Skip to main content

By Shira Small

Across the country, parents, providers, and Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) administrators are struggling with a child care sector that doesn’t fully meet families’ needs or support the child care workforce. To discuss the state of child care, key progress that has been made, and the work yet to be done, we brought together a virtual panel of child care experts for a webinar series in October in partnership with Economic Policy Institute’s Economic Analysis and Research Network. These experts were:

To build on the knowledge and insight they offered during the webinar, this Q&A uplifts the panelists’ reflections on how their states are strengthening the child care sector and addressing the inequities that make child care less accessible for people of color and people with low incomes. Policy must be informed by people directly impacted by it, and we are grateful that our panelists were willing to share their perspectives on the change needed to create a more equitable, accessible, and affordable child care system.

Question for the full panel: We know that the state of child care is challenging across the country, though the needs of families and the workforce differ state to state. What does child care access look like in your state or community?

Belvie: Although Delaware boasts a mixed delivery system offering families choices, the demand for quality child care outweighs the supply. According to the Rodel Foundation, as of May 2024 the total licensed capacity statewide was 53,640 but the estimated number of children aged zero to nine was 109,075. The annual price for center-based infant care in Delaware is $14,995 or $1,250 per month, and $10,146 for home-based infant care or $846 per month. To put these figures into perspective, the annual in-state undergraduate tuition for Delaware State University is currently $8,358! We’re currently enhancing the state eligibility system to include a child care waitlist function.

Carol: The pandemic shined a light on the huge need for affordable child care, but that need was huge before and it still is. We estimate that Mississippi is currently only serving about 30 percent of the children in families who qualify for child care assistance. This means a huge increase in public funding is needed to serve more eligible families. Our state doesn’t invest in CCDF (beyond the required state match) or Head Start, and we don’t have a statewide pre-K program. So, we push for increased investment in CCDF, such as using federal TANF welfare funds, and workforce funds, that can be used to expand services to serve more eligible families.

Charis: Child care access is a significant obstacle to Ohio women participating in the workforce. A lot of parents and mothers can’t stay in the workforce because there is no child care for them. For single-income families, the lack of affordable care can make a parent stay home and need government assistance, when affordable child care would help them stay in the workforce. There are families I know that barter, staying at work longer so their employer takes a little off their child care costs, in order to pay their bills. And it’s not fair that you have to stay away from your family longer to try to afford care.

Kristi: In New Orleans, child care access remains a critical challenge, particularly for low-income families. Programs like Early Head Start, Louisiana’s Child Care Assistance Program, and City Seats aim to expand access, but limited funding and a shortage of high-quality centers create barriers. Initiatives like the Early Childhood Education Fund provide critical support, yet the demand far exceeds available resources. Providers also face staffing shortages and low wages, impacting their ability to meet community needs. Expanding investments in subsidized seats, increasing teacher pay, and supporting infrastructure improvements are essential to ensuring all families can access affordable, quality child care.

Question for Belvie: As an administrator, what do you think needs to happen to create sustainable change within child care?

To witness a sustainable change in the child care sector it will take more than funding! We need to shift the paradigm and the way we think about child care. The initial way to do so is to change the language we use. Instead of using the term “child care,” we need to refer to the industry in broader terms such as the use of the term “early care and education.” My belief is that once the paradigm shift takes place, early care and education professionals will become a part of the country’s K-12 system and will receive the same salaries and benefits that [those educators] receive. Unless and until we make this complete paradigm shift and begin to think about early care and education in this broader way rather than simply “child care,” the system will remain a broken one.

Question for Carol: What is one accomplishment you are most proud of in your work over the last few years that improved child care in Mississippi?

That is an easy question – there is absolutely no contest for the answer! Last year we succeeded in removing a child support requirement from our state’s child care assistance program. We worked 19 years for this. The state imposed a requirement that was not federally required, that single parents had to cooperate with child support enforcement in order to qualify for child care assistance. This policy deterred the parents who needed child care assistance most. Since this change went into effect, the state has reported that over 17,000 children have gotten child care assistance who wouldn’t have qualified to receive assistance before this change.

Question for Charis: What do you, as a parent and advocate, think is most needed to get to transformative change that meets the needs of children and families?

Transparency. If parents have an ask, and policymakers can’t meet that ask, that needs to be said. Focus groups help give parents a voice and a seat at the table so there is no question what parents need and what we’re asking for. That way policymakers can see the information and the statistics about parents’ needs and move forward from there knowing what we want. Parents not having a seat at the table doesn’t just impact if we can afford child care, but it concerns the education and quality of care our children get. Transparency affects it all.

Question for Kristi: At CLASP, we know that the best policies and programs are crafted with the people who are most likely to be impacted by them. From your perspective, how can providers and parents be better centered in the policy-making process?

Providers and parents must have a seat at the table during policy discussions to ensure their lived experiences shape decisions. Establishing advisory councils that include diverse stakeholders, conducting focus groups, and holding community listening sessions are crucial steps. Policies should be informed by real-world challenges, such as workforce shortages and affordability. Simplifying feedback mechanisms and compensating participants for their time shows respect for their contributions. Transparent communication and accountability from policymakers are essential to build trust. When parents and providers are empowered as co-creators, policies are more likely to address the actual needs of families and the child care workforce.

To learn more, the full webinar is available to view here.

This statement can be attributed to Olivia Golden, interim executive director of the Center for Law and Social Policy

Washington, DC, December 23, 2024—On Saturday, President Biden signed a continuing resolution (CR) funding the federal government through March 14, 2025. After placing a prior bipartisan agreement at risk to provide easier passage for future tax cuts for billionaires, House Republicans finally introduced the CR just hours before a potential federal government shutdown on Friday.

In addition to continuing the core public services that were placed at risk by the possibility of a shutdown, we are pleased that the short-term budget signed by President Biden provides important disaster relief funds, including support for child care access in areas recently devastated by natural disasters. With the shortage of early educators and affordable, accessible child care in the affected states, the costs of disaster recovery are too significant for any one family or employer to address on their own.

However, we are concerned that this short-term budget stripped out other important provisions included in the earlier, bipartisan CR. For example, the final proposal fails to include a key provision that would have reimbursed Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program recipients for benefits stolen through no fault of their own. We remain deeply concerned that the House majority prioritized the possibility of tax cuts for billionaires over the needs of working people. Yet we remain committed to advocating for policies that center workers, reduce poverty, and address the institutional and racial barriers faced by communities of color.

CLASP and the Economic Policy Institute hosted a joint webinar on state progress in advancing equity in child care 

 

Tuesday, October 8, 2024

2:00pm ET/1:00pm CT

The Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP) and the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) hosted a webinar about equity in the child care and early education space. We were proud to co-sponsor this webinar with EPI’s Economic Analysis and Research Network (EARN) as part of their EARNTalk series. EARN is a nationwide network of research, policy, and advocacy organizations fighting, state by state, for an economy that works for everyone.

This virtual webinar features a child care provider, administrator, parent advocate, and nonprofit leader who will discuss the work happening across states to strengthen the child care sector and address the inequities that make child care particularly inaccessible for people of color and people with low incomes. The panel also reviews the current federal landscape for child care and what needs to change to help families access the care they need.

Speakers included:

Download and view the webinar recording with the passcode: 0%epN@Qk

 

 

Mark Greenberg worked at CLASP from 1988-2007 and was CLASP’s Director of Policy from 2001-2007. In the Obama Administration, he was Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and then Acting Assistant Secretary at the Administration for Children and Families. He is now a Deputy General Counsel at HHS’ Office of the General Counsel. His remarks are made in his personal capacity.

By Mark Greenberg

I can’t speak to much of CLASP history before 1988, but in the late 1980s and early 1990s, much of CLASP’s work around child care flowed from our work relating to the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program, the cash assistance program for families with low incomes and children that existed before TANF. In addition to enacting the Child Care and Development Block Grant in 1990, Congress had created separate programs to guarantee child care to families receiving AFDC, provide transitional child care to families leaving AFDC due to employment, and provide funding for families “at risk” of receiving AFDC. CLASP worked to help advocates and states understand how these programs could be used to help families access child care, to improve these programs, and to support “seamless service” for families in light of the many complexities of different programs with different rules.

When the 1996 welfare law passed, CLASP worked extensively to encourage states to make humane and family-supportive choices in TANF implementation, but it became apparent very quickly that the number of families receiving cash assistance was falling sharply. While we engaged in multiple efforts to preserve access to cash assistance, we also recognized that the drop in cash assistance spending provided a potentially historic opportunity to expand child care assistance to families to support parents’ work and child development. CLASP’s then-Executive Director, Alan Houseman, was very supportive of our efforts to increase our work around child care. Joan Lombardi, who had been the first Director of the Child Care Bureau (now the Office of Child Care) at the Department of Health and Human Services, began working with CLASP. Our first hire was Rachel Schumacher, and later Danielle Ewen, Jennifer Mezey, and Hannah Matthews joined the team. Katie Hamm was one of our early research assistants.

Our first major projects focused on explaining the law and describing child care-TANF intersections. We did reports on access to child care after leaving cash assistance, a report analyzing considerations in direct spending versus transferring TANF funds for child care, and a study of how states were using TANF to expand child care. Within a short period our work broadened to focus on attention to coordination with Head Start and pre-kindergarten, strategies to strengthen Head Start, and the potential use of both TANF and CCDF funds in support of state efforts to for universal pre-kindergarten efforts. We did a set of detailed state case studies and made recommendations to states and Congress for improving coordination of child care, Head Start and pre-K.

We worked closely with advocates and states across the country and focused on what we hoped would be a significant child care expansion in connection with TANF and child care reauthorizations in 2002. In 2001, we called upon the Bush Administration to advance a reauthorization proposal which would increase child care funding; improve the quality of child care; remove administrative barriers that made it difficult for families to access and maintain subsidies; promote parents’ ability to choose and have equal access to a wide array of early care and education options; and enhance data collection and research capacity to increase understanding of the subsidy system and its impacts on children, parents, and providers. We pursued those goals throughout reauthorization efforts, working closely with state and national advocacy groups in our efforts.

While much has changed over the past 25 years, CLASP’s crucial role in addressing child care and early education policy and practice dates back to these very early efforts. I want to congratulate CLASP for 25 years of extraordinary and invaluable work.

By Shengwei Sun, Karen Schulman, Rachel Wilensky, and Melissa Boteach

Child care allows parents to enter or stay in the labor force, improves the well-being of families and communities, yields long-term positive outcomes for future generations, and buttresses economic growth. Yet in the United States, child care is perceived and funded as a private responsibility that is made possible by women’s unpaid or underpaid labor. The private provision of child care is “a textbook example of a broken market,” with families paying unaffordable fees and early educators—predominantly women who are disproportionately Black and Hispanic compared to the overall workforce—subsidizing the system with their poverty wages. While the value of child care extends to the entire society and far into the future, what individual families can afford to pay cannot match the true value of care work. The United States’ failure to invest in this crucial sector has created a fragile and patchwork system unable to meet the demand for child care.

Even before the pandemic, rising child care costs were far outpacing the rate of overall inflation. A long history of racism and sexism has contributed to early educators, especially women of color and immigrant women, remaining some of the most underpaid workers in the country. In 2019, the median annual pay for child care workers ($24,230) was less than half that of kindergarten teachers ($56,850), and Black early educators were paid on average $0.78 less per hour than their white peers. A long history of racist and xenophobic biases toward Black, Latinx, and immigrant families has also created significant gaps in child care assistance policies and funding, with only one in six children who qualify for federally funded child care assistance actually receiving it.

The pandemic pushed the already precarious child care sector to the brink of collapse. In response, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act and the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act (CRRSAA) included initial relief funding to the child care sector, followed by the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA), which included an even larger investment to better stabilize the sector and support families with children. The ARPA legislation provided $24 billion in stabilization funds to the child care industry and a $15 billion increase in the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG), the major federal child care program that provides funding to states to help families afford child care and invest in the quality and supply of child care. The ARPA relief dollars were the largest federal investment in the child care sector since World War II, but with the expiration of child care stabilization dollars in September 2023 and the upcoming expiration of the CCDBG supplemental funding, the sector will be left with a funding cliff that will only exacerbate its fragility.

What lessons have we learned from this short-term investment? While the pandemic child care relief dollars have provided critical support for families and early educators as they navigate the crisis, these one-time relief funds are not nearly enough to remedy the failures in the existing child care market. Moreover, not all impacts of the expiration will be immediate. The negative effects of this expiration will be long term and deeply damaging. Only sustained and robust public investment can address the long-term structural flaws and build a child care system where all families can find and afford care and where all early educators are valued and paid robust wages and benefits.

>> Download the full fact sheet for recommendations

This blog is part of a series that lifts up alumni, partner, and board member reflections in celebration of CLASP Child Care and Early Education team’s 25th anniversary. Rachel started working on child care policy at CLASP in 1999.

By Rachel Schumacher

Rachel Schumacher

What were some of the greatest successes and victories for the child care sector during your tenure at CLASP? What was your/the team’s role?  

My time at CLASP ran from 1999-2010. Our team was small but mighty for much of that time!

CLASP went to work explaining how states could use the new TANF block grant for child care in language advocates and administrators could understand, [which meant] many PowerPoints and charts. We also documented how access to child care was plummeting after TANF went into effect.

Head Start was reauthorized in 2005. CLASP talked to Hill staff and tracked every version as part of a coalition of groups working to improve the outcomes of the legislation. States innovated new ways to deliver pre-kindergarten and Early/Head Start in child care settings in the absence of major federal funding expansion., CLASP wrote “All Together Now” and other papers to point out pros and cons and encourage more innovation in other states.

What were some of the greatest challenges facing the child care sector during your tenure at CLASP? How did you and/or the team overcome them?  

Federal funding increased in small increments or not at all during most of [my tenure], so CLASP tried to bring attention to the difference between potential children and families that could benefit and how many the program was [actually] serving. CLASP staff attorney Jennifer Mezey and Mark Greenberg, who was involved in advocacy for child care and the 1998 Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) regulations, developed ways to quantify this since federal agencies were not promoting this gap.

The other challenge was the dominant idea that child care was just babysitting for working parents. A major influential thinker and political operative at the federal level was heard to say that all that was needed was a “clean, well-lit room.” CLASP lifted up examples of how states were investing more in child care through mixed delivery and standards to show that child care could and should be considered part of the education continuum. We also developed a Starting Off Right project with ZERO TO THREE to focus on the particular challenges for infant and toddler child care and key ways to measure whether state policies were positive for children [between the ages of newborn to age three] and their families.

How did CLASP amplify policy considerations of families with low incomes, families of color, and of marginalized communities during your tenure at CLASP? 

CLASP was and is an expert at technical analysis of the subsidy system, how it undermines equity, and the goals of the CCDBG in how it was regulated and implemented by states. We hammered on the misguided assumption in states that they could only use vouchers/certificates to distribute assistance and tried to persuade states they could use contracts/grants to stabilize the supply of child care. We interviewed state administrators who were using grants and contracts to get their insight on  how it helped them build more quality and supply in underserved areas, for infants/toddlers, children with disabilities, etc.

CLASP started to analyze and publish Head Start Program Information Report (PIR) data annually, which wasn’t really being done by any organizations, to build understanding of how comprehensive the program was (and still is!). [CLASP also] advocated for more connection to comprehensive services for children served in child care subsidy, whose families also needed a two-generation approach to [support].

CLASP also led the way [in using] analytical skills with data and research to spotlight  the racial inequity and bias against access to child care for children of immigrants.

What does a transformed, well-resourced child care system look like? What do you think are the next steps to get there? How can the CLASP CCEE team lead the way?  

We need publicly funded, universal child care that meets the needs of all families and compensates its workforce fairly. Policy and advocacy are important, but we need to expand public will and support power-building among the parent and provider leaders who are closest to the pain points of the child care system and passionate advocates. CLASP has recognized this and has been a partner in movement building.

What is your fondest memory of your time on the CLASP CCEE team?  

Once CLASP was able to raise money to have a child care team, we were able to bring in amazing young women early in their careers who have gone on to great work in early childhood and related areas like Katie Hamm, Hannah Matthews, Kate Irish, and Elizabeth Hoffman.

On the sillier side, CLASP used to have an incredibly competitive white elephant game at the holidays as well as an annual Oscar pool.

>> Learn more and register for the 25th Anniversary of the child care and early education team.

By Eddie Martin, Jr.

This is the fifth in a series of commentaries from CLASP experts that explore dimensions of poverty as part of the U.S. Census Bureau’s annual release of poverty, income, and health insurance coverage statistics from the previous year. On September 10, we provided a snapshot of the economic hardship that children, youth and young adults, and families experienced in 2023. Ahead of the release, CLASP experts offered key insights on the impending 2025 tax debate, the child care crisis, Medicaid unwinding, and raising labor standards and enacting new regulations to protect workers. The complete series is available here. 

As we reflect on the U.S. Census Bureau’s recent poverty and income report—showing that more than 1 in 10 people in America live in poverty and documenting stubbornly higher poverty rates for Black, Hispanic and Native American people—it is crucial to revisit President Lyndon B. Johnson’s declaration 60 years ago of an “unconditional” War on Poverty. Johnson sought not only to address the symptoms of poverty but to “cure it and, above all, to prevent it.” He poignantly remarked that “many Americans live on the outskirts of hope—some because of their poverty, some because of their color, and all too many because of both.” Johnson understood that these issues were not the result of individual failures but were rooted in systemic inequities like limited access to education, health care, housing, and opportunities for upward mobility. He recognized poverty as a moral and societal challenge tied to short-sighted public policies that left too many Americans behind.

The War on Poverty led to significant programs like Head Start, Medicaid, and Medicare. At the time, the national poverty rate stood at 19 percent and was nearly double that for Black Americans. These programs reduced poverty and provided a safety net for millions. But the latest Census report shows that the 2023 poverty rate was 11.1 percent, revealing only marginal progress after six decades. Johnson’s vision has been hindered by political compromises and reforms that failed to tackle economic inequality and racial disparities.

A major shortcoming of the War on Poverty was its inability to fully address the intersection of racial injustice and economic inequity. Johnson’s Great Society agenda laid the groundwork for progress through landmark legislation like the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1968, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, which linked racial justice to economic opportunity. However, the failure to implement more “radical” solutions—such as guaranteed incomes or large-scale systemic reforms in housing, law enforcement, education, and civil rights enforcement—has meant that poverty, particularly for communities of color, persists.

Today, these shortcomings are glaringly apparent. The lack of affordable child care and early education continues to create economic instability for families. Black and Hispanic workers remain overrepresented in jobs without adequate benefits or wages, perpetuating the cycle of the “working poor.” The housing crisis, driven by rising costs and stagnant wages, has pushed many who were once part of the middle class to the brink of homelessness. Elected officials have failed to prioritize justice, and equity and progress has been painfully incremental, leaving children and families across the U.S. to suffer.

These interconnected challenges create a vicious cycle that deepens inequality and undermines democracy. As Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. emphasized, “the evils of racism, economic exploitation, and militarism are all tied together.” Poverty erodes both economic participation and political engagement. When individuals and communities are trapped in poverty, they are less able to participate in the democratic process, less likely to trust public institutions, and often deprived of basic human rights. Both Johnson and King understood that poverty is not just an economic issue—it is a fundamental threat to democracy itself.

To truly revive the War on Poverty and achieve Johnson’s vision, we must enact bold policies that create a strong safety net for workers and families. These measures should go beyond merely lifting people above the poverty line. Rather, we must ensure that economic progress is met with sustained access to benefits and opportunities. This means investing in an equitable, high-quality child care and early education system; enacting comprehensive minimum wage reform; strengthening labor laws; permanently expanding the Child Tax Credit and Earned Income Tax Credit; and ensuring universal health coverage that includes publicly funded care for immigrant populations, including the undocumented. As Olivia Golden, CLASP’s interim executive director, has stated, such bold approaches, grounded in both an economic strategy and the necessary investments in core programs, are vital to eliminating poverty. Without comprehensive support, poverty will remain episodic, trapping families in cycles of hardship across generations.

In 1967, King called for a “radical revolution of values,” urging society to shift from a “thing-oriented” to a “person-oriented” approach. He argued that poverty demands not just charity, but systemic change, stating “true compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar. It is seeing that an edifice that produces beggars needs restructuring. A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth.” King’s message remains as relevant today as it was in the 1960s. He recognized that to achieve true democracy, our country needed a complete reimagining of our economic and political systems rooted in a redistribution of power and wealth.

If we are ever to truly defeat systemic poverty, we must have a national awakening—a profound shift in values, driven by moral and political courage. We must ensure that all people, not just the fortunate few, have access to the resources and opportunities they need not only to survive but to thrive. This means dismantling the structural inequities that perpetuate racial and economic disparities while building a more just, compassionate, and equitable society for all. Only then can we realize the vision Johnson and King had of an America free from poverty, where opportunity and democracy are truly accessible to everyone.

This blog is part of a series that lifts up alumni, partner, and board member reflections in celebration of CLASP Child Care and Early Education team’s 25th anniversary. Steven is a CLASP board member and long time child care and early education expert and advocate.

By Steven Dow 

Amidst the devastating loss of life and widespread calamity of the COVID pandemic, the unavailability of child care and the fragility of the child care and early education systems presented a major impediment to economic recovery and getting people back to work in communities all across the country. What had previously been something of an invisible problem was suddenly thrown into the spotlight of local, state, and national media coverage.   

Expertise was needed to help educate the public, legislators, business leaders, and policymakers about the nature, extent, causes, and consequences of our country’s inadequate support system for working parents and our youngest children, as well as for pragmatic and implementable short- and long-term solutions to help ameliorate the conditions that the pandemic had laid bare. Congress reacted by appropriating unprecedented amounts of financial resources, and public systems that had been perpetually underfunded and understaffed were suddenly inundated with resources. 

Enter the CLASP Child Care and Early Education team–built for such a moment. 

Building on its quarter-century expertise, the CCEE team sprang into action from the earliest moments of the pandemic. At the national level, the team worked with other partners and advocates to call upon Congress and the administration to allocate substantial and immediate relief funds, provided technical assistance on strategy and policy, and undertook and published extensive research and analysis. While it ultimately failed to pass through both chambers of Congress, President Biden’s proposed Build Back Better plan included massive investments in child care and pre-k and represented an enormous victory for the CCEE team and other early childhood advocates in having raised the needs of young children to the level that they became the centerpiece of the proposal. 

 As the loci of decision-making shifted to the states and the child care industry experienced massive challenges in reduced enrollment, staffing shortages, and widespread closures, the CCEE team worked with state administrators to provide technical assistance and support in response to the implementation challenges of timely and effective use of all of the relief funds, including CCDF, Head Start, and Early Head Start. The team placed special focus on the impacts that the child care crisis was having on especially vulnerable populations, including infants and toddlers, immigrant children and families, mixed-status families, families involved with the child welfare and justice systems, and those needing non-traditional hours of care.   

As a result of the long-standing and deep relationships that the CCEE team has built with partners at the national, state, and local levels, the team was uniquely positioned to develop and maintain a strong feedback loop between national and state/local advocates, administrators, policymakers, and practitioners to help ensure that the most equitable policies centering those most impacted were being implemented and continuously improved. 

Even as the small but powerful team was stretched to respond to the pandemic demands, leadership recognized the magnitude of the opportunity to capitalize on the long-overdue attention that the country was paying to the fragility of the child care system and inadequate supports provided to young children and families. This led to the CCEE team playing a key leadership role in the establishment of the Child Care for Every Family Network, a groundbreaking partnership dedicated to ensuring that America builds a child care system that offers universal access to equitable, accessible, high-quality, affordable, and culturally relevant child care across the country, with a diverse, well-paid, and well-supported workforce. 

In my years of working at the community level in Tulsa and, more recently, in Houston, I have seen how the policies and legislation enacted in Washington impact children and families on the ground and the organizations, providers, and dedicated early educators trying to serve them.   In my time on the CLASP Board of Directors, I have gained a special appreciation for the enormous amount of effort and extraordinary skill that the talented CCEE team and its partners invest in helping to secure, defend, and expand federal resources and continuously trying to improve the conditions for young children and families, particularly those who are the most vulnerable.   

As the CCEE team celebrates 25 years of being at the forefront of the movement for child care and early education, its current and past staff members deserve all of our thanks, appreciation, and gratitude for a job well done! Based on what I’ve seen from my close-up view on the Board, however, my guess is that they won’t be focused on patting themselves on the back or spending much time looking with nostalgia at the accomplishments of yesterday. They are already looking to build on the successes and foundations of the past as they envision and work towards building the high-quality system of child care and early education that ensures that all children, parents, and providers are thriving and reaching their full potential.   

>> Learn more and register for the 25th Anniversary of the child care and early education team.

This is the fourth in a series of commentaries from CLASP experts that explore dimensions of poverty ahead of the U.S. Census Bureau’s annual release of poverty, income, and health insurance coverage statistics from the previous year. On September 10, we’ll get a snapshot of the economic hardship that children, youth and young adults, and families experienced in 2023. Ahead of the release, CLASP experts are offering key insights on the impending 2025 tax debate, Medicaid unwinding, and raising labor standards and enacting new regulations to protect workers. In honor of the 60th anniversary of the War on Poverty, we’ll examine what has and has not changed in the past six decades. The complete series is available here. 

By Alyssa Fortner and Stephanie Schmit 

The high cost of child care has a significant impact on families’ economic security and spending power, yet this impact is not captured well in data. In fact, for families with the lowest incomes, the costs consume 35 percent of their income on average. This means that these families must make difficult decisions around care and other necessities like food and housing. For example, a recent study found that families with low incomes are more likely to reduce work to care for their children whereas families with higher incomes are more likely to pay for care. This crisis has led to $122 billion in lost earnings, productivity, and revenue to the national economy every year, according to the Council for a Strong America As we near the release of the U.S. Census Bureau’s annual poverty statistics, it is important to uplift this significant impact that is very real to families’ pocketbooks and interrogate the missing piece from this important data source. 

Access to affordable child care and early education is essential to the economic well-being of families with young children, particularly those with low incomes. However, the programs that support access to care for families with low incomes, including child care subsidies, have historically been underfunded and undervalued, which has led to significant tradeoffs at the state level that have created inequitable policies and limited access. In fact, only 14 percent of potentially eligible families received Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) subsidies in the most recent year (2020) data that is available. Because of this, they often experience further economic instability related to care compared to families with higher incomes. This is because access to child care is critical for parents’ ability to work and support their families and needs, but it is also incredibly expensive.  

The Census Bureau’s poverty data, however, fails to capture data on the full impact of child care expenses on a family’s income, especially impacts on families with lower incomes who may have access to child care assistance. Even the Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM), which measures poverty by considering both cash and noncash benefits while subtracting necessary expenses, it does not reflect the true impact child care expenses have on have on families with different care arrangements and financial circumstances. For example, it does not distinguish between a family that has low costs for child care because they receive a child care subsidy for quality child care and the family that has low child care costs because they are paying a minimal amount for low-quality, unstable care that they can afford. But the National Academies of Science recognizes this significant cost and complexity and recommends the SPM be updated to include the full picture of the impact of child care expenses. Their report cites that for families who pay for child care, it is the third largest expense after housing and transportation. Despite its incredible cost burden, child care is essential for family economic security, and we must be working to alleviate that burden.  

Until Congress makes intentional, transformative investments in building an equitable, high-quality child care and early education system, we will continue to lose billions of dollars in the national economy and fail to improve economic and job security for families. However, we will not see this reality in the data that is being released which undermines the ability of families, advocates, and others to make a strong case for why these investments are necessary. Additionally, even if investments are secured, the lack of data and/or data that doesn’t lead to an accurate assessment of expenses means that we can’t ensure that the amount of funding meets the actual needs of families across the states. This is also true in states’ abilities to know if their proposed investments and policies fit their families.  

To mitigate this, it is crucial for more intentional, equitable data to be collected about the state of child care and early education in this country, including the accessibility and affordability of these programs for families. While we know care consumes large portions of families with low-income budgets, we don’t see it reflected in this measurement of impact on families’ resources and income. And one strong place to start is to begin is in the Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Statistics and American Community Survey Estimates.  

On Thursday, September 12th, Rachel Wilensky, Senior Policy Analyst on the Child Care and Early Education team, will deliver opening remarks and moderate a panel discussion at the Economic Policy Institute’s annual Economic Analysis and Research Network Conference (EARNCon). The plenary on Advancing Equity in Child Care: State Progress in Expanding Access and Affordability will cover the work happening across states to strengthen the child care sector and address the inequities that make child care particularly inaccessible for people of color and people with low incomes. This session will also review the current federal landscape for child care and what needs to change to help families access the care they need.

>> Register