needs more public investment in child care settings that offer care during nontraditional hours and increased support for the workforce needed to deliver it. When designing a universal child care system, policymakers must consider the growing population of parents working outside traditional business hours and should incorporate the following three principles.

Include home-based child care providers in policy design. Right now, most child care during nontraditional hours is , rather than by licensed child care providers. In other words, by people families trust who care for children in ways that resemble parental care. This type of arrangement — known as family, friend and neighbor (FFN) care — is in the U.S. child care system. This trend points to both a preference and a gap: Families rely on familiar, home-based care during these hours, yet the supply of licensed child care that is open during these hours simply isn’t there. Building a universal child care system that is responsive to families’ needs will require recruiting and investing in licensed family child care providers and FFN caregivers who operate outside of child care licensing systems. Building policies that include the full range of home-based providers will require creative solutions, such as community-based peer support groups and access to resources and materials related to caring for children. 

Create fair working conditions and compensation for providers who offer care during nontraditional hours. Increasing child care access for working families must prioritize investment in the workforce caring for children during . These providers face some of the in an already strained sector: low pay, unpredictable schedules, on-call demands for families that need last minute child care or need to change hours without notice, and the strain of balancing their own family responsibilities with offering child care. Many FFN caregivers provide child care for their families . Expanding child care options that meet the needs of families working nontraditional hours requires intentional strategies that ensure a livable wage for paid child care workers and compensation for FFN caregivers — many of whom indicate for their work. These approaches must also reflect that the cost of care varies by time of day. 

Right-size standards and regulations to reflect the realities of providers caring for babies and children during nonstandard hours. Finally, quality and regulatory frameworks must evolve to recognize that care at 10 p.m. does not look like care at 10 a.m. Children’s development during nontraditional hours is shaped by like shared meals, bedtime stories and quiet, unstructured time. Systems that measure quality solely through daytime standards risk missing — such as healthy sleep practices and creating calm and comfortable environments — while placing unnecessary burdens on providers. Universal child care systems should offer tailored professional development that reflects the realities of care at night and on weekends — focused less on building lesson plans and more on developing routines, relationships and supporting children through transitions like bedtime or early wake-ups.

As states and cities build universal child care programs, ensuring access to child care beyond standard work hours must be a central goal. By embracing a mixed-delivery system that values all types of care, investing in compensation and professional development, and developing appropriate standards, early adopters of universal child care initiatives can provide an example of how to create policies that meet the needs of all working families.

When she recently separated from her partner, it became critical that she get a job. She was hired for a position with a nonprofit last summer, and shortly after that, she went online and applied to get a subsidy so she could afford child care for her three children, ages 2, 4 and 8 years old.

Two months went by before she got a response, she said, only to be told that she had been put on a waitlist. It gave her “a moment of panic,” she recalled. “I need my bills to be paid but I also need somebody to watch my children.” There was no way she could afford the out-of-pocket cost of child care on her pay. It costs a year, on average, for center-based care for a toddler in Virginia.

A growing number of parents have been confronted recently with a situation similar to Moyer’s. Strapped for child care funding, have started waitlists for child care subsidies — or lengthened existing ones — putting new applicants in limbo when they need immediate help paying for care. Virginia is one of 14 states that have recently instituted or expanded waitlists, according to Child Care Aware of America. 

Moyer ended up asking neighbors and friends to watch her children, “people that I normally wouldn’t have asked to watch my kids,” she said. She installed some cameras in her house to make herself feel more secure. But “I wasn’t as comfortable as I would have been had they been in a licensed, insured day care,” she noted, adding that she had to work around the schedules of the people who agreed to watch her children, even though she wasn’t able to control her own schedule at work. There were some days when the person she had arranged to watch her kids canceled at the last minute, sending her scrambling to find someone else.

“It was very, very emotionally stressful, because I had never been away from my kids up until this moment and suddenly I’m leaving them at home with other people,” she recalled.

Moyer had to wait four months to get off Virginia’s waitlist, she said. Then, when she was finally taken off, she had to fill out all the paperwork again, which required getting documents from her employer and finding a child care center that she could enroll her children in. It took her another two weeks before she was actually getting help, she said. 

Waiting lists for child care subsidies are not new. “It has been true for a long time that there are not enough resources to provide subsidies to every eligible family,” said Anne Hedgepeth, senior vice president of policy & research at Child Care Aware of America. “We’re not meeting families’ needs with our current subsidy system.” In 2021, were eligible for subsidies under state rules, but just 1.8 million received them, or less than a quarter of those who qualified. 

But the child care sector has, in the past five years, received more funding that it typically does. It received in federal COVID relief funding meant to prop the sector up, which some states to eliminate waitlists, among other changes. The Child Care and Development Block Grant, which mostly funds state subsidies, received a increase in funding in 2023 and then another increase in 2024. Some states, for their part, also devoted some of their own dollars to the sector.

Now with the billions in COVID relief funding gone, and with big state budget cuts looming due to to Medicaid and other safety net programs passed by Republicans in Congress, many states have searched for ways to reduce spending. Waiting lists have become a common tool. States are “not able to serve all eligible families, and they’re having to do things like institute waitlists that limit families who are coming in,” Hedgepeth said. 

Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Indiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Dakota, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia have recently started putting at least some parents on waiting lists for child care subsidies or have significantly expanded the number of parents on their lists, according to Child Care Aware of America. Missouri also   a waitlist starting March 1. 

The number of states with waitlists has nearly doubled since early 2022, according to Child Care Aware of America. “Many on this list did not have waitlists when there were additional dollars available,” Hedgepeth said, and “were able to serve all of the families that were applying.”

This situation “does tell us that the funding amount that was flowing to states during the pandemic was an amount that better reflected the total need in the system,” Hedgepeth said. The increase in states using waitlists as an approach to cut costs is bad on its own, but ����’s also a canary in the coal mine, she said, signaling deeper troubles in the child care system.

“A single state may not be able to replace federal funding,” she noted, but if ����’s only spending the bare minimum without dedicating general funds “that’s a real opportunity for state policymakers.” , for example, has instituted waitlists without investing any additional funding for the sector. 

For parents like Moyer, the impact of state waitlists can be devastating, Hedgepeth said. Many families don’t bother to go through the steps to get a subsidy or might not even know that they’re eligible in the first place. For those who actually fill out the paperwork and submit it, “which is often no easy task,” she said, finding out that they won’t get any help for a number of months or, possibly, indefinitely “can be really disheartening.” Parents likely face impossible choices about how to make sure their children are cared for while they work. “This is not something they have time to wait for,” she said. “They need care today for their kids.” That’s especially true for mothers, as women’s labor force participation has , and many parents child care problems are keeping them from work. 

Providers, meanwhile, often suffer as well. In Indiana, for instance, the freeze in new subsidies left some providers who were counting on enrolling new infants with empty infant classrooms. The freeze, along with deep reimbursement cuts, has put them in a difficult financial position. “Your highest rates of pay comes from your infants,” Dionne Miller, who runs Room to Bloom Learning Academy in Indianapolis, previously told �鶹��Ʒ. “We no longer have that stream of income coming in.” More than 100 providers closed last September and October after the state’s changes were put in place.

On top of the expiration of federal pandemic relief funds, ongoing federal funding has become increasingly unstable. In December, the Trump administration announced that, after resurfacing fraud allegations in Minnesota’s child care and other public programs, it was freezing all child care funding to the state and reinstituting a Defend the Spend requirement for the Child Care Development Fund, which provides key funding for state subsidies across the country. With the change, all states now have to provide justification, including receipts and photo evidence, in order to draw down the money that was already appropriated by Congress. 

The administration also sought to completely freeze CCDF and other federal funding to five states, although that action has been by a judge. And the administration rescinded Biden-era rules that paid child care providers in a more stable way. 

Given all of this, Hedgepeth said, “I would not be surprised to see more states institute waitlists.” 

“We are in some ways back to the pre-pandemic conversation of the way in which child care and early learning are situated in our priorities,” she added. It’s “not receiving the full support that it needs despite what we know about its critical importance to families and economies.”

McNally, a Democratic state representative who lives in west Youngstown, Ohio, relies on her neighbors — who include nurses, police officers and public utility workers — as her North Star for how families are doing. These are people, she describes as having “job titles where they should be able to sustain a family and a household, but aren’t even coming close.” She hears how they are struggling to pay bills, how they can’t afford back-to-school supplies for their kids, or how long they will wait to turn the air conditioners on at their houses in the summer. 

that  most families spent their expanded 2021 child tax credit for everyday necessities: groceries, utilities, housing and clothing — the very same things she, her husband and neighbors were doing. The extra payment, between $3,000 and $3,600 annually per child — or a monthly check between $250 and $300 — brought the child poverty rate to a record low of 5.2%, . also shows that the funds dramatically improved overall well-being for families, many of whom were able to use the money to pay down bills or give a bit of breathing room to their finances. supports its bipartisan appeal. 

After the federal tax credit expired at the end of 2021, McNally introduced the in 2023, a measure she has since re-introduced in each session of the Ohio General Assembly since. A version of her proposal even made it into , before being overridden by the Republican’s veto-proof majority in the statehouse. 

McNally wasn’t the only lawmaker to view the child tax credit as a vehicle for families with young children to improve outcomes — and Ohio wasn’t the only state to take that approach. Altogether, 22 states and D.C. have created , though only child tax credits will be active in 2026. 

“States were curious about how to fill the gaps left behind,” said Ryan Vinh, a research analyst at the Center on Poverty and Social Policy at Columbia University, who has studied the impact of the child tax credit.

by the Columbia center found that the state-level child tax credits helped mitigate the loss of the expanded federal credit. And the center’s forthcoming research, Vinh said, shows that the states that have expanded their child tax credits are seeing similar effects with bringing people out of poverty, but not to the extent the federal government’s impact was, largely because states are not able to offer the full amount of $3,000 to $3,600 per child. 

In July 2025, the federal , from $2,000 to $2,200 per child, although the new version limited the ability to receive a refund and created new eligibility criteria so that some families who were previously able to access the credit no longer could. Refundability is particularly crucial for the families in poverty, as it requires a family to make enough income to have a sufficiently high tax burden, rather than being able to access the funding outright. 

The ability to zero-in on child poverty is incredibly effective for state lawmakers who see this as an issue to address, and ����’s drawing the attention of other states who are seeing the impact.

“It’s a domino effect,” said Neva Butkus, a senior analyst who leads the state child tax credit work for the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. States and localities seeking to add or expand a child tax credit work with her team to come up with what they want to solve for — in some cases it may be reducing the number of families in poverty, or it might be creating a smaller tax credit that more families can access, improving overall affordability. 

Butkus observed that there are clusters of states that tend to follow one another, such as those based on geography, and that conversations surrounding the child tax credit (CTC) among state lawmakers transcend political affiliation. She points to the CTC that McNally and DeWine pushed for and one that as examples of forward momentum in red and purple states. “We are seeing it become more commonplace, and lawmakers across the aisle are seeing the value in the credits, as affordability becomes more of a focus.”

The CTC is “both an affordability and anti-poverty mechanism,” Butkus said. “Lawmakers understand the rising costs associated with raising children. With recent years, lawmakers and advocacy groups come to us with poverty alleviation really as a focus,” she said. But addressing refundability tends to be one of the differences along party lines, she noted, as some legislators view fully refundable tax credits to be an anti-work incentive.

Vinh points out that there is not strong evidence that the fully refundable child tax credit negatively impacted workforce participation, and on the 2021 expanded tax credit found a “muted” impact on employment.

But there are limits to what states can do to address poverty. They are required to balance their budgets and cannot run a deficit — unlike the federal government — and cannot do deficit financing. “With the upcoming changes to Medicaid and SNAP, states have to take on additional cost sharing,” Vinh said. “To the extent that states have to find money in their budget, these kinds of gaps at the federal level create some concern about being able to fund more ambitious tax credit policies.” 

States that do opt for a generous child tax credit may see its impact relatively quickly. Butkus cites Minnesota as an example, explaining that in 2023, the state legislature used a budget surplus to  implement a child tax credit of $1,750 per child; in 2024 this was offered as an , a similar model to the checks in the mail that families received in 2021. from the Columbia center cite that this change will cut child poverty by one-third.

In neighboring Iowa, though, the legislature opted for a described as “a total windfall to the state’s of households.”

Ohio, too, opted to go in a different direction, despite having a Republican governor who championed the proposed child tax credit. In 2025, the child tax credit was nixed, but the state for the Cleveland Browns to build a new stadium. The state also switched to a , which, like Iowa’s changes, lowered taxes for the wealthiest residents..

McNally plans to keep pushing for the expanded child tax credit in Ohio, though she is aware that the outcome of the 2026 governor election will likely foretell whether she can gain momentum. Part of what she wants to do is continue selling it to families, who tend to tune out conversations about taxes. 

“Taxes are complicated, dry and dull,” she said. “But when I say ‘remember when you got the check in the mail, once a month from the federal government? You want to do that again?’ They said ‘oh that is awesome.’ They just want to get that money in the mail so they can buy groceries. They don’t care what is happening behind the scenes to get that.”

A third of American workers now have access to some form of government-issued paid leave — the biggest share ever. 

The United States is one of only a handful of countries that doesn’t have a federal paid leave policy offering workers paid time off after the birth of a child or to seek medical care, for example, and access to unpaid leave is only about . In that dearth of federal action, states have moved ahead to pass since 2002, which now cover a third of the population. Ten of those were passed in the past decade, as support for paid leave ; three go into effect this year.

Some states’ paid family and medical leave programs expand beyond time off to care for a new baby or to get medical treatment. Last year, Colorado expanded its paid leave program to include an for parents of babies in the neonatal intensive care unit. In Oregon, also qualify for paid leave. Connecticut offers paid leave if you’re serving as an .

According to research from the National Partnership for Women & Families, a nonprofit advocacy group, the 14 laws now cover 32 percent of private-sector workers, an estimated 46 million people. Of those covered, a third are women, a third are men and another third are parents. Asian American, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders have especially benefited — 55 percent have paid leave through their state programs, as do 41 percent of Latinx workers due to a concentration of these communities in states that have enacted programs. 

Paid leave laws are in 13 blue states and the District of Columbia: California, New Jersey, Rhode Island, New York, Washington, Massachusetts, Maine, Connecticut, Oregon, Colorado, Maryland, Delaware and Minnesota.

Though other workers may receive paid leave from their employers, workers of color — and especially women of color — are less likely to be in jobs that offer any paid leave. That’s one of the reasons advocates have pointed to a state or federal system as an equalizer that could improve access. 

“All workers will at some point need paid leave, whether for their own health or to care for loved ones. But when access is not guaranteed, the workers least likely to have paid leave also tend to be those who are likely to face greater health and caregiving challenges and have fewer financial resources to fall back on,” the National Partnership for Women & Families noted in its report. 

Low-wage workers, , have to paid family and medical leave from their employers than do high-wage workers.

“This creates a double bind for low-wage workers who often can’t take off unpaid time because they lack savings or might lose their job if they do. This inequity especially impacts women who are more likely to be low-wage workers and at the same time do two-thirds of unpaid caregiving,” said Katherine Gallagher Robbins, a senior fellow at the National Partnership for Women & Families and one of the authors of the report. 

Large paid leave campaigns in six more states — Hawaii, Illinois, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania and Virginia — could, if passed, bring the share of American workers covered to 44 percent, the national partnership estimated.

The most imminent of those is a proposal in Virginia. Last month, lawmakers in the Virginia House and Senate that are likely to be signed by Democratic Gov. Abigail Spanberger, who called for passing a state program in her State of the Commonwealth speech this year. 

In Pennsylvania, lawmakers are hoping to reignite momentum behind a paid leave bill that has support. Lawmakers in and are also considering a bill this session. And both Nevada and New Mexico have come close: In Nevada, a paid leave bill passed in the legislature last year was by Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo and in New Mexico, a paid leave bill passed the House last year .

At the federal level, part of the momentum of the past decade has come from men — — pushing for more paid leave access. During the Biden administration, the United States got to passing a federal paid leave policy before it was removed from a spending bill. Now during the Trump administration, lawmakers made permanent a who voluntarily offer paid leave to certain employees. 

So while the issue does have bipartisan support, Republicans and Democrats remain at odds about what form a federal paid leave policy should take. At a , U.S. Rep. Ryan Mackenzie, a Pennsylvania Republican who has a newborn, said his wife is able to care for their daughter because of her company’s paid leave policy. 

“We know that this practice makes an important difference for many in our community. Unfortunately, paid family leave has been out of reach for millions of Americans who are hoping to grow their families,” he said. 

But while state bills are “encouraging,” Mackenzie said it is also “difficult for state administrators and private-sector benefits managers to navigate the patchwork of paid leave policies across different states. While one program may work in Maryland, Alabama likely has its own workforce challenges to manage. One state’s approach should not be forced upon another’s workforce, or vice versa.” 

For paid leave, he said, “there is no silver bullet solution.” 

Dawn Huckelbridge, the director of Paid Leave for All, a national advocacy organization pushing for federal paid family and medical leave, said she is “heartened to see there is bipartisan interest and dialogue” on the subject. 

But, she added, “there are states that will likely never pass paid leave, so as long as there isn’t a federal guarantee, this is going to create a system and have and have nots that will just continue to grow inequities.”

was originally reported by Chabeli Carrazana of . .

Over the past six years, my own children and many young people in Maine have experienced  violence, terror and educational disruption. From the COVID pandemic and its aftermath, to the lockdowns after the Lewiston mass shooting and the regular practice of active shooter drills, many in our community are living on edge. 

Some lockdown drills required the entire kindergarten class to crowd together in the bathroom in their classroom and remain still and silent. Five year olds were trained not to respond to a knock on the door, and to only come out when they heard an announcement over the public address system. My son called it “Kansas Clover,” which we later learned meant “campus closure.”

Our children and families are already worried about school safety. In the past few months, Immigration Customs and Enforcement agents have made things so much worse. 

In September, immigration officers in a Portland ’s driveway arrested a parent who had just dropped off his child. This sent shock waves throughout the community. It solidified that we in child care needed to raise our voices to protect children and families. We also realized we needed to provide support for child care providers, educators, hospital and health care workers, and people who work for public institutions. Their physical and emotional safety is at risk. 

Further underscored this need, creating widespread fear in our communities. Local schools saw in January because of these concerns.

This fear works its way to impact even the youngest in the community. In my own classroom, we have noticed an increase in stress behaviors during the enhanced ICE occupation, as well as in the days and weeks following the murders of Alex Pretti and Renee Good amid the ICE crackdown in Minneapolis. Students who do not normally act out have been yelling, crying and throwing tantrums noticeably more.

From church members to family members to families in our child care center, people are noticing a difference. Parents are making emergency communications plans in case ICE creates a disruption that leaves them unable to pick up their child. Schools and students have noticed their classmates stop showing up to school, and do not know where they are.

All children deserve affordable, accessible, high quality education in physically and emotionally safe environments. This cannot happen when officials are deputized to enter sacred spaces, profile, detain or arrest parents, caregivers and young people. Learning and fear cannot coexist. 

This isn’t surprising.

For decades, federal administrations led by Republicans and Democrats prohibited immigration enforcement at sensitive locations such as schools and hospitals. Policies were built on the premise that everyone should be able to access services supporting life and wellbeing without fear. It was common sense that children needed safe spaces where fear would not find them.

Unfortunately, one of the first actions of the current administration was to reverse these policies. They sought to rationalize their actions by pushing harmful and false narratives linking immigrants with criminality. But no one benefits when one group of people is maligned, targeted and pushed to the margins of society. It only hurts the people in our communities.

We need action at every level to respond to these threats and protect our children. Our elected officials can lead through legislation, such as in Maine which would prohibit ICE from entering public schools, child care centers, libraries and hospitals without a valid judicial warrant signed by a judge. 

Local mutual aid groups are working overtime to make sure that affected communities are able to get food, medicine and baby products delivered when the threat of racial profiling by ICE is too great to leave home, regardless of citizenship status. Members of my own community are getting notarized to help create formal arrangements for children in case anything happens to their parents. This kind of action must continue and expand to protect children from future harm.

There’s a lot that we parents can’t control in the world to keep our children safe. However, we have an opportunity to speak up against ICE terrorizing our schools, child care centers and medical facilities. We should act swiftly to do so. Whether you are an educator, a lawmaker or a parent who cares about your community, speak out against ICE. All of us can contribute to the safety and future of our children and our communities.

Kela King had two children by the time she was 17 years old. She dropped out of high school, received her GED, and for 13 years has struggled to complete her college degree as a working mother.

When King, now 35 and a mother of three, failed two classes last year because she was focused on her children’s needs, she wondered if she was ever going to graduate. But with the support of the student parent success program at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee — which helped her navigate her studies while working — she hopes to walk across the stage in December 2026.

“I’m building this legacy,” King said. “Even if I don’t get to where I want to be, you’ll be able to see the legacy just in the building.”

For King and many other student parents, attending college can be a very tough road. Obstacles like financial stress, balancing coursework with family responsibilities and finding affordable, quality child care make it difficult for students raising children. 

Parents make up about and according to , which provides research and resources for pregnant and parenting students. They represent a diverse population, including a significant share of , , and individuals from Student parents face especially steep challenges and are than those without children to leave college before completing their degrees.

These students have unique needs, and a growing body of points to that colleges and universities can take to help them flourish and graduate. Successful practices include: Offering child care on or near campus with financial assistance to cover or subsidize the cost; providing access to food and other basic necessities; building a student parent support center; and creating opportunities for peer community building. 

There’s a key — Child Care Access Means Parents in School (CCAMPIS) — that helps colleges and universities support students like King by subsidizing child care and funding support services for student parents. But the program has come under threat recently. Last year, the federal government abruptly CCAMPIS grants for about a dozen colleges that depend on the funding. 

The future of the program’s funding has been precarious for some time, but in February, after facing potential elimination under the Trump administration for months, Congress approved the final 2026 federal budget, maintaining CCAMPIS funding at , the same as it was in 2025. This brought relief to some higher education institutions, but not for the colleges that saw their grants terminated.

Financial cuts to programs that support student parents will certainly hamper efforts to serve these students — especially through child care — but advocates say there are actions campus leaders can do to help them persist and thrive.

“Child care is huge, but ����’s not the only thing that’s necessary for parenting students to be successful,” said Nicole Lynn Lewis, executive director of , a nonprofit that supports student parents in college. “We also want to see, across the institution, real intentionality around supporting these students. And sometimes that’s low hanging fruit at no cost or low cost.” 

For example, if a higher education institution simply shows student parents in its marketing material, it would send a message “that I belong here,” she said.

While more research on outcomes is needed, said Theresa Anderson, a senior fellow at the Urban Institute, some have shown that initiatives such as a student parent resource coordinator, regular peer meetings and monthly stipends help by increasing graduation rates and offering a . Anderson has also found in her that parents who receive a college degree typically earn more than those of similar socioeconomic status without a degree, which suggests the importance of bolstering support for student parents. 

The question for colleges and universities is how to translate research on what helps student parents thrive into reality — and in ways that suit their specific type of institution. About half of student parents attend community colleges, while 20% attend private, for-profit institutions and a combined 29% attend public or private nonprofit institutions, according to by the SPARK Collaborative. They tend to have as high or higher grade point averages than their non-parent peers, but they are also to graduate from college within six years than those peers. 

Changing that dropout rate is one of the goals of Howard Community College in Columbia, Maryland. Over the past four years, it has stepped up its services for student parents. The institution’s progress includes big-ticket items such as reopening its child care facility — which closed during COVID — and starting a that offers scholarships and wraparound services, including case management and academic coaching. Howard has also offered changes resulting in smaller, but still significant benefits, such as priority class registration.

For its efforts, the college last year was awarded a by Generation Hope. The seal, which the organization has given to 22 higher education institutions and nonprofits, recognizes “exemplary, measurable efforts in supporting parenting students.”

Celeste Ampaah, 23, and the mother of a 5-year old, said she first felt unseen on the Howard college campus. “I didn’t even know that there were any other parents on campus, especially people that were my age,” she said. And she wasn’t aware of the resources the college offered. 

She was leery about letting her professors know she had a child, afraid it would seem like she was asking for special privileges or making excuses.

“I just stopped going to class if I had a hardship,” she said. 

But that changed once she connected with Howard’s resources for student parents and became a parent scholar. Now she proudly carries the backpack that proclaims “Student Parent” below the Howard logo and reaches out to other parents. 

“I’m not ashamed anymore,” she said.

Priority class registration is one benefit Ampaah says is an enormous help. “Being able to plan my classes and work around my schedule before everyone else jumps on board feels like a luxury,” she said. 

There is room for improvement, she noted, including displaying resources for parents on the college’s website more prominently, and training faculty and staff to be more aware of student parents on campus and the difficulties they face.

Some of the obstacles that affect student parents, such as transportation costs, also impact many low-income students, so the goal is to connect those students with the services already available, said Maya Mechenbier, a fellow at the Beeck Center for Social Impact and Innovation at Georgetown University who co-authored a recent of the needs of student parents in Maryland. 

In an interview for the study, Mechenbier recalled, “one mother shared that having to walk across campus or use public transportation while quite pregnant was a big barrier for her. Had she known about transportation subsidies sooner, she might have not had to drop out at that time.”

For that reason priority parking for student parents is a welcome benefit, something California Polytechnic State University (CalPoly), a four-year university that is part of the California State University system offers. 

The university has also garnered the FamilyU Seal for its parent-friendly services. Much of the institution’s progress has been led by Tina Cheuk, an associate professor of education, who was a student parent herself when in graduate school at Stanford University.

It was about a decade ago, and she felt completely isolated, Cheuk said. She recalled asking for a quiet place to breastfeed her daughter — a lactation room — and being told it simply wasn’t possible.

She threatened to file a case with the U.S. Office of Civil Rights and ultimately received the space she needed. And that started her on the road to become a student parent advocate at Stanford and later at Cal Poly.

A student parent at Cal Poly won’t run into Cheuk’s problem today, as the university now offers . There is also on-site child care and a coordinator for student parents within the student affairs office. In addition, there are community events for families — and at graduation, children receive some regalia and walk across the stage with their parents.  

Some of these supports are mandated under California state law, which that public colleges and universities give student parents priority registration and provide a “clearly visible” on the institution’s website outlining resources available to such parents, as well as a designated support person.

The law, Cheuk said, “serves as a minimum. But if all can meet that minimum, that is a signal to potential students that there are resources.”

More states and colleges are recognizing that in order to serve student parents, ����’s important to about their lived experiences. But one of the sticking points around serving this population, experts say, is simply identifying who they are.

There is no federal mandate to collect such numbers and a tool that many colleges used — a question on the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) form that asked if students had dependents — when the form was simplified for the 2024-25 academic year. 

While the FAFSA number wouldn’t have included international students or those who didn’t apply for financial aid, it was one data point.

“Without such data, ����’s difficult to understand the characteristics of those students, which programs they’re in, and where they’re facing roadblocks and barriers,” Anderson said.

Five states — California, Illinois, Minnesota, Oregon and Texas — requiring student parents to be counted. The Urban Institute has awarded grants to 23 higher education institutions, including Cal Poly, through its , as an effort to develop best practices for colleges to identify student parents in their data systems. 

For example, Cheuk said students could be asked if they have dependents when filling out an intake enrollment; California community colleges already do that during their application process. 

Some colleges — even ones that implement best practices — are struggling in the face of rollbacks. UW-Milwaukee has had an on-site child care facility for more than 50 years and a longstanding wraparound and scholarship program aimed at serving student parents, said Rachel Kubczak, the manager of UW-Milwaukee’s who has been working with student parents at the institution for the past decade. She is also King’s advisor.

The child care facility is still operating robustly, but when UW-Milwaukee last year, Kuczak said, many students had to scramble to cover the child-care subsidies they lost through that program or simply reduce their child-care hours, which affected their ability to work and go to classes.

In addition, the university’s wraparound program was supported through one generous grant from 2005 that ended in 2021. That left Kubczak, as the only full-time staff member, struggling to figure out how to serve these students. 

But even without the funding she needs, Kubczak offers crucial types of support — often partnering with other campus centers — such as welcome orientations, coffee and pastry mornings, parenting workshops and assistance in navigating the system.

And she can chalk up some wins, she said, such as getting diaper changing decks in most bathrooms on campus, as well as safe and comfortable lactation rooms. 

There are also success stories, like King’s, Kubczak added. King, who is majoring in social work and minoring in American Sign Language is on track to graduate this year.

“As a teen mom, I’ve been counted out by family members saying I couldn’t do it,” said King. But Kubczak “pushed me and supported me.”

Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly identified Kela King’s job and marital status. She’s currently married and working at a nonprofit.

Ohio received a bump in funding for child care last week, a small win in a sector that is still facing uncertainty and an affordability crisis.

Analysis by advocacy group Groundwork Ohio shows at more than $9,500 per year for preschool-age care, more than $11,000 per year for toddler care, and more than $12,000 a year for infant care.

The Ohio Department of Children and Youth was awarded $14.7 million in federal grants “to support access to early care and education services,” according to a press release from Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine.

The federal funding comes from the Preschool Development Grant – Birth to Five, distributed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

“This funding will help Ohio better support families and make sure young children have access to quality care and learning opportunities during their most important years,” DeWine said in a statement.

The state said the money will be used to upgrade technology and research, help early childhood education workers with curriculum development, professional learning opportunities, and “business support resources.”

A total of $250 million was distributed through the federal grant program, and Ohio’s director of the Department of Children and Youth, Kara Wente, said the grant would allow the state “to build on the work already happening in communities across the state.”

“By improving coordination and planning, we can make it easier for families to find the services they need and ensure young children get a strong start,” she said in a statement.

The state General Assembly approved funding for child care through its most recent budget, with funding going to the Child Care Choice voucher program and a pilot cost-sharing child care model.

But advocates were disappointed when eligibility for Publicly Funded Child care was left at 145% of the federal poverty level, despite pushes to raise the level to 160% or 200%.

Programs to provide state grant funding for recruitment and child care provider mentorship went down from previous budget drafts, ending up with $2.85 million in funds over the two years of the budget, .

Lynanne Gutierrez, president and CEO of child advocacy group Groundwork Ohio, has said Ohio faces after one-time federal dollars fade away for good in 2028.

State child care advocates have been pushing the federal government to bring current and further funding to the sector.

They have around the country to urge the government to continue funding the Child Care Development Block Grant, along with $10 billion in funding that was frozen in certain states after fraud allegations about Minnesota child care facilities were circulated by a right-wing YouTuber earlier this year.

The funding freeze for Minnesota and other states was blocked temporarily by a federal judge in January, but the lawsuit in which the ruling was made continues.

As funding comes and goes, the cost of child care continues to balloon, and a lack of access and affordability is costing the country billions, according to a new analysis by ReadyNation, a research group partnered with the Institute for Child Success.

The study, released this week, showed insufficient child care for children younger than 5 costs the U.S. economy $172 billion per year in “lost earnings, productivity, and economic activity.”

It showed a $5.3 billion economic impact for Ohio alone.

“Challenges mount over time: with less training and less experience, these parents face diminished career prospects, reducing their earning potential,” the study stated. “And less parent income, along with parental stress, can have harmful short and long-term impacts on children.”

National polling also shows bipartisan support for further child care support and changes to the system.

A poll conducted in the beginning of January on behalf of the national First Five Years Fund showed 80% of voters find the ability to find and afford child care as “either in a state of crisis or a major problem.”

The polling also showed 75% of participants believe child care funding should be increased or at least kept at current levels, with 75% of Republicans, 97% of Democrats, and 85% of independents giving that opinion.

A majority in all political parties polled said funding for child care “is an important and good use of tax dollars.”

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David Dewitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com.

The evidence for underenrollment is myriad, with data points coming in from a range of sources. For instance, KinderCare, the nation’s largest private child care provider, stated on a that enrollment was down around 2% year-over-year. The Bank of America Institute, an economic think tank that provides insights from the bank’s data, in October 2025 that, among its customers, the share of households with more than one source of income making child care payments had dropped to slightly under 35.5%. That figure is down nearly 2% since 2021, with a more prominent decrease among low-income households. These findings suggest that fewer families are utilizing licensed child care programs, which may result in open slots. 

While these percentages aren’t massive, they are meaningful when applied across the board to the . These data also track with as they wrestle with high costs of living and declines in flexible work-from-home options. 

Child care programs are reporting the phenomenon as well. Over half of child care program administrators in early 2025 by the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) said they have fewer children enrolled than they would like.

Importantly, the sector’s declining enrollment doesn’t appear to be driven by some sudden drop of interest in licensed care among families, nor by declining birth rates as some nations are experiencing (there isn’t evidence that this is a significant factor in the U.S. yet. 

Instead, households are grappling with a lack of ability to afford their preferred care arrangement. Among underenrolled programs in the NAEYC survey, the top reason (given by 41% of respondents) was parents’ inability to afford a slot. A recent survey of New York City parents from Columbia’s Center on Poverty and Social Policy that 16% of respondents had cut back on child care hours or stopped using child care altogether due to cost; the number rose to 34% among single moms. (Other parents reported switching to what they considered “inadequate” care as a result of costs.)

Rising costs aren’t the only reason for underenrollment: A fierce scarcity of early educators is leaving many classrooms dark. In the NAEYC survey, the second and third most cited reasons for underenrollment related to not having — or being able to retain — enough staff. A recent by the Wisconsin Early Childhood Association (WECA) illustrates how this plays out in practice. The analysis found that in Wisconsin, most center-based programs are operating at around 75% of their licensed capacity, leaving over 33,000 seats unfilled — and filling those seats would require an estimated 4,000 educators. Low compensation is a primary driver behind these staffing shortages. The WECA analysis also revealed that one-quarter of the state’s early childhood workforce left the field permanently in 2024. That’s a crippling level of annual turnover, to say nothing of the negative impacts on children . And when programs have to pay their monthly bills with fewer paying families, they may be forced to raise rates, ending up in a vicious cycle that can lead to closure. 

The link between poor pay for early educators, staff shortages and underenrollment is not unique to Wisconsin. In 2024, a group of researchers led by the University of Virginia’s Daphna Bassok, the latest in a series of workforce studies on Louisiana, a state with a particularly strong early childhood data system. Bassok’s team looked at programs accepting public subsidy dollars that did or did not utilize pandemic-era grants to boost wages. Among programs with lead teacher pay of $8.50 an hour, 40% had at least one-quarter of their staffing positions vacant, over half had to close classrooms and 70% had to turn families away. Programs with better, but still low, pay of $15 an hour (about $31,000 a year) had reduced rates of vacancies, but 47% still closed classrooms and 59% still had to turn families away.

Underenrollment, then, is a multifaceted problem that calls for multifaceted response. 

For one, the trend adds more urgency to lower parent fees via direct public funding. The more states can follow the lead of exemplars like Vermont, New Mexico and in expanding who is eligible for free or low-cost care, the better. Underenrollment is also a symptom of how much families are struggling right now overall, suggesting the need to put more money in their pockets via mechanisms like expanded and refundable child tax credits.  

On the program side, getting money into providers’ hands so they can should be a priority. Here, states would do well to look at precedents like Massachusetts’ Commonwealth Cares for Children (C3) grants, which provide monthly checks to over of the state’s licensed programs, and Washington’s which raises early educator pay through wage supplements by while moving them toward parity with elementary school teachers. While there is certainly reason to continue building out new supply in geographic areas that need it, a major priority in the present moment should be maximizing the system’s existing capacity.

Policy tends to move along lines of “path dependence” — the concept that we do what we’ve done because that’s what we’ve been doing — and it can be difficult to unlearn old narratives or change course even when there is a promising alternative. 

There are now two simultaneous truths about American child care: Families struggle to find child care, often facing long waitlists, while many child care centers sit partially empty. The slots aren’t vacant because families don’t need care. They’re vacant because families can’t afford care — and because providers lack the staff required to operate at full capacity. Policymakers need to adjust their strategies and solve for both problems at once. 

The good news is that there is a solution that addresses each challenge in turn: making child care a right backed up by strong, permanent public funding. While the child care story has evolved, the answer has never been clearer.

There’s been some progress along the way. In 2022, after a number of high-profile Olympic athletes spoke out about their experiences losing sponsorships and health coverage, the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee directed the National Governing Bodies of each sport to with certain protections for athletes during pregnancy and the postpartum period.  At the 2024 Paris Games, the first ever was created with dedicated space where athletes could spend time with there children, and private space for breastfeeding mothers. That was a big shift since children and family members of competing athletes are generally in the Olympic Village.

As the photographs below reveal, generations of mothers have competed while pregnant, or with their children cheering from the stands. The path to motherhood is often demanding in any context  — but for Olympians, who train and compete year-round, it can be especially taxing. Here’s a glimpse into the unique challenges facing Olympic moms. 

Sarah Newberry Moore had long believed that motherhood would mark the end of her career sailing at the world championship level. A five-time national champion, she didn’t know of many women who had made it to the Olympics as mothers, even as many of her male peers competed at the highest level while raising children.

But then COVID hit, and her sailing competitions — and the 2020 Olympic Games — were . As the months went on, she realized she didn’t want to stop sailing, even though she wanted to have a baby. The widespread lockdowns had presented a rare window in which she didn’t have to choose. She recalled thinking: “Who made this rule? I’m going to do both.” In 2021, her son Iren was born. And then, three years later, he was at the 2024 Summer Olympics in Paris to cheer his mom on as she competed with the U.S. Sailing Team. 

Women have been competing in the Olympics when they were first granted access to participate, but it’s taken decades for pregnancy and parenthood to be acknowledged as a natural part of an elite athlete’s path — and policy still hasn’t caught up. 

Though Newberry Moore said ����’s becoming more common to bring children to the Olympics — and she is in touch with several athlete-mothers competing in this year’s Milano Cortina Games who are doing so — she described how hard it was to bring Iren to the Olympics in 2024.

The children and families of athletes have historically . Athletes who stay in the Olympic Village typically have their room and board covered; those who want to bring their kids along need to make — and pay for — other arrangements for housing accommodations and child care.

During the 2024 Summer Olympics in Paris, for the , a was set up where parent athletes could visit with their children in the “nappy/diaper-wearing age.” There was also dedicated private space for breastfeeding. But Newberry Moore’s sailing competition was in Marseilles, not Paris, and the satellite Olympic Village where she was staying didn’t have a nursery. So Newberry Moore could only see Iren when her husband could bring him to visit; she would leave the hotel and give him a hug, and then return. He couldn’t go to her room and it was incredibly hot, so their visits were brief. 

“If my husband had been allowed to bring my kid into the room of the hotel, I could have spent actual recovery time with him,” she said. Newbery Moore in the Olympics, but skipped the closing ceremony — which the rest of her teammates attended — to reunite with her family. Out of the 13 athletes on the U.S. Sailing Team, she was the only mother.

For the 2026 Winter Olympics, there will be even fewer options for athlete parents. There will be during The Games. A spokesperson from the International Olympic Committee confirmed that there will also be no permanent breastfeeding facilities within the Olympic Villages, but “a certain number of bookable spaces will be made available in each Village, which may be used for breastfeeding, among other purposes.” 

These spaces matter a great deal for Olympic athletes because many are inclined to bring children along, rather than be separated for weeks, or in some cases, months. For breastfeeding mothers in particular, these spaces are not a luxury but a necessity.

As an Olympic medalist and mother of three, Alysia Montaño has been a vocal advocate for women in sports for years. She founded For All Mothers+ (formerly &Mothers), a nonprofit focused on dismantling the motherhood penalty that women face in all industries, including sports, and adopted better standards to help address it. 

Her organization provides for athlete moms — including the “Bring the Babies Changemaker Grant” — a $5,000 grant intended to help cover “essential family travel costs” which can include airfare, lodging and child care. Newberry Moore was a grantee in 2024, and this year, five athletes competing in the Milano Cortina Games have received funds from the grant.

The grants are “a crutch for a broken system,” Montaño said. While interviewing some of the grantees gearing up to compete in Italy to learn more about their experiences, she said, it became clear that the funding plays an important role “in alleviating maternal and child stress. Reflecting on her conversations with athlete moms, she said, that “being able to stay with their children is the very best support system so that our athletes can go out and be the very best they can be.”

Kelly Curtis, a skeleton athlete competing in this year’s Winter Olympics with the USA Bobsled & Skeleton (USABS) Team, is one of the grant recipients. In an with Montaño, Curtis explained that she regularly brings her daughter, Maeve, to competitions. “She comes with me wherever I go,” she said. For the 2026 Winter Games, Curtis will forgo staying in the Olympic Village, because she doesn’t want to be separated from her daughter. Instead, she will be staying off-site at a hotel. The cost is 700 euros a night, for 17 nights, she told Montaño, noting that she has to pay fully out of pocket. 

Tabitha Peterson Lovick, a member of the U.S. Olympic Curling Team and another grant recipient, Montaño that having a “little bit of baby time” will be good for her mental health during her competitions. She is staying in the Olympic Village, but her daughter, who is traveling with her husband and in-laws, is staying off-site. “I really want to have that time with my baby, even if it’s just 30 minutes.”

Kaillie Humphries Armbruster, an Olympic bobsledder, and another member of the USABS Team, called the grant “a huge relief,” in an with Montaño, and explained why ����’s so important for her to have her baby there. “When I go to race, it will have been hours since I’ve seen him,” she said. “He could care less how I do every single time, but he’s just so excited. He like runs over and he just — he wants Mom. And I’m excited to end an Olympics and have that.”

For mom Olympians, challenges go beyond child care

Women’s participation in the Olympics has been over the decades, but it wasn’t until the 2024 Paris Olympics that The Games achieved among athletes.

While ����’s not uncommon for men to have both professional athletic careers and children, it is a much harder road for women who must pause their training and competition schedule to have children. According to an ongoing , conducted by For All Mothers+ and Carleton University’s Health & Wellness Equity Research Group, 73% of mom athletes experienced a decrease, termination or pause in funding related to pregnancy or motherhood, and 72% of respondents reported needing additional income or employment outside of their sport to support their family. 

The key goal for gathering this data, Montaño said, is “to influence policy changes more broadly across the sports industry. There are biases with the motherhood penalty that we are looking to shift.” It’s bigger than sports though, she explained. She’d like to see the narrative change for all mothers in all industries. “The podium moments for athlete mothers are podium moments for all mothers.”

Montaño has publicly shared about her own when she was pregnant in 2014.

In 2022, after several high-profile Olympic athletes, including Montaño, Allyson Felix, Kara Goucher and Elana Meyers Taylor the disparity, the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee (USOPC) directed the National Governing Bodies (NGB) of each sport to for pregnancy and postpartum time periods, allowing athletes who announce they are pregnant to have their stipends and for up to a year after the birth of a child. 

Newberry Moore said these provisions are game changers. “It makes it possible for you to imagine returning, and it creates the climate needed for retaining female athletes.”

A number of athletes have continued pushing for change beyond those provisions. 

In 2022, Felix and Montaño, two world-class American track and field Olympians, started an initiative to in the in Eugene, Oregon. Felix, who went on to be a , has said that the is “the biggest barrier” to women continuing to compete at a high level. 

Kristine David, a spokesperson for For All Mothers+ explained that the recent on isn’t because there weren’t mothers who could compete before, but because “they just got forced out too early because they didn’t see a path forward with the infrastructure in place for them, such as getting their health care cut off, or not being able to bring nursing babies to competitions.” She added: “We are making headway with the USOPC and other NGBs, but there’s still a long way to go to making maternal support standard at The Games. Our hope is that by the Summer 2028 Games, we will see ourselves as obsolete, and all provisions become standard.” 

Montaño underscored that point and expressed the disappointment that there will be no nursery this year. “We are looking for consistent and reliable change that parents can rely on,” she said.

After the 2024 Olympic Games, Newberry Moore found out she was pregnant, this time with baby boy Rocky. She had a contract to continue with the U.S. National Sailing Team so she called her performance director and asked if she could defer by a year. But there was no specific language in her contract to protect her decision; a deferral would be at the discretion of the performance director. “I really think you guys should put this in writing,” she recalled saying to her director. “If she hadn’t had agreed to defer the contract, the idea of coming back is insane to me. It would have been a year of resources I couldn’t have used because I was growing a baby in my body.”

Nearly half of those surveyed reported leaving their jobs to provide child care, 80% experienced food insecurity and just over half worried that their child was missing out on care that is safer or more welcoming. This was especially true for kids with disabilities.

The research is particularly relevant given the federal government’s recent attempt to freeze $10 billion in social service funds to five Democratic-led states, including at least $2.4 billion in child care subsidy funding.

Daphna Bassok, the report’s author and an education and public policy professor at the University of Virginia, said if the funding to the five states were to disappear overnight, the impacts would be “pretty dire” and quickly felt.

“The findings highlighted just how meaningful these resources are for families. This is not help around the edges or help just to make things a little better,” she said. “The results suggest they are driving families’ abilities to work and go to school and do basic things, as well as children’s ability to go to child care centers.”

On Jan. 6, the Department of Health and Human Services announced it was halting billions in child care and family assistance funds to California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota and New York, alleging “serious concerns about widespread fraud and misuse of taxpayer dollars in state-administered programs.”

Within days, the attorneys general for all five states claiming the move was “cruel,” unconstitutional and would lead to immediate and devastating impacts. A federal judge has since issued two , halting the freeze through Feb. 6. 

Three key programs serving particularly vulnerable children and their families hang in the balance: the Child Care and Development Fund ($2.4 billion), the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ($7.35 billion) and the Social Services Block Grant ($869 million).

The Child Care and Development Fund is the main federal grant program allowing states to assist low-income working families with child care, and even before the attempted freeze the need was greater than what the dollars were able to support, according to Julie Kashen, the director of Women’s Economic Justice at The Century Foundation. 

“It is a program that has long been starved,” she said.

The move by HHS to cut off funds to the five states followed a conservative YouTube personality alleging widespread fraud in child care centers in Minnesota. A from 2019 did find significant weaknesses in anti-fraud controls, vulnerabilities that were addressed by and . Separate and highly publicized instances of substantial fraud in a Minnesota child nutrition program during the pandemic have since led to dozens of . The more recent allegations made via viral video have so far proven to be

Some 12.5 million children are eligible for the subsidies based on federal guidelines, yet only about 2 million received them in 2019, covering just 16%, according to a 2023 Between July 2024 and May 2025 in Virginia alone, almost 19,000 families who applied for a subsidy were placed on a waitlist.

Brookings researchers collaborated with the Virginia Department of Education to survey these families. They received responses from 6,548 (35%) of them between August and September of 2025, making it one of the largest studies to date looking at the experiences of eligible families missing out on subsidies. At the time of the survey, 67% of respondents were still awaiting the benefits, while 33% had made it off the waitlist and were receiving funds.

The vast majority of surveyed families still on the waitlist reported significant impacts to their employment as a result, with 76% saying they worked less than desired, 71% saying they turned down additional work or a promotion and 64% saying they reduced work or school hours to provide care. Nearly half had left their jobs altogether.

In open responses, parents described the financial bind they were in: each needed child care to work but, without subsidies, also needed work to afford child care.

“So many of these families felt trapped in this cycle,” said Bassok.

One parent wrote: “I feel like I can’t commit to any plans or ideas about the future months or year until I know if my daughter can go to daycare because we simply cannot afford the rates without subsidy.”

This challenging loop could be exacerbated if HHS is allowed to proceed: The Century Foundation has that if child care providers in the five states are forced to shutter because of withheld federal subsidies, it could impact more than 500,000 children, cost more than $400 million annually in lost parental earnings and could drive 156,000 moms of young children out of the workforce.

It’s not clear what will happen once the temporary halt lifts on Friday; the judge is currently considering a request for a temporary injunction, which would secure the funding while the underlying case is litigated.

For now, the families who eventually made it off the waitlist in Virginia are faring significantly better: nearly two-thirds reported they were able to increase work or school hours, start a new job, or accept a promotion or new position as a result. In all, those still awaiting funds were twice as likely to remain unemployed as those who received them, a difference Bassok described as “massive.”

Those still on the waitlist were also 11 percentage points more likely to experience food insecurity (80% vs. 69%); 15 percentage points more likely to frequently worry about running out of money before getting paid again (51% vs. 36%); nearly twice as likely to have bills that are often past due (31% vs. 18%); and 10 percentage points more likely to buy things with credit, hoping to have the funds later (25% vs. 15%). 

Half of families awaiting support said they were unable to find any care for their kids — including with relatives or friends — and the vast majority (69%) worried their children were missing out on care that could better support their learning and development. That percentage plummeted to 21% for the families that eventually made it off the waitlist.

These concerns were particularly pronounced for parents of kids with diagnosed or suspected learning disabilities and delays, according to Bassok, who described this as an “intense and common theme in the responses.”

Families were “really worrying about what the wait for a child care center was doing for their kids at a critical moment in their development,” she said.

“My son is turning 2 years old and is not yet talking or interacting with other children,” wrote one parent. “Without access to affordable, quality care, he is missing vital opportunities for socialization and early learning that could support his development.”

Another argued her daughter’s delays were a direct result of low-quality care: “She is just being ‘watched’ and not taught much. She doesn’t say many words and I have to put her in speech therapy. … I didn’t have enough money to pay for the day care center that teaches babies.”

These concerns extended to physical safety as well: parents struggling to afford care were less likely to rely on regulated child care centers and more likely to turn to options they didn’t trust.

“The wait for assistance has forced us to rely on unlicensed home daycares out of desperation,” wrote another parent, “which comes with safety concerns and constant instability.”

On the flip side, parents of kids with disabilities who did have access to the subsidy reported an ability to access high-quality care. One wrote, “[Receiving a subsidy] has meant that my son, who has high functioning autism, can attend a safe school where he can get incredible care and since starting there he has been thriving.”

Bassok argued that the Brookings report demonstrates a growing need for more of the exact resources the federal government is trying to strip away. 

“Aside from this moment of what’s happening nationally around these cuts,” she said, “the real takeaway is around needed expansions in federal and state dollars to meet these demands for kids.”

In 2024 alone, more than 6,000 early childhood educators in Wisconsin exited the field, representing about a quarter of the state’s overall child care workforce, according to a from the Wisconsin Early Childhood Association (WECA), a nonprofit advocacy organization that supports early childhood educators and the children they serve. 

Without qualified teachers to fill classrooms, most center-based programs are not able to enroll as many children as they can accommodate. As of October 2025, more than three-quarters of programs were under-enrolled, with the average program operating at only about 75% of their licensed capacity, according to the WECA study, which analyzed monthly data over the past five years that early education providers submitted to the state’s Department of Children and Families. 

That translates to more than 33,000 licensed but unfilled child care slots across the state. To make those seats available, the state would need an estimated 4,000 additional educators.

Wisconsin’s high staff turnover and worsening shortages have strained its child care capacity, leaving the state with the space — but not the teachers — to meet the needs of families.

There’s clear data proving that this paradox is playing out in Wisconsin. There’s also ����’s other states. It’s not surprising, in a nation where the average wage for early childhood educators around $15 per hour, employer-provided benefits are rare, and nearly half the field some sort of public assistance. 

“We have a precarious workforce,” acknowledged Anne Hedgepeth, senior vice president of policy and research at Child Care Aware of America, a national organization that promotes high-quality, affordable child care. 

In Wisconsin, where the last pandemic-era relief payments are due to this June, that has perhaps never been more true.

“Staffing has always been a challenge, but it continues to get worse,” said Paula Drew, director of early care and education policy and research at WECA. “This business model is not focused on what it costs to provide high-quality care to children. It’s based on what parents can afford to pay. [Providers have to cover] rent, liability insurance, food. What’s left is what goes to staff.”

In Wisconsin, early childhood educators earn an average of just over , while the statewide median wage across occupations is close to $23 an hour. The result is a workforce that can barely make ends meet. 

Across the country, fast food restaurants, gas stations and retail stores have since the pandemic. Early care and education programs, in many instances, are no longer trying to compete with their prices — they simply can’t afford to. They’re relying, instead, on people who love young children so much that they are willing to forego financial stability. 

Drew pointed out that in the K-12 education sector, pay is modest, but public school employees often get rewarded with great benefits. 

“There isn’t something like that in early childhood,” Drew said. 

She added: “It’s great to watch a lesson in circle time play out, to see children use a lesson you just taught them. But when you worry about how you’re going to pay for groceries or get to your second job, there really isn’t something that helps you stay.”

In interviews, several providers in Wisconsin shared that they have lost exceptional teachers to jobs in unrelated fields, strictly because of compensation. 

Virginia Maus, co-owner of Joyful Beginnings Academy in Hortonville, said her program lost 18 teachers in 2025, out of a staff of 38. 

Every single one of them left for higher pay, she said, and 80% of them left early education altogether. (Maus has a day job as a data scientist, so naturally, she collects and analyzes the center’s data on staff turnover.) 

“They all came to me and said, ‘I got this offer,’ and I said, ‘I’m sorry, I can’t match that,’” she explained.

One went to McDonald’s. Another, who Maus said was a “really, really great teacher who really connected with the children,” left for a job at a factory. 

“It’s really saddening, when they’re really talented people and the children adore them — to think she’s now standing in front of a machine,” Maus said. 

Julia Wilridge, who runs Lov ‘N Care Academy, a child care center nearly 150 miles away, in Kenosha, has also seen many teachers leave the industry for better-paying jobs elsewhere. The cost of living has gone up, she pointed out. Pay for unskilled jobs has gone up. But wages for early childhood educators? They’ve remained stubbornly low — at least in her program. 

“Young kids are getting jobs at McDonald’s and Taco Bell, getting $16 to $18 an hour,” she said, “and we’re still offering $12 and $13 an hour.”

Wilridge is in the process of increasing her base pay to staff, out of necessity. Assistant teachers without experience would start at $13 an hour, instead of $12, while lead teachers would start at $15 an hour, up from $14. 

Part of the challenge in Wisconsin, providers shared, is that the state’s child care quality rating system, YoungStar, when more teachers have advanced certificates and degrees, but these programs aren’t making enough money to pay degree-holding teachers what they want.

Wilridge, for example, needs to hire a new teacher to lead her 4-year-old classroom, but that teacher has to have an undergraduate degree. 

“I already know I’m going to run into an issue,” she said, noting that the last time she was hiring for a similar role, candidates all wanted at least $20 an hour. “None of our staff make $20 an hour. I’m going to run into a problem getting people to accept a job paying $16 or $17. I don’t blame them, but I know that’s going to be an issue.” 

Annette Larson, director of Coulee Children’s Center in La Crosse, said her program closed the toddler classroom she was teaching in after she stepped into the director position there three years ago. They haven’t been able to find a teacher to help reopen it, since that person needs to have a degree. 

“You don’t find a lot of four-year-degree people who want to work in child care due to what you get paid in child care,” Larson said bluntly. “That’s a lot of the issue.”

Her center is licensed for 125 children but currently only serves 70, in part due to staffing, she said. 

Child care programs can hire people without experience and education, but then they have to ensure those teachers obtain the required coursework. Even assistant teachers are required to take one or two classes — depending on the age group they teach. That’s a financial investment and time commitment for programs, which are already just scraping by. 

Hedgepeth, at Child Care Aware, described teachers as the “linchpin” of early care and education programs. “It’s critical to figure out what we need to do [to keep them] in our programs and fill vacancies when we have them,” she said. 

Drew, who led the WECA study and plans to continue to track statewide staffing data, emphasized the importance of this issue. 

“Workforce is everything. That is child care supply, child development, child care quality,” she said. “One of the items on the list to do to improve child care infrastructure is shoring up our workforce.”

Constitutions are powerful, both practically and symbolically. After the Civil War, as Congress was debating what defeated Confederate states must do to rejoin the Union, a surprising requirement rose to the top. When Southern states rewrote their constitutions, they were expected to include voting rights — but also . Some years later, in 1881, then-President James Garfield inveighed on the importance of these rights . “The voters of the Union, who make and unmake constitutions, and upon whose will hang the destinies of our governments, can transmit their supreme authority to no successors save the coming generation of voters, who are the sole heirs of sovereign power,” he said. “If that generation comes to its inheritance blinded by ignorance and corrupted by vice, the fall of the Republic will be certain and remediless.” Garfield concluded that, “For the North and South alike there is but one remedy. All the constitutional power of the nation and of the States and all the volunteer forces of the people should be surrendered to meet this danger by the savory influence of universal education.”

By universal education, of course, Garfield was largely excluding the early years — but we now understand how inextricable early childhood experiences are from any desired child outcomes. While more states are moving in the direction of dedicated funding sources for child care (and in 2022, New Mexico even passed a constitutional amendment that committed funding to early education), none have yet tapped the ultimate forcing function: passing a constitutional amendment establishing a right to child care.

In practice, a constitutional right to child care would likely mean that every child in the state would be entitled to — and guaranteed access to — a child care slot. There would be protections in place to ensure that right. For example, every state has a , so if a resident’s local public school district refuses to enroll a child, or tries to charge a fee for enrollment, a parent or guardian can take the district to court — and will likely win. It’s important to note that a hypothetical right to child care does not necessarily mean child care services must be government run, merely government funded; an amendment could be written in a way that maintains a mixed-delivery system including a variety of center- and home-based settings.

There are only a few instances in which early childhood has been addressed by state constitutions, and most of them focus solely on pre-K rather than a comprehensive child care system. Still, they’re notable. The most clear-cut example comes from Florida. As Aaron Loewenberg of the think tank New America explained , “In November 2002, Florida voters voted by a 59 to 41 percent margin to approve a constitutional amendment making their state the first in the nation to grant four-year-olds a state constitutional right to pre-K. The Florida Constitution that, ‘Every four-year old child in Florida shall be provided by the State a high quality pre-kindergarten learning opportunity in the form of an early childhood development and education program which shall be voluntary, high quality, free, and delivered according to professionally accepted standards.’” 

In New Jersey, meanwhile, a decades-long legal battle known as — though not resulting in a right to child care — ended with courts requiring the state to make major pre-K investments in low-income counties as a matter of educational equity. And New Mexico’s 2022 involved dedicating a portion of the state’s Land Grant Permanent Fund to early childhood education. While it was a major win for the state, there’s an important distinction to make: the amendment created a stable funding pathway that powered the 2025 policy which expanded free child care eligibility, but did not establish a right to child care because the state legislature isn’t obligated to fully fund the system or guarantee a slot. 

It’s also important to recognize that establishing a constitutional right to child care doesn’t guarantee that the service is high-quality or that service providers are well compensated. There have been long-running battles in states from to where the courts tell the legislature they need to put more money into the state’s public education system, and the legislature pushes back or refuses. Similarly, Florida’s pre-K amendment has had a rocky translation into practice: as Loewenberg notes, Florida’s program “has fallen short of the lofty goals announced upon the amendment’s passage. The good news is that sixty-eight percent of the state’s four-year-olds were enrolled … during the 2021-2022 school year, making Florida second in the nation when it comes to pre-K access for four-year-olds. However, the state only spends about $2,200 per child, making Florida 43rd out of 46 states when it comes to per pupil pre-K spending,” leading to many quality concerns. Often, the state only covers three to four hours of pre-K per day. 

Still, constitutionally-protected services present a stark contrast to America’s largely pay-to-play child care system in terms of access and cost. A constitutional right is also extraordinarily difficult to remove once enshrined, and when a state establishes this kind of entitlement, it conveys a sense of values that can shape how society perceives an issue. It is perhaps unsurprising that many of the European nations with strong child care infrastructures, from Finland to Germany, have crafted their systems within . Thus, the very debate over whether child care should be a constitutional right could in and of itself help reshape public opinion.

Realistically, amending state constitutions . In many states, the process is arduous and requires action by state legislatures that may be reluctant to obligate themselves to fund a new entitlement. That said, child care champions would do well to consider state constitutional amendments as a long-term strategy. If child care undergirds strong children, strong families and strong communities, then it would call on a great American tradition to assert the need for constitutional authority enshrining the savory influence of universal child care.

Could those two trends be related? New research and surveys indicate yes.

In , Boston University economics Ph.D. candidate Abigail Dow finds that when child care prices increase, some American families decide to put off having more children, and many don’t have more children at all. 

Dow looked at child care prices across the country in a compiled and published by the Women’s Bureau at the Department of Labor with data from 2010 to 2022. 

She then isolated a “shock” to child care prices — an event, unrelated to something like a recession or a spike in inflation, that made the cost of care go either up or down. The shock she identified was that when states mandate smaller group sizes and/or lower child to staff ratios, child care prices rise, so she studied what happened to fertility decisions when states passed such regulations.

“My key takeaway is that child care costs are high in the U.S., and I do find they’re a barrier to having children,” Dow said. She found that a 10% increase in the price of child care for children from birth to 2 years old led to a 5.7% decrease in the birth rate among women aged 20 to 44. Her research also found that the price increase leads to women delaying when they have children: a 10% increase prompts women to push back their first birth by four months and to extend the time between a first and second child by half a month. Dow found that women’s decisions about whether to have second and third children were particularly hampered by high child care prices. 

The findings are strongest for women ages 30 or older. This is, Dow posits, because they have more to lose if they can’t get child care: they’ve invested more time and resources into their careers and likely earn more, making the cost of having to give up on work to care for more children in the absence of affordable child care higher. Younger women have less to lose by having a child and dropping out of the work force if child care can’t be secured.

The research is novel: while there have been studies in European countries which suggest that women rethink having children when child care prices rise, Dow knew that those situations may not be applicable to the U.S., where the government spends much less on child care, ����’s a primarily private system, and there is no guarantee of paid family leave. “There wasn’t a robust empirical analysis of: How do child care prices affect fertility rates?” Dow said. 

Dow noted that child care prices aren’t the only factor dampening the country’s fertility rate — other research has found that things like housing and health care prices also make an impact. But ����’s clear that the cost of raising children is top of mind for American parents when they’re thinking about the sizes of their families. In of 3,000 nationally representative respondents by YouGov, the Wheatley Institute at Brigham Young University, and Deseret News released in November, a record share of participants — 71% — said that raising children is unaffordable, a 13 percentage point increase over 2024. That high cost of raising children was listed as the single most important reason survey respondents offered for why they’ve limited the children they either had or planned to have. That response was twice as prevalent as the next two reasons they gave — a lack of personal desire and a lack of a supportive partner — and for the first time in the survey’s 10-year history, it was the top reason respondents gave.

The survey also found that support for government resources aimed at parents through direct payments and better programs had increased since 2021, and opposition to such interventions was 10 percentage points lower. A majority favor universal day care, while just 18% oppose it. Survey respondents also supported increased tax credits for parents.

“If you think about, ‘What do I have to think about when I’m raising a family for those early years,’ child care is going to be front of mind,” Dow said.

The situation is poised to get worse for Americans considering whether and when to have children. Dow’s data only goes through 2022. Since then, the billions of dollars in pandemic-era federal relief for the child care sector has disappeared. In its wake, states like Arkansas and Indiana have cut back on support for the sector. Indiana stopped enrolling new children in its child care subsidy program, and the state has reduced reimbursement rates for providers, leading more than 100 providers to shutter. Arkansas has also cut provider reimbursement rates, put new subsidy applicants on a waitlist, and instituted new copays for parents who receive vouchers. More of the cost burden will now fall on parents in states that pull back.

Dow cautioned that her research shouldn’t be interpreted as an argument for relaxing regulations in order to bring child care costs down and boost births. “These regulations are really important for child health and safety,” she pointed out. “I’m absolutely not in the business of saying we should be making these regulations more lax purely to make child care more affordable for parents.” But, she said, her research makes it clear that parents, and particularly mothers, make decisions about whether to have children and how many to have based at least in part on whether they can afford child care. “Anything we can do to make child care more affordable seems important from a policy perspective,” she said. 

Editor’s note: This article is part of a series on the intersections of community colleges and child care. .

Community college students are often balancing lives and responsibilities outside of school — from work to family obligations. For students with young children, the struggle to find and afford child care can make a tricky balance close to impossible.

Colleges across the state are finding ways to lessen the burden of child care challenges for their students and communities, from providing on-campus child care and subsidies to strengthening and expanding the child care workforce.

And state leaders are calling for more colleges to follow suit.

“I’ve been saying, all of the 58 need to have child care,” said — referring to the state’s 58 community colleges — at the December 2025 meeting of the , which he co-chairs.

On-campus child care is also a priority of Lt. Gov. Rachel Hunt, a Democrat, who co-chairs the task force with Burgin. Hunt’s says on-campus centers would “leverage our excellent community colleges, strengthen experiential programs for child care professionals, and increase options for students and working families.”

Child care is a critical yet for colleges and policymakers to consider as they work toward and reengage . Models and investments that provide child care for parents as they earn credentials and degrees matter for student access, , and , research says. These strategies also have intergenerational benefits, , relieving families from poverty while exposing children to high-quality early childhood experiences.

When students cannot access or afford care, it risks “their personal investment in education and federal and state investments in postsecondary success,” who studied student parents’ experiences and colleges’ child care approaches at 10 community colleges across the country, including in Winston-Salem.

“Within a broken child care system, colleges alone can’t solve the workforce, supply, quality, and affordability issues that plague families, providers, and communities,” the New America researchers write. “Still, there is reason for hope, and colleges can adopt strategies to better meet the needs of their parenting students.”

Community college students with young children face the same child care crisis all families are experiencing.

About 44% of the child care need in North Carolina was unmet by its supply, according to using 2020 data by the Buffett Early Childhood Institute at the University of Nebraska. The analysis identified 257,670 children without access to child care within a reasonable distance.

The following map shows the real-time supply of North Carolina licensed child care providers — as well as all 58 community colleges, including their satellite campuses. Use the filters to explore availability through different geographic lenses: by congressional or state legislative districts, counties, regions, or census tracts.

If a region is red, that signifies a child care supply and demand gap, or a “desert,” which in this map means there are at least 50 children with all parents working and that there are at least three children per child care slot in that area.

The map defaults to showing regions as the geographic boundary. To view child care “deserts,” toggle on smaller geographic boundaries. For example, when viewing the map by county, eight counties are red. When viewing the map by census tract, many more areas are red.

The orange circles with graduation caps represent community college campuses. The inclusion of community college campuses on this map allows community college leaders to assess if they have available space, on a main or satellite campus, that is located in a child care desert.

Click on a county or region for more information, including the average cost of child care, median family income, and the types of child care programs in the area.

This map was developed by Child Care Resources Inc. (CCRI) in partnership with NC Child Care Resource & Referral and the NC Division of Child Development and Early Education.

The number of licensed child care programs in the state by 5.8% during the five years when providers were receiving pandemic-era stabilization grants, first from the federal American Rescue Plan Act and then partially continued by the state legislature.

to 6.1% between March 2025, when those grants ended, and September 2025. Family child care homes, licensed home-based child care programs, made up 97% of that net loss.

Advocates have called for child care investments since the pandemic brought increased costs and increased competition for employees. Providers were able to raise teacher wages with the infusion of stabilization grants. Without it, they are struggling to compete with retail and food service jobs. This leaves them stuck between increasing tuition for parents who cannot afford to pay more and losing teachers who cannot afford to make less.

The average cost of child care statewide is $10,481 per year, according to state data in the above map. The median wage for child care workers was $14.20 in 2024, .

Advocates say state and federal public investments are necessary to create a system that provides high-quality care and education at a price that is affordable to families.

Research has linked high-quality early care and education with higher academic, social, and economic outcomes for students and communities. In North Carolina, affordable, accessible child care up to 68,000 jobs, increase the state’s annual economic input by up to $13.3 billion, and boost its GDP by up to $7.5 billion, according to from the state Department of Commerce and nonprofit NC Child.

Child care access matters for community college students

Child care access can be a make-or-break factor for student parents. Seventy-one percent of caregiving students nationwide reported that their caregiving responsibilities could lead them to dropping out of community college in the .

The same survey found student parents were highly motivated to succeed. They were less likely than students without caregiving responsibilities to cite academic unpreparedness as a reason for stopping out. Caregiving students reported higher engagement across benchmarks like academic challenge, student effort, and student-faculty interaction compared to students without caregiving responsibilities. Caregiving students also reported higher GPAs than their non-caregiving peers.

This is despite many factors that “could pose challenges to student engagement” — parent students were more likely to be older, to be women, to be first-generation, to be Pell-eligible, and to be working 30 hours or more per week compared to non-caregiving students.

Student parents who persist through a credential or degree are more likely to attend colleges that provide child care supports like full-time care, drop-in care, or subsidies — as well as support with basic needs — than student parents who drop out, according to .

The same research found child care services like full-time and drop-in care could be the convincing factor for a little over half of students surveyed who stopped out to come back to school. Free tuition was the top factor, with 72% of student parents reporting they would return if the cost of tuition was covered.

EdNC has identified three primary ways community colleges can strengthen child care access and affordability: providing on-campus child care, utilizing the state’s child care grant program, and expanding the early childhood workforce, including through child care academies.

Providing campus-based child care

Community colleges across North Carolina are supporting student parents’ child care access, from hosting full-time, on-campus centers to providing drop-in and after-school options.

Colleges have fewer on-campus child care options than they used to. of federal data, 29 community colleges in North Carolina offered dependent care on campus in 2004.

In May 2025, there were 17 colleges offering on-campus child care, according to EdNC’s analysis. Twenty-one colleges had closed on-campus child care, and 20 had never operated on-campus child care, based on what our analysis was able to document.

The on-campus child care programs that remain vary in their design — from operating hours to funding sources and populations served — but can provide starting points for colleges looking to expand access in their regions.

Thirteen of the 17 colleges providing on-campus care are . Three are Head Start programs, and at least five offer .

According to EdNC’s analysis, five child care models exist at community colleges across the state:

• Licensed, on-campus child care, currently provided at 13 community colleges;
• Both licensed, on-campus child care and drop-in care, currently provided at Cape Fear Community College (operating both) and Forsyth Technical Community College (operating a lab, outsourcing drop in care to a local provider, and providing care for particular on-campus events);
• Head Start, currently at Blue Ridge Community College, Halifax Community College, and Lenoir Community College;
• After-school and drop-in care, currently provided at Sandhills Community College; and
• Drop-in care, currently provided at Central Carolina Community College.

The programs braid parent tuition, along with federal, state, and local private and public funding streams, to operate their programs.

They simultaneously support student parents and their children. Kids on Campus, a national effort to expand on-campus Head Start programs from the (ACCT) and the  (NHSA), says providing child care to community college students can have lasting, two-generation effects.

“Two of the most effective strategies for reducing poverty,” says a March 2025 Kids on Campus , “are providing high-quality early childhood education for young children and supporting parents through education and training that will advance their career goals.”

Full-time, formal child care centers are not the only strategy available to colleges. They also do not always meet the needs of parenting students, according to New America’s research. Colleges should consider options like drop-in care, after-school care for older children, and financial support for off-campus options that work with students’ schedules like family child care homes or informal care arrangements with family and friends.

Drop-in care, which in North Carolina is limited to four hours per day, can provide more flexible options for students needing irregular or unpredictable care. Cape Fear Community College (CFCC) launched its drop-in care model at no cost to students. The program is partly funded through a grant from the , created by the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners from the sale of New Hanover Regional Medical Center to Novant Health in 2020.

The program has since moved to a more accessible location for children on campus and doubled the number of children it can serve at once from 20 to 40 students.

In 2025, CFCC President Jim Morton told EdNC that he offers this advice to other community college leaders:

You’re here to serve a community, and to educate and train them so they can have a livable wage and a higher standard of living… Child care is really a big challenge and, next to financial need, that was always one of the higher needs… There are so many issues and other reasons for students to drop out, and so when we find them, we try to pick them off where we can.

— CFCC President Jim Morton

Parents’ child care needs do not stop when young children enter school. At , school-age children of students and staff can attend after-school programming through an on-site partnership with Boys & Girls Club of America.

Students also often need evening or weekend care. Additionally, students might need or prefer access to family child care homes, which are more likely to meet those needs at irregular hours, and family, friend, and neighbor care.

Asking students about their caregiving roles and needs is a crucial first step in supporting parenting students, the New America report found. Then, colleges should use those insights to design their approaches both for direct service provision and financial support.

Utilizing the state’s unique child care grant program

Child care costs make it harder for student parents to afford college. , released in September 2025, provides a new way for colleges and policymakers to think about affordability by including costs outside of tuition, including child care.

In 2019, the organization’s “dispelled the myth that a student can still work their way through college in a minimum-wage job.” Then the organization decided to look at the finances of student parents, aiming to calculate “the actual annual cost of pursuing a degree.”

In North Carolina, child care and other costs like housing and transportation mean community college parenting students pay, on average, $16,700 more per year than their non-parenting peers.

When taking into account these costs relative to student income and other grant supports, the average affordability gap for student parents in the state is $19,645, which would require 54.2 hours of work per week at minimum wage to close. That’s compared to an affordability gap for non-parenting students of $2,993, which would require 8.3 hours of work per week at minimum wage to close.

North Carolina is one of only five states that allocates funding for child care grants for community college students.

In 2024-25, the state allotted just over $3 million for the , distributed across all 58 community colleges. Each college received a base $20,000 allotment, plus $10.16 per full-time equivalent student the college was budgeted to serve. Eighty-four percent of the funding was spent, up from about 77% in the 2023-24 year. The average grant award was $3,726.34, and 737 students received funding.

Not all of the funding was used in the 2024-25 fiscal year, but $211,000 more in grant funding was disbursed than in the previous year.

The grants can help students pay for licensed or unlicensed care from individuals or organizations. Grant funds can cover the cost of child care provided by nannies, relatives, after-school programs, and licensed and unlicensed providers, but not parents themselves. Students must provide an invoice after child care services are provided that passes “a reasonable test for cost.”

Colleges are supposed to work with local social services agencies that distribute child care subsidy funding to coordinate aid for students. Colleges should not require official documentation of students’ subsidy application and denial if it creates a barrier or is too time-consuming, Brenda Burgess, associate director of student aid at community college system, told EdNC.

The timing of the state budget and the reimbursement model make it challenging for colleges to get all available funds to student parents. For example, when a budget is not passed by the time classes start in August, community colleges do not receive the grant funds until after the semester begins. Once they do, some parents have made other arrangements. A community college system said the delays cause some students to postpone enrollment.

The same report states that having to reimburse students or providers after services are given creates challenges. Students often cannot afford to make up-front payments, even if reimbursed down the line, and child care providers rely on timely payments.

Some colleges are tweaking policies and taking advantage of the grant program’s flexibilities to ensure the grants reach the students who need them and do not cause unnecessary stress for students, providers, or college staff. Read more about how colleges can make the grant work best:

Training child care teachers, launching academies

Community colleges do not just support the child care needs of their own students. They also expand child care capacity by serving as the main sites for the education and training of the early childhood workforce, including child care professionals.

There were 5,524 students enrolled in the early childhood education curriculum program across North Carolina community colleges , up 5% from the year before and nearly reaching pre-pandemic enrollment levels.

North Carolina is home to several programs that provide financial assistance to early childhood professionals looking to further their education, most often at community colleges. , from the nonprofit , assist child care teachers with the cost of tuition for associate, bachelor’s, and master’s degrees. , from the same organization, provides wage supplements for child care teachers based on their education level. , expanded and financially supported by a recent effort called , provide pathways for new and seasoned early childhood teachers to work and go to school at the same time while increasing their compensation.

Beyond providing multiple early childhood curriculum programs, community colleges also offer alternatives for individuals to receive the , which is required to be a lead teacher in a licensed child care classroom.

With the industry , fast-track options called “child care academies” emerged in the last two years as another quick and affordable option for individuals interested in working in child care.

In September 2025, at least 11 of these academies operating across the state, which prepare teachers through anywhere from 20 to 64 hours of class time to enter the classroom at little to no cost to the participant. These models were started and operated by a combination of community colleges and local early childhood organizations like Smart Start partnerships and Child Care Resource & Referral (CCR&R) agencies. Most were partnerships between at least two of these institutions.

These academies differ depending on local priorities. Some academies, which EdNC’s analysis described as the “classroom-ready model,” give individuals what they need to start working in the classroom, including providing basic health and safety training and covering criminal background checks required to work in licensed settings.

A second approach to these academies, described by EdNC’s analysis as the “teaching credential model,” takes the basic training from the classroom-ready model and adds coursework from EDU 119, the introductory early childhood community college course. This model gives teachers a continuing education credit (EDU 3119) that they can then build upon at any community college and provides teachers with the credential required to be a lead teacher.

In December, the state Division of Child Development and Early Education, under the N.C. Department of Health and Human Services, with 16 institutions of higher education — 13 of which are community colleges — to launch new child care academies. Each institution is expected to operate at least three academies through July 2026. The models are funded through the federal .

“North Carolina’s early learning system depends on a strong, well-prepared workforce, and the Child Care Academies are designed to meet that need head on,” said DHHS Deputy Secretary for Opportunity and Well-Being Michael Leighs . “By providing free high-quality training, we’re opening doors for new educators while supporting families and ensuring children across our state have access to safe and nurturing care.”

The following colleges received funding to start academies:

• Appalachian State University
• Bladen Community College
• Central Carolina Community College
• Central Piedmont Community College
• Davidson-Davie Community College
• Durham Technical Community College
• Elizabeth City State University
• Forsyth Technical Community College
• Guilford Technical Community College
• Montgomery Community College
• Nash Community College
• Pitt Community College
• Roanoke-Chowan Community College
• Sandhills Community College
• The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
• Wilson Community College

Shifting culture

The New America research project of 10 community colleges’ approaches to supporting parenting students’ child care needs led to recommendations and for .

In addition to models like on-campus care and subsidies, the project recommended several ways to integrate child care and family-friendly policies into colleges’ overall approaches.

Colleges, the researchers write, should include child care when writing their strategic plans and equity goals. They should collect data on students’ caregiving roles and needs. And they should consider centralizing child care services and/or coordinating with student services like housing referrals, food assistance, and transportation help.

“Such models ensure parenting students aren’t left to piece together services on their own,” the report says. “They address the reality of time poverty and can improve retention and completion.”

The report references Forsyth Tech’s as an example of a one-stop shop that improves student parents’ experiences accessing several kinds of support.

Maya Clay, a Forsyth Tech student parent , said the support of SPARC and Shanta Reddick, director of and adult learner success, “was like hope brightening my future.”

“Being able to have somebody in your corner, who just wasn’t there to support you financially but emotionally, and like making sure you’re successful, and being able to link you to other resources, makes being a student parent here so different,” Clay said.

Partnering with early childhood support organizations and adopting family-friendly policies make a difference in campus culture and student success, according to the New America research project.

In North Carolina, some colleges are co-locating or partnering with Smart Start partnerships and CCR&R agencies. These organizations’ staff have expertise in connecting parents with child care options and other family resources.

Forsyth Tech’s Reddick has a close relationship with a local CCR&R coordinator, which, the New America report found, facilitates “warm hand-offs and personalized referrals.”

(BCC) is using a former elementary school to co-locate Bladen Smart Start’s headquarters and the college’s culinary and agribusiness programs. Additionally, four classrooms have been set aside with future plans for child care for the children of parents.

The effort is the result of collaboration between BCC, the Bladen County Board of Commissioners,  (BCS), and .

The New America research says family-friendly policies beyond child care are also important, including virtual options for students when child care arrangements fall through and clarification on when children are welcome on campus.

In addition to providing after-school care for students’ families and community members, is also the only community college in the state designated a employer, a certification workplaces receive when their policies reflect best practices in early childhood and family well-being.

The certification, the effort’s website reads, “is not just a badge. It’s a marker on your journey to create a family friendly workplace, and sends a clear message: you care about your employees, their families, and their children — the future workforce of North Carolina.”

Sandhills has prioritized creating a family-friendly workplace by providing after-school and drop-in care, paid parental leave, flexible work options, among other policies.

“Invest in your employees, their values, and their families, and they’re going to work harder for you. It’s a pretty simple concept,” said Taylor McCaskill, the college’s senior director of workforce development and corporate partnerships, as reported by Alexandra Quintero.

Sandhills also has plans to open a Center for Excellence in Child Care through a partnership between the college, (the local Smart Start partnership for Moore County), Southern Pines Land & Housing Trust, and the Moore County Chamber of Commerce.

The project, which is still in the fundraising stages, would renovate two buildings. One would be a high-quality child care program to serve the neighborhood and act as a lab school for community college students studying early childhood to observe best practices and gain hands-on experience in the classroom. The second building would house both early childhood faculty from the community college and the staff of Partners for Children & Families. Co-locating the staff would help to provide coordinated wrap-around family support, said Stuart Mills, executive director of Partners for Children & Families.

Mills emphasized that the project is born out of an ongoing, close partnership between the organization and the college, and is just one example of the ways they collaborate. Smart Start staff provide training at the local child care academies, some of which are housed at the community college. Two members of the college staff serve on the organization’s board of directors. And both Partners for Children & Families and the college are leading members of the local Chamber of Commerce’s Child Care Task Force, which is working on long-term child care solutions for the entire community.

Community college faculty and leaders are participating in similar local task forces across the state. The task forces are often hosted and convened by chambers of commerce.

Community colleges have a role in advocating for systemic solutions, , one of the New America researchers.

“By supporting early education advocacy in their communities, they can help secure the child care infrastructure that both parenting students and their employees need,” Baker writes.

When community college child care efforts are supported by outside funding, they can be powerful tools for colleges in their roles as employers, as educational institutions, and as community anchors, state leaders say. Utilizing the capacity of educational institutions, including community colleges, is part of the approach of working on long-term child care solutions that strengthen families and the state economy.

Samantha Cole, child care business liaison at the North Carolina Department of Commerce, said the task force has found that these efforts are working well for those participating, but are “hyper-localized” in funding source, design, and reach.

Cole said more peer-to-peer collaboration between colleges could help scale effective approaches to other communities.

“It’s not like you’re hearing that there’s a ton of external communication about the successes of these projects and programs,” Cole said at the December meeting of the task force. “We’d certainly like to see more of that. We think it might help encourage other campuses.”

Editor’s note: This article includes previous reporting by Mebane Rash, Katie Dukes, and Sophia Luna.

This first appeared on and is republished here under a .

For years, Minnesota has been investigating the fraudulent use of state and federal dollars in child care and other social services programs, which and have led to prosecutions. But the allegations have now by the Trump administration and have drawn more attention after a viral video from a right-wing influencer who claimed, without evidence, to have found federally funded child care centers without children in them.

What exactly the Trump administration is changing is not yet completely clear. In a on Dec. 30, 2025 to the social platform X, Department of Health and Human Services Deputy Secretary Jim O’Neill wrote, “We have frozen all child care payments to the state of Minnesota” and in a video that the agency had “activated our Defend the Spend system for all ACF [Administration for Children and Families] child care payments across America,” and that it will “require a justification, receipt or photo evidence before we make a payment.”

Days later, the administration that it is also freezing access to funding for the Child Care Development Fund (CCDF), a key source of federal funding for child care subsidies, as well as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and Social Services Block Grant money in five states — California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota and New York — and Biden-era rules that urged states to pay child care providers more similarly to how parents pay out of pocket. On Jan. 8, the five states against the move, saying the administration failed to adequately justify it, and on Jan. 9, a temporary restraining order blocking implementation of the freeze by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

In response to a request for comment and clarification about the Defend the Spend changes to CCDF from �鶹��Ʒ, HHS spokesperson Emily Hillard wrote in an email, “The onus is on the state to provide additional verification, and until they do so, HHS will not allow the state to draw down their matching funds for the CCDF program.” The matching funds Hillard mentioned represent all remaining funds that Congress appropriated after states get their mandatory tranches, but sent last week to state agencies about the new requirements makes no mention of the additional verification applying only to matching funds, nor does it mention requiring receipts and photographs. Hillard said the additional justification required from states will not be as extensive as what ����’s requiring from the Minnesota centers it suspects of committing fraud. She did not respond to additional clarifying questions.

This is not the first time the Trump administration has imposed extra justifications on child care funding, but it could be a much heavier burden than it was before. In early 2025, Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) effort imposed what it called “Defend the Spend” on both CCDF and . In April 2025, state agencies that disperse CCDF funds to child care providers were told they had to provide “justification,” including “a description of the award and what you plan to do with the funds,” through a website when requesting the grant money that Congress had already appropriated for the program. At the time, it led to delays in the funding flowing to states, and in at least one state the delay caused providers to lay off staff or pay staff late.

But Ruth Friedman, senior fellow at The Century Foundation who served as director of the Office of Child Care at ACF under former President Joe Biden, said that requiring receipts and photographs is much more than what states had to share in the spring. “It’s super concerning,” she said, because these appear to be materials “that states are not currently required to necessarily have on hand.” If that’s the case, and the new process “requires new burdensome mandates to states,” she said, “that will lead to significant delays in payments.” 

That would mean many child care programs could go without being reimbursed for services they’ve already provided, potentially leaving them unable to pay rent or make payroll. Friedman said she is aware of states that have already experienced delays in getting funds due to the new Defend the Spend requirements. “It’s an attack on families and ����’s an attack on child care,” Friedman said.

It’s also redundant, as Friedman laid out. There are a number of systems in place to detect fraud and vet spending in the CCDF system. States have to conduct annual audits of child care providers, she said, and they have to submit quarterly financial reports to HHS as well as improper payment reports every three years. Every three years, states also have to submit lengthy plans to the federal government laying out how they will follow its rules, which are reviewed by HHS before states can get any money. States with high levels of improper payments are put on a payment plan and subjected to more careful monitoring. States are also required to have systems to detect and investigate fraud, and to impose sanctions whenever ����’s found. The national improper payment rate — which could include fraud as well as mistakes like underpaying providers — for CCDF was in 2023.

In May 2025, the Defend the Spend requirement ended for CCDF, but it has stayed in place for Head Start programs. When a Head Start program administrator goes into the payment management system to draw down the money their program has already been awarded, requiring that they justify the money, although they haven’t had to submit receipts or photographs. 

Previously, dollars would typically show up in a Head Start program’s account 24 hours after the request was submitted. But with Defend the Spend in place, there have been reports of delays, said Katie Hamm, who served as deputy assistant secretary for early childhood development at ACF under Biden. “One thing that has been consistent is that every month there’s a couple of programs for whom it takes two weeks, and that really puts programs in a bind,” Hamm said.

Programs can’t hold onto the money for more than three days and must make requests for funds they need to use immediately, so any delays are difficult to absorb. Some have had to start shutdown procedures, alerting staff and parents that they might have to close imminently, Hamm said, although she didn’t know of any that have actually had to shut down. The extra steps, and the delays they have caused, come despite the fact that programs’ budgets must be approved before they receive the grants in the first place, and are audited annually.

On top of reinstituting Defend the Spend for CCDF and freezing child care payments to Minnesota, the Trump administration planned to freeze key federal funding for child care and family assistance in five states, before a court order prevented the freeze on Friday. 

In nearly identical letters ACF sent to California, Colorado, Illinois and New York on Jan. 6, shared with the 74, the administration claimed it is “concerned by the potential for extensive and systemic fraud” in the states’ CCDF programs and has reason to believe that the states are “illicitly providing illegal aliens with CCDF benefits intended for American citizens and lawful permanent residents.” ACF is therefore, the letters said, placing the states “on temporarily restricted drawdown of CCDF funds until additional fiscal accountability requirements are implemented and necessary information is provided.” Those requirements include submitting verified, non-identifiable attendance documentation for children who receive subsidies. 

States are not currently required to give attendance information to HHS, Friedman said, and the requested information may not even be something they already collect. “I don’t think they’re going to have it on hand, and I don’t think ����’s necessarily an easy lift or a quick lift to get it,” she said. 

If the freeze eventually goes into effect, and states struggle to send ACF what ����’s asking for and cannot draw down CCDF funding, they won’t be able to pay providers who accept subsidies, most of whom have already provided the care they’re getting paid for. “It may be as severe as making them close their doors, it may mean they lose staff,” Friedman said. If the system becomes destabilized, providers may reconsider accepting subsidies at all and only enroll families who can pay out of pocket. “The child care sector, which is already teetering on the edge of crisis, becomes even more unstable,” Friedman said.

All of those outcomes would mean fewer child care options for families who can’t afford the full cost. Without care, “They may not be going to work the next day, they may lose their jobs,” Friedman said. 

The administration also announced other steps in reaction to the fraud allegations in Minnesota that are likely to financially hurt child care providers. In 2023, the Biden administration new rules to pay child care providers who accept federal vouchers more similarly to how parents pay out of pocket. It required that providers be paid based on enrollment so that they could count on steady payment even if children called out sick or skipped a day, and that they be paid upfront, rather than at the end of a month, so that the money better covered costs like rent and supplies. 

Without those changes, providers have to “eat the costs,” said Friedman, who worked on the rules, and get reimbursed after having already provided the services. Instead, the changes had state agencies eat that cost, which gave providers more stability and made the program resemble private pay practices. “These were really, really important reforms,” Friedman said. “If you have a $12 billion program, that program shouldn’t be adding to the child care crisis and adding to destabilization in the sector.”

Last week, HHS released a to rescind those changes, claiming it received feedback from several states and territories that the changes were “more costly and difficult to implement than HHS had estimated” and were “onerous,” with no mention of fraud as justification. But then the administration an announcement about the proposed rescission that claimed the Biden-era rules “weakened oversight and increased the risk of waste, fraud and abuse,” citing the fraud allegations in Minnesota. In a posted to X, O’Neill said the rules “weakened accountability and made fraud easier and not harder.” 

“They’re just outright lying,” Friedman said. But she fears that, while states are technically still allowed to pay providers upfront and for enrollment rather than attendance, the rhetoric around fraud will scare them off. “That will be devastating for providers,” she said. 

That day marks an important shift for her and other early care and education providers in Nebraska who serve low-income families. On that date, the state intended to begin paying providers a consistent rate for families who use government subsidies to pay for child care. 

Instead of reimbursing providers based on children’s attendance — which can vary wildly, especially this time of year, based on factors like illness and family travel — Nebraska would pay providers the same amount each month based on enrollment. 

Last year, because of the change expected to come in summer 2026, Hampson, who owns a home-based child care program in Lincoln, Nebraska, felt comfortable filling more of her program slots with children whose families pay with subsidies. Today, she does not have one private-paying family. She made the shift assuming the enrollment-based pay would insulate her from the instability that often accompanies subsidy slots. 

“I was super excited to know more of these families were going to get that quality, consistent care,” Hampson said, adding that reaching more low-income families is important in the field. “It’s not that providers don’t want to.”

Now, though, that could all be about to change. 

Nebraska’s transition to enrollment-based pay was part of an effort to get in compliance with a rule . Enrollment-based payments, that administration believed, would create greater predictability for providers, allowing them to serve more low-income families who need child care and, eventually, could entice more providers to participate in the subsidy program. 

The rule was one of a handful of changes made by the prior administration related to the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF), the primary federal program that states use to provide financial assistance to low-income families in need of child care. Other shifts include paying providers up front for child care, rather than reimbursing them the following month, and encouraging the use of grants and contracts with providers. timelines for implementing these changes have varied. As of September 2025, 24 states were paying based on enrollment, according to an by New America. For the others, the latest deadline granted was Aug. 1, 2026. 

Just this week, however, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, through the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), that it would seek to rescind many of the 2024 rules, returning these issues to states. 

The cannot be enforced right away. Under federal law, the agency is required to take public comments, review them, and use that input to make final decisions, noted Alex Adams, who leads ACF. He declined to give a timeline for any changes to take effect.

If approved, the changes would not “make any net new policy decisions,” he added. “It simply goes back to where we were prior to 2024 regulations.”

The administration wants to rescind the 2024 rules, he said, because all 50 states had requested waivers related to some or all of these rules due to budget constraints and other implementation challenges. 

“Any time 50 states are asking for a waiver from something,” Adams said, “it suggests to me that maybe the rule isn’t working as intended.”

He also noted that “attendance-verified payment,” rather than enrollment-based, “is more of a deterrent to fraud.” Leaders in the Trump administration are concerned about programs with “phantom attendance” — suggesting they receive government payments but don’t actually serve the children they say they do — Adams said, but he declined to share specifics of ongoing investigations. 

Many early care and education advocates and policy experts have that rampant fraud and abuse is going unchecked. 

Casey Peeks, senior director of early childhood policy at the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning think tank, called the allegations “unfounded” and worried that they would undo real progress made in the field in recent years. 

“It is very unhelpful and destabilizing to the sector, in the immediate- and long-term, to take some of these most foundational levers we have to stabilize the sector and claim that they result in fraud,” Peeks said.

Upon hearing the news this week, Hampson said she’s had to remind herself to “just breathe.” She knew she was taking a risk by enrolling 100% of families on subsidies.

Now, she said, she will have to rearrange her budget to continue to serve all of those families. Under an attendance-based pay structure, her income is just that much more volatile.

In December, for example, between holidays, vacation time and children’s absences, Hampson was only able to bill the state for 18 child care days. If the children in her program were from private-paying families, she would have been paid for 23 days, she said. 

But Hampson’s operational costs didn’t see a material decrease in December. 

“Without a provider being at fault at all, they could be at 50% attendance one day just because the flu is going around. That shouldn’t harm their bottom line,” Peeks said. 

“It’s really unpredictable and unfair for the provider,” she added. “Just because attendance is down doesn’t mean operation costs go down.”

In West Virginia, where providers have been paid based on enrollment since 2020, Katelyn Vandal emphasized how critical the change has been to keeping her rural, center-based program open. 

“Our mortgage payment doesn’t cost less because two kids in the classroom have the flu,” noted Vandal, director of A Place to Grow, a child care center in Oak Hill, West Virginia. Nor does her electricity bill and a host of other overhead costs. 

If her state returns to attendance-based pay, she’s not sure A Place to Grow would be able to continue operating. The center serves about 100 kids, with 60% from families that pay with subsidies. 

“We run such a fine budget line anyway that if, six months from now, we were going back to attendance, we would be looking at closing,” she said. “We would not survive transitioning back to that.”

Sheryl Hutzenbiler, owner of Munchkin Land Daycare in Billings, Montana, said she suspects that, under attendance-based pay, providers will either raise tuition rates on families — many of whom are already paying the maximum they can afford without one parent leaving the workforce — or, like Vandal, be forced to close their doors. 

But that is not a decision Hutzenbiler will have to face, should the Trump administration successfully restore attendance-based pay. Since she lives in Montana, where enrollment-based pay became in 2023, she and other providers in the state are protected from policy fluctuations at the federal level. 

That’s true for a , which have either passed laws protecting enrollment-based pay or have continued paying based on enrollment, on a temporary basis, since the pandemic. (West Virginia is in the latter category.)

Enrollment-based pay has been pivotal for Hutzenbiler, whose home-based program consists of about 60% of families who pay with subsidies. Back when she was paid based on attendance, she said her first sacrifice during low-attendance months would be her own wages. She would pay her full-time teacher first and make sure program costs were covered, often leaving nothing for herself and relying on her husband’s income instead. With the consistent subsidy income each month, though, she’s not only been able to avoid missed paychecks for herself, she’s been able to add two part-time workers to the payroll. 

Hampson, in Nebraska, said she was part of a group last year advocating for the state to pass around enrollment-based pay. It was ultimately unsuccessful.

“We wanted to know our state had already said yes, so we wouldn’t go backwards,” she said. “And here we are going backwards.”

In an industry where profit margins are at less than 1%, these changes will inevitably leave providers who participate in the subsidy program with less revenue to survive on. The shifts will likely also deter providers who participate in the subsidy program, or who might have considered participating, from doing so in the future, said Peeks. This will likely, in effect, leave low-income families with fewer choices about where to go for child care. 

“When you’re stabilizing providers overall, you’re often creating more options for families overall,” said Peeks. “I think it could definitely have a chilling effect.”

Colorado officials say money that helps 18,000 low-income families pay for child care could run out by Jan. 31 if federal officials don’t lift the freeze they’ve imposed on funding for several safety net programs in five Democrat-led states.

If that happens, some children could go without care and some parents would have to stay home from work. State lawmakers could cover such a funding gap temporarily, though Colorado is facing a significant budget crunch.

The Trump administration announced the freeze on $10 billion in child care and social services funding for Colorado, California, Illinois, Minnesota, and New York in a press release Monday.

In letters sent to the two Colorado agencies that run the affected programs, federal officials said they have “reason to believe that the State of Colorado is illicitly providing” benefits funded with federal dollars to “illegal aliens.”

The letters didn’t cite evidence for that claim and a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services didn’t respond to questions from Chalkbeat about why federal officials are concerned about fraud in Colorado.

Spokespeople from both state departments said by email on Tuesday they’re not aware of any federal fraud investigations focused on the programs affected by the funding freeze.

The five-state funding freeze follows a federal crackdown in Minnesota after a right-wing YouTuber posted a video in late December alleging that Minneapolis child care centers run by Somali residents get federal funds but serve no children. It’s not clear why the other four states have gotten the same treatment as Minnesota, but all have Democratic governors who have clashed with President Donald Trump.

In a New Year’s Eve social media post, Trump called Colorado Gov. Jared Polis “the Scumbag Governor” and said Polis and another Colorado official should “rot in hell” for mistreating Tina Peters, a Trump supporter and former Mesa County clerk who’s serving a nine-year prison sentence for orchestrating a plot to breach election systems.

The federal freeze will affect three main funding streams in Colorado that together bring in about $317 million a year. They include $138 million for the Colorado Department of Early Childhood for child care subsidies for low-income families and a few other programs.

The subsidy program, known as the Colorado Child Care Assistance program, helps cover the cost of care for more than 27,000 children so parents can work or take classes. It’s mostly funded by the federal government with smaller contributions from states and counties.

The other two frozen funding streams go to the Colorado Department of Human Services and pay for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF, and other programs.

In the letter to the Colorado Department of Early Childhood, federal officials outlined new fiscal requirements the state will have to follow before the funding freeze is lifted. They include attendance documentation — without names or other personal identifiers — for children in the child care subsidy program.

A state fact sheet issued in response to the funding freeze said funding for the child care subsidy program would be depleted by Jan. 31. It also outlined several measures already in place to prevent fraud or waste, including state audits, monthly case reviews by county officials, and efforts to recover funds if improper payments are made.

The state said it is exploring “all options, including legal avenues” to keep the frozen funding flowing.

Six Democratic state lawmakers, most in leadership positions, released a statement Tuesday afternoon calling the funding freeze a callous move that will make life more expensive for working families.

“We stand ready to work with Governor Polis and partners in our federal delegation to resist this lawless effort to freeze funding, and we sincerely hope that our Republican colleagues will put politics aside, get serious about making life in Colorado more affordable, and put families first,” the statement said in part.

The statement was from Speaker of the House Julie McCluskie; Senate President James Coleman; House Majority Leader Monica Duran; Senate Majority Leader Robert Rodriguez; Rep. Emily Sirota; and Sen. Judy Amabile.

Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.

By now, you may have seen the news that the Trump administration is ringing in 2026 by and implementing new administrative hoops for states to jump through in order to draw down any funding. There’s a lot going on here, and ����’s complicated, so I thought a primer would be helpful to get everyone on the same page.

How did this all start?

This story thanks to a viral video by conservative YouTube personality Nick Shirley. Shirley claimed that a handful of child care centers, primarily run by people of Somali heritage, were running fraudulent operations with no kids inside. It may not shock you to hear that these assertions and , but the damage was done: the video has been viewed over 100 million times, and was amplified by powerful figures like Elon Musk and Vice President JD Vance. (Update: Since Shirley’s video went viral, The Minnesota Department of Children, Youth, and Families conducted compliance checks on nine child care centers in the video and that they were “operating as expected,” and that children were present at all but one, which wasn’t open for families during inspection.)

What Shirley seems to be doing is trying to make new hay out of an old story. There were allegations of substantial child care fraud in Minnesota . A that year from the state’s Office of the Legislative Auditor found that fraud was nowhere near the epidemic levels being claimed, but that there were significant weaknesses in the state’s anti-fraud controls. That mini-scandal helped lead to , to tighten anti-fraud measures around child care subsidies, and from the federal Administration for Children and Families including an audit launched in 2023 under the Biden Administration. In short — much like the Feeding Our Families food assistance fraud ring which began to be broken up years ago and has to dozens to criminal charges — this is being dredged up and repackaged in service of political aims.

Alas, those facts don’t seem to matter much. I’ll leave it to others to unpack the and , because motivations or pretext aside, the Administration is acting the way ����’s acting.

What does the funding freeze mean in practice?

I need to get a bit technical for a moment. The main federal child care funding source is the Child Care Development Fund, or CCDF. The way CCDF money actually flows from federal government bank accounts to state government bank accounts (which states then tap to issue monthly payments to providers for each child that is enrolled in the state’s subsidy system) is through the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Payment Management System, or PMS. States essentially submit regular requests to draw down money that has been allocated to them via PMS, the request is approved, and the bank transfer occurs. What HHS is saying they are going to do is put new steps in place between the request and the disbursement.

We have some idea of what this may look like, because earlier in the year HHS did a back when DOGE was busy DOGE-ing. Here is a relevant section of a webinar held for Head Start grantees:

In the announcement, it was shared that the payment management system, which was also known as PMS and used by recipients to request a drawdown of their awarded funds will be implementing a new mandatory field at the sub-account level. This new mandatory field requests a payment justification explaining the purpose of the requested funds. To support this request the Administration for Children and Families has asked that all requests for federal funding specifically outline the purpose and the use of the funds as they will now be made public in an effort to promote transparency and accountability.

To receive an approval of your payment requests, recipients will be required to summarize the use of the funds in alignment with their approved funding requests. If these approved activities or the use of the funds should be related to what has already been awarded through your baseline application, your continuation application, or any amendment request that has been approved, amendment requests may come in the form of a budget revision, a one-time supplement or a carryover.

Recipients are to provide short summaries outlining the purpose of the funds and include details for each cost category as provided on your notice of award. Just as a quick, gentle reminder, your notice of award is released in grant solutions to your assigned point of contact. One thing to note is that any failure to provide proper descriptions with your payment request may result in significant approval delays.

If your eyes haven’t glazed over reading that, here’s the takeaway: ����’s a lot more work for state agencies, and a lot more opportunities for the Administration to say “no.” And this was just for Head Start, which is a relatively easy program to get one’s hands around because the money just flows from the federal government to Head Start sponsors, of which there are only about 1,600 nationwide. Child care subsidies flow from the feds to states, and from states through families to a myriad of private for-profit and non-profit child care programs, constituting a network of tens of thousands of end users. And state agencies that oversee child care meeting existing verification and compliance standards!

What are the potential consequences?

In a word: delays. Delays in drawing down funds are going to lead to delays in states getting payments out the door (something many states struggle ) which are going to lead to child care programs unable to make payroll or pay rent, which are going to lead to programs limiting or even ending operations. This isn’t hypothetical: During the pandemic, many states struggled to get aid out the door to child care providers, and . We also saw what can happen when, in 2023, Illinois :

CHICAGO — Some Illinois childcare providers have been forced to close their doors after they did not receive their paychecks from the state.

Childcare workers across the state are still waiting for their monthly paychecks, which they should have received at the beginning of January.

But 19 days later and many are unable to pay bills and are closing their doors until that money comes in.

“I got a license through the state of Illinois to be a childcare provider and take care of children and help families in need,” Kandanise Ramseur said. “And now I’m in need.”

Similarly, the Minnesota Reformer from Minnesota center director Amanda Schillinger, “who said that her center will shut down if it loses the 75% of children it cares for whose families receive government help for child care.”

I wrote to explain in more detail what we could see:

1) Most child care programs operate on shoestring budgets (child care is a necessarily expensive service to provide because child:adult ratios are kept low, so fixed staff costs are very high despite educators barely making above poverty wages). Any extra delay in payments can easily create a fiscal crisis where programs are unable to make payroll, pay rent, etc., and that can lead to service pauses / closures — we saw this happen during the pandemic when states struggled to get PPP and CARES Act funding out the door.

2) Programs that take kids using child care subsidy don’t *only* serve low-income kids. Many serve families across the income spectrum, so a center may have everyone from grocery store stockers to heart surgeons relying on them — which means disrupting service is going to have negative ripple effects up and down the economy, and across all sorts of jobs we were calling essential just a few years ago.

3) Though this all started with a focus on one community, families throughout the country rely on child care subsidies — in red states and blue, urban and rural and suburban areas, farmers and miners and factory workers alike. Weakening America’s already-neglected child care system will hurt America’s families. 1.4 *million* kids receive subsidies.

4) This isn’t even just about the youngest children — federal child care funds also support hundreds of thousands of school-aged kids in affording after-school and summer care, and therefore also impacts the viability of after-school and summer programs.

Happy New Year to America’s families!

What can be done?

In case this post feels too dispassionate, let me be clear: I’m furious. We’re watching one of the most Administrations in American history use a YouTuber’s crappy excuse for an exposé as part of a larger effort to demonize a particular immigrant group — and now they are going to punish millions of American families across the country who have done nothing wrong but are collateral damage in an attempt to deflect from failed, unpopular policies.

However, I don’t think the way I can best serve you all — and kids and families and child care providers across the country — is by stamping my foot. I am grateful for the foot-stampers out there who are already mounting a . I want you to understand what is happening, why it is happening, and what it means, so that you can spread the word.

Because that’s what we need right now. Swamp the invective with a focus on the real impacts on real families across America. Call your Congresspeople. Talk to your friends and family members. This episode has revealed that there are still about the of how in this country.

Fraud is unacceptable. We should say that, too. In fact, the best way to minimize child care fraud is to have a simple, robustly funded child care system with well-funded state capacity to provide support and oversight to providers, and strong guardrails against profiteering. Instead, we have a byzantine system of welfare and for-profit mechanisms smashed together, combined with hollowed-out state capacity — and then we pretend to be shocked when the broken thing breaks.

But right now, this isn’t really a story about fraud. Right now, this is a story about millions of American households — both those that rely directly on child care aid and those that don’t — that are about to take yet another blow to their well-being. The Administration’s actions here are needless, callous, and destructive: they should be pressured to release all child care funds ASAP.

“It’s pretty grim,” said Natalie Renew, executive director of Home Grown, a national initiative committed to improving the quality of and access to home-based child care, about the outlook for the sector.

“I don’t think anyone is particularly optimistic about child care” in the new year, added Daniel Hains, chief policy and professional advancement officer at the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). 

A handful of early care and education experts noted that 2025 did herald in a number of key victories in the field. 

Some states in policies shaping child care and early childhood education. In 2025, , and were among those that made new investments in the field. New Mexico took its gains in recent years a step further by free universal child care for all families, regardless of income, beginning last November. 

Alongside those wins for early learners and their caregivers came some challenges. Head Start was caught in political crosshairs more than once throughout the year — first when it was for elimination, then when many of its regional offices across the country were , and later when programs serving thousands of children nearly lost access to services during the prolonged government shutdown. And some states, such as Indiana, by the end of federal pandemic relief dollars, began to for families and programs, slashing provider reimbursement rates, instituting co-pays for families who use subsidies, and changing subsidy eligibility, among other actions. 

Now, those experts say, the that many states have experienced as historic pandemic-era investments expired is going to run headlong into another kind of budget shortfall in 2026. That’s one of four main issues they said they’ll be watching in early care and education in the new year. 

1. Child Care Spending: States Begin Tightening the Belt

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act that was signed into law in July 2025 includes significant cuts to Medicaid and SNAP. The cuts effectively shift the costs of those programs from the federal government to states. If states decide to pick up the tab, they’ll likely have to pull back on other services.

Most of the cuts won’t go into effect until after the 2026 midterm elections, but states will start planning ahead. 

“It’s less painful to do it slowly than all at once,” explained Melissa Boteach, chief policy officer at ZERO TO THREE. 

Unlike the federal government, states can’t spend more than they earn; they have to balance their budgets. So they’ll be looking for ways to increase revenue, such as through new taxes, or cut costs by eliminating or scaling back programs and services. 

“Uncertainty is the word,” said Aaron Loewenberg, senior policy analyst at New America. “There’s a lot of anxiety and uncertainty at this point about what the next year or two could look like.”

As states look to reduce costs, they will have fewer dollars to invest in early care and education. Certainly the prospect of bold new projects and initiatives seems less likely, experts said, but ����’s also possible that existing programs could be scaled back. 

What will emerge, said Hains of NAEYC, is a divide between states that have the will and resources to fund ECE, and states that don’t. 

“We’re going to be looking at two very different countries: States that have revenue to invest in child care and early learning — [like] Vermont, New Mexico, Connecticut, Montana — while other states are going to be in more constrained and challenging situations.”

Ultimately, funding cuts will be felt by children, families and early educators. 

“There’s no way to nickel and dime investing in children,” Boteach said. “At the end of the day, if we’re going to really transform outcomes for children and families, it requires resources. … Children in this country are going to suffer because we are disinvesting rather than investing in their future.”

2. Expanding Access: Can Promises of Universal Child Care Be Fulfilled? 

New Mexico’s pledge of free, universal child care has buoyed the spirits of many early childhood educators and advocates. 

“It’s an enormous bright spot in an otherwise very difficult year,” Boteach said.

The initiative is in its early days — the income limitation was lifted on Nov. 1, 2025 — so this year will offer state leaders a chance to make good on their promise. Early childhood policy experts will be watching closely. 

Loewenberg of New America said he’ll be looking at how leaders navigate in the system, whether families feel ����’s successful, and how such a policy could be replicated in states that don’t have the oil and gas revenues that New Mexico uses to fund universal child care. 

Meanwhile, all eyes will be on New York City as Mayor Zohran Mamdani settles into his new role and pursues his own for universal child care. 

“I’m holding out excitement or negativity to wait and see what happens,” said Loewenberg. “I think we’re past the point of saying, ‘This is great because people are talking about it.’ The difficult work is being able to make it work. That remains to be seen.”

One critical step is working out the funding mechanism for universal child care, which will likely require from the state government. 

Hains does find the policy pledge in itself encouraging. 

“Reflecting back on the last decade or two in this work, how amazing is it that we are at a place where mayors and governors are putting forward real, meaningful proposals of child care as a public good that’s available to everybody?” Hains said. “As a whole, looking at the big picture, ����’s exciting that child care feels like something that elected officials can deliver on.”

3. Workforce Instability: Immigration Enforcement Creates Chilling Effect

In 2025, the Trump administration intensified immigration enforcement, which has had deleterious consequences for early childhood educators and, in turn, the families who rely on them.

An estimated early childhood educators are immigrants. In large urban areas, such as New York, Los Angeles and Chicago, immigrants make up of the child care workforce, Boteach pointed out. 

New America, a left-leaning think tank, released a in December that found a strong association between the increase in ICE activity and the number of foreign-born child care workers: Between February and July 2025, as ICE arrests increased after President Trump took office, there were 39,000 fewer foreign-born child care workers than the same period in 2024. 

With more funding for immigration enforcement, detention and deportation included in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the trend is expected to continue in 2026. 

“Immigration enforcement, to me, right now, is the number one disruptor both to parent behavior and provider behavior,” said Renew of Home Grown. “It is hugely disruptive.” 

Because arrests have been , they have created a culture of fear among immigrants, even those with legal status in the country, New America found. And now that are fair game for ICE activity — prior to Trump’s second term, they were protected under a “sensitive locations” exception — many educators and parents worry about what may unfold before children’s eyes. 

“The amount of stress, the amount of worry about targeting in your community, can affect providers’ mental health and then the health of those kids in their care,” Boteach said. 

In effect, the escalation in immigration enforcement may impact both the availability and the quality of early care and education, she added.

4. Bright Spots: Solutions Emerge Amid Challenges

Even in a challenging political and budgetary environment, there are bright spots to keep an eye on in 2026. 

For one, Loewenberg pointed out, Head Start is still a viable, funded federal program. A year ago, that was not a sure thing.

A second is that a number of states with protected revenue streams for early care and education, including New Mexico and Vermont, will continue to invest in the field. Others are jumping in to commit more dollars to the sector — , and among them.  

Finally, early care and education is proving to be a viable campaign issue. In addition to Mamdani’s victory in New York, Mikie Sherrill of New Jersey and Abigail Spanberger of Virginia both won their gubernatorial races by talking about child care. 

“You’re seeing in the elections that candidates that ran on child care, ran on helping families and children, won,” Boteach said. “These are winning political issues, which means both parties should be vying to talk about these issues and govern on these issues.”

Indeed, Hains feels that the country is moving from a place of “whether” child care is a government responsibility to “how” and how much the government should be involved.

WASHINGTON — States must now provide “justification” that federal child care funds they receive are spent on “legitimate” providers in order to get those dollars, President Donald Trump’s administration announced. 

The Tuesday shift in policy came followingwhich prompted the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to freeze all child care payments to the state. 

HHS could not offer many specifics on how the review process will play out for other states, but clarified that the money in question is provided through the multibillion-dollar federal Child Care and Development Fund, or CCDF. 

“States will be required to provide documentation, such as written justification, receipts, or photographic evidence, demonstrating that funds are supporting legitimate child care providers,” Emily Hilliard, a spokesperson for HHS, said in a statement to States Newsroom on Wednesday. 

CCDF provides federal funding to states, territories and tribes to help low-income families obtain child care. 

The program, administered within the Office of Child Care under HHS’ Administration for Children and Families, combines funding from the Child Care and Development Block Grant, or CCDBG, and the Child Care Entitlement to States, or CCES. 

Funding for CCDF in  stood at roughly $12.3 billion — comprising $8.75 billion from CCDBG and $3.55 billion from CCES. 

Head Start — a separate program that provides early childhood education, nutritious meals, health screenings and other support services to low-income families — does not appear to be affected. 

In a Tuesday  announcing the move, Health and Human Services Deputy Secretary Jim O’Neill said he had “activated our defend the spend system for all ACF payments” and “starting today, all ACF payments across America will require a justification and a receipt or photo evidence before we send money to a state.” 

He clarified in a  shortly after that “funds will be released only when states prove they are being spent legitimately.” 

Funds undergo ‘regular audits’

“Federal funding enables millions of parents in every state and Congressional district to access and afford quality child care,” Sarah Rittling, executive director of First Five Years Fund, a federal advocacy group, said in a Wednesday statement. 

Rittling added that “these funds are essential to the nation’s well-being, allowing parents to work while ensuring their children are cared for and safe.” 



She also described the reports of potential fraud as “deeply concerning” and pointed out that “state oversight through regular audits is required by law to ensure that every dollar intended to protect and support young children is used properly and effectively.” 

“At the same time, we must ensure that nothing takes away from making sure funds for child care continue to reach the children and families who depend on them,” she said.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Minnesota Reformer maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor J. Patrick Coolican for questions: info@minnesotareformer.com.