Higher wages for early care and education workers in California are essential to expanding affordable child care, supporting families’ economic security, and addressing long-standing workforce inequities rooted in racial and gender disparities.
Access to affordable, nurturing early care and education (ECE) is critical for families’ economic security and positive child development. California’s ECE system helps families with low incomes find and pay for vital programs during a child’s early years. As part of this programming, the state also pays ECE providers who participate in subsidized ECE programs. State investments in ECE are critical for ensuring that families have adequate access to affordable early care options and that ECE providers are reimbursed at a fair rate. While the state has increased funding for subsidized ECE programs since the Great Recession, this funding has not gone far enough. Namely, the demand for subsidized ECE programs far exceeds the number of spaces. As of 2023, only 14% of children eligible for subsidized ECE programs were actually enrolled.1The ECE programs referenced in this statistic include the child care and development programs administered by the California Department of Social Services.
The need to expand access to affordable early learning options also means that California requires a workforce to meet that demand. The ECE profession has experienced high turnover due to low pay, a lack of benefits, and pandemic-related risks that drove many out of the field. In order to effectively address the unmet need for affordable care, the workforce must also expand. This remains a challenge under the current subsidized system’s payment rate structure. The ECE system will remain inequitable and affordable child care will remain scarce without higher wages for the workforce.
How are ECE providers paid and why are these professionals paid such low wages?
Those that accept state vouchers are paid based on the Regional Market Rate (RMR) survey; and
ECE professionals that have a direct contract with the state are paid using the Standard Reimbursement Rate (SRR). The current rates are frozen through the 2024-25 fiscal year as the state works to create an alternative methodology reflecting the true cost of care.
However, the 2023-24 budget established “cost of care” stipends to temporarily increase reimbursement rates above the RMR and SRR through the 2024-25 fiscal year.
Early care and education professionals working in these organizations — primarily women and disproportionately women of color — deserve fair and just wages for essential work that helps children learn and grow while parents are working or going to school to support their families. However, families are often unable to afford the true cost of care, including adequate wages for these professionals. The subsidy from the state could fill this gap, but the rate-setting methodologies that have been in place in California for decades assume and perpetuate a low-paid workforce. Paying this essential workforce low wages is a direct result of racist and sexist stereotypes that devalue caregiving work and exacerbate the gender wage gap. State leaders should instead prioritize treating these jobs as high-skill, high-value jobs. The current workforce of talented and dedicated providers who help care for and develop California’s children is misaligned with the low wages they receive.
How much has the reimbursement rate increased for ECE providers?
Over the past decade, ECE providers have experienced an increase in their reimbursement rates. Yet, these increases have been insufficient to keep pace with the rising costs of goods and services and the state’s minimum wage, which has been steadily increasing since 2016. The following chart highlights key points regarding increases to ECE providers’ rates:
Despite the cost of care supplement to the RMR, increases in rates remain far below the increase in the minimum wage. In 21 counties, home-based ECE providers participating in a voucher program had rates for infant care increase at less than half the rate of the minimum wage. In almost every county in the state, licensed family child care home providers and center-based providers struggled with low rate increases relative to the minimum wage (see table).
Aside from the cost of care supplement, state leaders have only updated voucher-based payment rates for child care providers three times in the past nine fiscal years. Specifically, rates were increased to the 75th percentile of the updated market surveys as part of the 2016-17, 2017-18, and 2021-22 spending plans. Without the cost of care supplement, rates in 2024 would still be at the 75th percentile of the 2018 market rate survey.
ECE payment rates have not kept pace with the increasing minimum wage. The state law requiring annual increases to the statewide minimum wage went into effect in 2016-17, raising the wage by 65% from 2016-17 to 2024-25. Because ECE professionals are paid very low wages, increases in the minimum wage increase costs for providers. State leaders have failed to increase payment rates to keep pace with the state minimum wage (see chart). This cuts into providers’ bottom line making it even harder to provide care to children and families.
Policymakers have not consistently updated the Standard Reimbursement Rate (SRR), either. From 2016-17 to 2024-25 the SRR increased by just 37%, falling far short of the 65% increase in the state minimum wage.
Policymakers’ failure to consistently update the payment rates for subsidized child care and preschool providers undermines their ability to offer care to children and families while covering the rising cost of business in California.
How Do ECE Professionals’ Wages Compare with the Broader Workforce?
The relatively small percent increase in ECE professionals’ wages is further compounded by the low wages they face, as compared with other professions.This is particularly the case when compared to elementary and middle school teachers, an occupation with similar work and professional qualifications. The chart below compares median wages for ECE professionals, all workers, and K-8 teachers.2The methodology to define “Early Care and Education professionals” is based on the Center for the Study of Child Care Employment’s Early Childhood Workforce. These professionals include: 1) child care workers in the child day care services, private households, religious organizations, or elementary and secondary school industries; 2) education and child care administrators in the child day care services industry; 3) preschool and kindergarten teachers in the child day care services industry; and 4) other teachers and teaching assistants in the child day care services industry.
Overall, this chart shows that median ECE professionals’ wages fall behind the median for all workers and even further as compared with K-8 teachers. Other key points from this chart include the following:
Between 2008 and 2023, ECE professionals’ wages increased by only a few dollars. After adjusting for inflation, ECE professionals’ wages increased by $2.81 between 2008 and 2023. This small increase has meant that ECE professionals’ wages have remained alarmingly low over time, exacerbating issues such as high turnover and fewer workers willing to enter and stay in the field.
If trends continue, it will take nearly 60 years for ECE professionals’ wages to catch up to the median wage of all workers. Specifically, using the 10-year average rate of change for ECE professionals and all workers’ wages, ECE professionals will finally surpass the median wage of all workers in the year 2083.3The rate used to project median wages is the 10-year annual average of the change in median hourly earnings from 2012-2023. Therefore, the number of years before the wage gap closes reflects an estimate based on projected median hourly earnings. The data include the employed population age 16 and over working more than 10 hours a week and 27 weeks per year. Data for 2020 was unreliable and therefore omitted from the analysis. Source: Budget Center analysis of US Census Bureau, American Community Survey data.
ECE professionals make only 39% of the K-8 median hourly wage. ECE professionals’ hourly wage is less than half the median hourly wage of a middle school or elementary school teacher. ECE professionals often have the same qualifications and work with the same age groups as elementary and middle school teachers; yet, median wages are far from parity.
In addition to K-8 teachers, comparing ECE professionals’ hourly wages with other professions underscores that ECE professionals work in one of the lowest paid occupations despite the critical value of their work. The table below outlines ECE professionals’ median hourly earnings in the context of other low wage occupations. Thus, ECE professionals’ wages have not only grown at a slow rate, but they also started near the floor. ECE professionals have been stuck in low wage work, despite increases in state funding for ECE.
What is the consequence of low wages for ECE professionals?
Poverty is on the rise for children and families across California. Thus, many of the families ECE professionals serve are struggling more now than in prior years to make ends meet; however, many professionals themselves are also in poverty. Specifically, compared with all workers and elementary and middle school teachers, a disproportionate percentage of ECE professionals are also in poverty. The chart below shows that while poverty rates have decreased for ECE professionals over time, they are still over twice that of all workers and nearly four times that of elementary and middle school teachers. These relatively high poverty rates are a consequence of ECE professionals’ historically low wages.
How can state leaders support ECE professionals?
Overall, California has undoubtedly seen an increased investment in its ECE system. However, the system is still falling short in several ways. While the number of slots has increased, thousands of families still do not have access to affordable ECE options. Increasing access to ECE programs also requires supporting ECE professionals, and wages are still too low to ensure ECE professionals have the resources they need to expand and thrive.
Inequities in the ECE system reflect centuries of historical racism and sexism. The ECE system and its workforce deserve better, and state leaders have the tools to ensure that ECE professionals are paid a living and just wage. Specifically, state leaders can advance the alternative methodology to develop payment rates and implement an improved rate structure. For far too long, ECE professionals have worked low wages and endured a system that undervalues their integral role in California. California has been a leader in many other policy areas, and is well-poised to continue leading by paying ECE professionals the true cost of care.
Kristin Schumacher, a former analyst at the California Budget & Policy Center, now contributes to the organization as a consultant on various research projects.
The ECE programs referenced in this statistic include the child care and development programs administered by the California Department of Social Services.
2
The methodology to define “Early Care and Education professionals” is based on the Center for the Study of Child Care Employment’s Early Childhood Workforce. These professionals include: 1) child care workers in the child day care services, private households, religious organizations, or elementary and secondary school industries; 2) education and child care administrators in the child day care services industry; 3) preschool and kindergarten teachers in the child day care services industry; and 4) other teachers and teaching assistants in the child day care services industry.
3
The rate used to project median wages is the 10-year annual average of the change in median hourly earnings from 2012-2023. Therefore, the number of years before the wage gap closes reflects an estimate based on projected median hourly earnings. The data include the employed population age 16 and over working more than 10 hours a week and 27 weeks per year. Data for 2020 was unreliable and therefore omitted from the analysis. Source: Budget Center analysis of US Census Bureau, American Community Survey data.
You may also be interested in the following resources:
There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Or contact us
Please check your email to confirm your signup.
Over the last sixteen years, California’s early care and education (ECE) system has gone through numerous milestones that have been reflected in state funding. California’s families and child care and preschool providers depend on this funding for access to affordable care and wages to sustain their businesses. Looking back at funding trends over time reveals both key wins and setbacks for the ECE field as well as opportunities for state leaders to continue investing in ECE programs.
Key policy and historical moments underscore how the child care system in California has expanded, contracted, and evolved amid changes in funding levels, as reflected in the following themes.
The Great Recession resulted in severe cuts to the ECE system. California, like the rest of the nation, experienced an economic downturn at the onset of the Great Recession in 2007. In the aftermath of the economic downturn, state leaders cut annual funding by 30%, eliminating 110,000 child care slots, lowering family income eligibility limits, and cutting payment rates for certain providers.
Subsidized slots and provider rates were incrementally restored over time. Beginning in 2013, the cuts made during and after the Great Recession were slowly re-established. Over the next decade, subsidized child care slots were funded at pre-Great Recession levels, provider rates increased, income and income eligibility limits increased, and family fees were reduced. These changes addressed many of the tremendous setbacks prompted by the Great Recession. Child Care Providers United (CCPU) formed in 2019 and supported several improvements for ECE providers, including increased rates, a health care fund, and a retirement fund.
The COVID-19 pandemic amplified the importance of child care and resulted in an influx of one-time federal funding. The COVID-19 public health crisis put child care in the national spotlight. Additionally, the federal CARES Act, Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, and American Rescue Plan Act brought over $5 billion in one-time child care funding to California. These one-time funds were used to boost provider rates, expand subsidized child care slots, and generally support the early care and education sector.
As federal relief dollars have sunsetted, the state has had to backfill those resources in order to sustain progress. The majority of federal relief dollars expired on September 30, 2023, prompting what many deemed the “child care funding cliff.” California managed to avoid the detrimental effects of several aspects of this “cliff” through using state dollars to reform family fees, provide temporary increases to reimbursement rates, and commit to funding 200,000 new subsidized child care slots.
California’s ECE system weathered severe cuts as a result of the Great Recession. Over the past sixteen years — in response to tireless advocacy — state leaders have restored funding to this system, providing additional access for families and more support for providers. In the current fiscal year, dollars for subsidized child care and preschool slots are 50% higher than prior to the Great Recession.
This chart highlights additional key points:
Increases in funding on subsidized child care were bolstered by one-time federal pandemic relief dollars. The spike in funding in FY 2021-22 was largely due to pandemic-related support provided by the federal government (as highlighted in the timeline). The state received over $5 billion in one-time federal dollars to support child care during the health crisis.
Recent spending on subsidized child care slots reflects the administration’s commitment to 200,000 new slots by 2027. In 2021-22, the governor committed to adding approximately 200,000 new child care slots by 2026-27. As of 2023-24, approximately 146,000 new slots were funded. Expansion was paused in 2023-24 and the state is still in the process of rolling out all intended new slots.
Increases in spending were not even across all ECE programs. Spending for the California State Preschool Program (CSPP) experienced a significant increase due to state leaders’ focus on California preschool programs. This resulted in spending levels higher than the Alternative Payment Program, CalWORKs programs, and General Child Care Program.
While the ECE system in California has experienced an increase in funding, more is needed to fulfill the administration’s intention to foster equitable learning for all children. Total funding for the state’s subsidized child care and development system is at $7.2 billion in the 2024-25 fiscal year. Yet, even with increased funding, resources still fall far short of the billions in additional support necessary to provide fair and just wages to providers and to increase access to ECE programs for families with low and moderate incomes in California.
Kristin Schumacher, a former analyst at the California Budget & Policy Center, now contributes to the organization as a consultant on various research projects.
There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Or contact us
Please check your email to confirm your signup.
Child care and development programs administered by the California Department of Social Services are critical for supporting California’s families with affording child care that meets their needs. Funding for child care programs has increased since the Great Recession. Given this increase, a greater proportion of children eligible for subsidized child care are being served. In 2023,14% of eligible children were enrolled in subsidized child care programs, up from 11% in 2022.
Although state investments in child care have increased enrollment in subsidized programs, the data in this chart highlights a persistent gap between supply and demand. As a result, many families still struggle to find the care they need — underscoring the urgency for state leaders to continue working to expand child care access.
Only one in seven children eligible for subsidized care receive services. The gap between the number of children eligible for subsidized care and the number enrolled remains far too large. Given the high cost of child care, this gap means that thousands of families unable to access affordable care struggle even more to make ends meet.
The lack of supply disproportionately impacts families of color. Namely, 55% of Black children and 48% of Latinx children in California are eligible for subsidized child care. Therefore, when there is an inadequate supply of subsidized child care, California’s families of color are disproportionately impacted.
The demand for subsidized child care spans age groups. Namely, only ten percent of school-age children (ages 6-12) eligible for subsidized child care are enrolled. And, only 19 percent of eligible infants, toddlers, and preschool-age children are enrolled. While enrollment varies across age groups, the tremendous need for more subsidized child care slots spans ages zero to twelve.
Throughout the next several years, the administration has committed to adding approximately 77,000 more slots to fulfill his commitment of 200,000 new slots by 2027-28. However, 77,000 is insufficient for addressing the demand for subsidized child care in California, leaving families in impossible situations. Additional state and federal dollars will be necessary to fully meet the child care needs of families with low incomes.
Kristin Schumacher, a former analyst at the California Budget & Policy Center, now contributes to the organization as a consultant on various research projects.
A las familias de California les cuesta un gran esfuerzo poder pagar el cuidado infantil, lo cual exacerba los desafíos del costo de vida en un entorno de tasas de pobreza elevadísimas. Específicamente, si no cuenta con acceso a cuidado infantil subsidiado por el estado, una madre soltera en California con un bebé y un niño en edad escolar gasta en promedio el 61% de sus ingresos en cuidado infantil. Por lo tanto, el acceso al cuidado infantil subsidiado por el estado es esencial para apoyar a las familias. Dentro del sistema de entrega de servicios mixto de California, el Departamento de Servicios Sociales (CDSS, por sus siglas en inglés) administra el cuidado infantil subsidiado por el estado, proporcionando programas de cuidado infantil de bajo costo a gratuito a las familias de ingresos reducidos. Sin embargo, la demanda de cuidado infantil subsidiado ha crecido mucho más que la oferta. En 2022, solo uno de cada nueve niños elegibles para los programas de cuidado y desarrollo infantil del CDSS recibieron servicios (aproximadamente el 11%), lo que significa que miles de padres y tutores deben enfrentarse a la realidad de gastar más de la mitad de sus ingresos en cuidado infantil.
Para abordar este problema, el estado ha estado trabajando para expandir la cantidad de vacantes de cuidado infantil subsidiado. Aunque la expansión estatal del cuidado infantil subsidiado es un componente integral necesario para abordar los desafíos de acceso, los centros urbanos del estado también deben considerar cómo apoyar mejor a las familias en sus comunidades para que puedan utilizar el mayor acceso de la forma que mejor cubra sus necesidades. Debido a la diversidad de California, las familias del estado tienen una variedad de preferencias y necesidades de cuidado infantil. Por ejemplo, las preferencias familiares varían respecto de la disponibilidad de horarios, el entorno, los idiomas que se hablan y la alineación cultural. Por lo tanto, además de expandir la cantidad de vacantes subsidiadas en general, también es importante entender los contextos comunitarios locales para que la expansión cubra las necesidades.
Para resaltar el contexto local, este informe detalla la necesidad insatisfecha de cuidado infantil en un condado específico, el de Monterey, para destacar los desafíos locales y las recomendaciones guiadas por la comunidad para expandir el acceso a un cuidado infantil asequible y transformativo. Al hacerlo, este informe busca compartir las experiencias y los puntos de vista de familias del condado de Monterey para darle sentido a la brecha significativa de elegibilidad y matriculación en los programas de cuidado infantil subsidiados e informar a los encargados de tomar decisiones locales y estatales en su labor de expandir el cuidado infantil asequible en California de una forma que responde a las necesidades de las familias.
Acerca de esta publicación
Este informe cuenta con el apoyo de First 5 del condado de Monterey. Al priorizar la niñez temprana, alentar conexiones comunitarias fuertes e impulsar la calidad en todos los sistemas de cuidado y apoyo, First 5 Monterey County enriquece las vidas de los niños, desde la etapa prenatal hasta los cinco años, y las de sus familias.
Deseamos expresar nuestro más sincero agradecimiento al Centro Binacional para el Desarrollo Indígena Oaxaqueño, por la ayuda brindada para capturar las voces comunitarias, y a los padres que participaron en los grupos de enfoque. Sus conocimientos y contribuciones fueron invaluables para darle forma a este informe.
¿Por qué enfocarse en el condado de Monterey?
El condado de Monterey es hogar de una amplia gama de comunidades con necesidades y prioridades distintas. Estando en el décimo séptimo puesto entre los condados más grandes de California, Monterey tiene casi medio millón de residentes y más de la mitad de esas familias hablan un idioma diferente al inglés. Además, en comparación con las estadísticas estatales, las familias del condado de Monterey se enfrentan a desafíos de seguridad económica mayores, específicamente, en el año 2023:
El 14% de la población del condado de Monterey vivía en la pobreza, a pesar de que a nivel estatal ese nivel es del 12%;
Las mujeres en el condado de Monterey gastan en promedio el 45% de sus ingresos en alquiler, el porcentaje más alto de los 58 condados de California;
Los ingresos familiares medios eran de $88,035 en el condado de Monterey, mientras que a nivel estatal eran de $95,521 y
el 29% de la población del condado de Monterey tiene un título de licenciado o mayor, mientras que en el resto del estado ese nivel es del 38%;
Estas estadísticas indican desigualdades raciales y de género en el condado de Monterey, así como inequidades de ingresos y barreras para acceder a las oportunidades para las familias de ingresos reducidos. Muchas familias en el condado de Monterey trabajan en entornos agrícolas y hablan idiomas indígenas. En comparación con las comunidades costeras más pudientes del condado, estas familias tienen barreras mayores para lograr la seguridad económica, incluyendo la posibilidad de acceder a un cuidado infantil que satisface sus necesidades.
Mientras que las familias del condado de Monterey tienen necesidades específicas para su comunidad, encontramos los mismos desafíos de pobreza y desigualdad de ingresos a nivel estatal, lo cual indica una oportunidad de entender cómo las barreras y soluciones al problema del cuidado infantil asequible en el condado de Monterey pueden impulsar mejoras en todo el estado. Escuchar y dar a conocer los puntos de vista de los residentes del condado de Monterey afectados por la falta de cuidado infantil asequible no solo apoyan la labor de crear un condado de Monterey más equitativo sino que iluminan las posibilidades de crear una California en la que pueden prosperar las familias históricamente subrepresentadas.
¿Cuál es la necesidad insatisfecha de cuidado infantil en el condado de Monterey?
En comparación con la tendencia estatal, la necesidad insatisfecha de cuidado infantil en el condado de Monterey es aún más grande. Específicamente, aproximadamente solo uno de cada doce niños elegibles para recibir cuidado infantil subsidiado en el condado de Monterey recibió esos servicios en el año 2022. En otras palabras, de los aproximadamente 27,000 niños en el condado de Monterey elegibles para recibir cuidado infantil subsidiados, solo unos 2,235 están matriculados (aproximadamente el 8%). Esta fracción de niños que reciben servicios es menor que el promedio estatal del 11%.
Si se disgrega la necesidad de cuidado infantil insatisfecha en el condado de Monterey por raza / etnicidad, se descubre que en general, los niños latinos son desproporcionadamente elegibles para recibir cuidado infantil subsidiado. Concretamente, casi la mitad de los niños latinos del condado de Monterey son elegibles para recibir cuidado infantil subsidiado. Por lo tanto, cuando el acceso al cuidado infantil subsidiado es limitado, las familias latinas del condado de Monterey son las más afectadas.
Sobre los grupos de enfoque
Los temas y citas de este informe reflejan los puntos de vista de las familias de cuatro grupos de enfoque. Estos grupos de enfoque incluyeron familias de la parte sur del condado de Monterey, concretamente Greenfield y las comunidades circundantes. Los cuatro grupos de enfoque se llevaron a cabo en español y uno de esos cuatro contó con servicios de interpretación para las familias que hablan mixteco y triqui. En total, participaron veinte padres/madres en los cuatro grupos de enfoque. Dos grupos se llevaron a cabo en persona en el Centro Binacional de Greenfield y dos se llevaron a cabo de forma virtual. Aunque el procesamiento de la narrativa resume los temas sobresalientes de estos grupos de enfoque, se pueden encontrar información y temas pertenecientes a cada grupo de enfoque en los enlaces a continuación:
Los grupos de enfoque se concentraron intencionalmente en los puntos de vista de familias que representan las comunidades indígenas, agrícolas y rurales para destacar los desafíos de cuidado infantil específicos que enfrentan en el condado de Monterey.
¿Qué opciones de cuidado infantil tienen los padres en el condado de Monterey?
Como se ha demostrado, la cantidad de niños elegibles para recibir cuidado infantil subsidiado en el condado de Monterey ha aumentado mucho más que la tasa de matriculación. Este porcentaje bajo coincide con las experiencias de los padres. Específicamente, aunque algunos padres sabían que pueden tener acceso a cuidado infantil subsidiado a través del estado, principalmente a través del Programa de cuidado infantil para trabajadores migrantes, ninguno de los padres había tenido acceso a tal cuidado. Como tan pocas familias matriculan a sus hijos en programas de cuidado infantil subsidiado, deben utilizar otros tipos de cuidado infantil. La siguiente lista delinea las opciones que han utilizado o conocen los padres en sus comunidades.
El cuidado informal fue la opción más mencionada por los padres. Los padres compartieron que el cuidado infantil en casas de familia sin licencia era la opción más asequible y flexible porque ofrecen servicios durante horarios no tradicionales (que son los que necesitan quienes trabajan en la industria agrícola). Sin embargo, algunos padres expresaron su preocupación sobre las opciones de cuidado infantil debido a la falta de responsabilidad de cumplir las reglas de salud y seguridad y la mayor cantidad de niños por proveedor. No todos los padres estuvieron conformes con el cuidado informal, y muchos de ellos optaron por dejar de utilizar estos cuidados informales debido a sus experiencias negativas.
Cuidado brindado por familiares, amigos y vecinos
Los familiares y amigos de la comunidad han apoyado a los padres proporcionando servicios de cuidado, en especial cuando no había otras opciones disponibles. Sin embargo, los padres no sabían que, si un familiar cumple con os requisitos y completa los documentos necesarios, se puede utilizar un vale estatal para pagar a los familiares, amigos y vecinos que proveen estos servicios.
Cuidado infantil en hogares de familia o centros con licencia
En general, los padres compartieron que había una falta de opciones de cuidado infantil con licencia. Los padres de Greenfield solo conocían unas pocas opciones e indicaron que en general tenían que viajar hasta Salinas si quería usar una opción de cuidado infantil con licencia.
Opciones basadas en la escuela
Algunos de los padres con niños en edad escolar utilizaron programas que ofrecen servicios después del horario escolar. Además, las familias con niños de cuatro años han matriculado a sus hijos en jardines de infantes de transición basados en la escuela.
Head Start
Unos pocos padres conocían los programas Head Start en el condado de Monterey. Sin embargo, los padres compartieron que los programas Head Start prefieren aceptar niños de 3 a 4 años. El rango de edad limitado era restrictivo para algunos padres e inconveniente para otros que tienen hijos de diferentes edades.
Además de las opciones de cuidado indicadas, muchos padres compartieron que dejaron de trabajar para poder cuidar a su hijo. Algunas familias no tienen ningún amigo o pariente que los ayude proporcionando cuidado infantil durante el horario de trabajo. Debido a las experiencias insatisfactorias con los proveedores de cuidado sin licencia y el costo elevado y falta de disponibilidad de cuidadores con licencia, estos padres eligen dejar de trabajar para poder cuidar a sus hijos.
“Antes yo trabajaba en el campo con mi esposo. Pero, entonces nacieron los niños y ya no tuvo sentido pagar por su cuidado además de mis gastos ya que no me quedaba nada de lo que ganaba. Sí. Cuando nacieron mis mellizos, dejé de trabajar”.
Activos comunitarios del condado de Monterey
Debido a las opciones de cuidado infantil limitadas para las familias de Greenfield, muchas familias confían en el apoyo comunitario para cuidar a sus hijos y llegar a fin de mes. Los siguientes son algunos ejemplos específicos:
Las familias de Greenfield confían en la información provista por otras familias para enterarse de opciones disponibles de cuidado infantil y obtener consejos sobre los mejores entornos de cuidado infantil para sus hijos.
Los padres que trabajan juntos en la industria agrícola suelen coordinar el transporte de sus hijos para ayudar a reducir el costo y aumentar la eficiencia.
La mayoría de las familias mencionaron haberse comunicado con organizaciones específicas en el condado de Monterey que los ayudaron a encontrar cuidado infantil y otros servicios. Entre ellas se mencionaron organizaciones sin fines de lucro y fundaciones. Estas organizaciones proveen servicios, distribuyen información a las familias y han ayudado a los miembros de la comunidad a convertirse en proveedores de servicios de cuidado infantil.
En general, la fuerte red comunitaria y la infraestructura creciente de organismos sin fines de lucro han sido recursos para las familias del condado de Monterey. Por esta razón, más familias han recibido información de boca en boca sobre dónde solicitar cuidado infantil subsidiado. Como el proceso se les hace inaccesible a tantas familias de Greenfield, puede ser útil contar con alguien en la comunidad que les pueda explicar el proceso, y es posible que esto aumente la matriculación en programas de cuidado infantil subsidiados. La siguiente cita de un miembro del personal de una organización sin fines de lucro resalta este activo comunitario.
“Muchos padres no conocen los programas o los proveedores disponibles. Estamos comenzando a correr la voz en la comunidad para alentar a la gente a solicitar estos programas. Como mencioné anteriormente, la oficina está lejos en Salinas, y si no manejan o no saben cómo llegar allí, no les es posible solicitar estos programas”.
¿Por qué se les hace difícil a los padres del condado de Monterey encontrar cuidado infantil asequible que cubre sus necesidades?
Las familias de diferentes comunidades en el condado de Monterey tienen dificultades para encontrar cuidado infantil asequible que cubre sus necesidades. A un nivel elevado, los padres enfrentan dificultades por unas pocas razones clave: 1) Al igual que con muchos otros lugares de California, existe una oferta insuficiente de proveedores de cuidado infantil y programas subsidiados; 2) Incluso aunque haya algunos programas disponibles, a las familias se les hace difícil navegar el proceso de matriculación; y 3) También existe una falta de coincidencia entre lo que los padres necesitan o prefieren y las oportunidades limitadas que tienen a su disposición. Los siguientes puntos explican en mayor detalle por qué se les hace difícil encontrar cuidado infantil a los padres del condado de Monterey.
"Si no hay vacantes, hay una lista de espera. Si uno no responde, pasan a la siguiente persona, o si uno no tiene los documentos obligatorios o si la posición de uno cambia debido a los ingresos. Una vez solicité ingreso para mi hija, y tardaron más o menos un año en llamarme. Para cuando fui, los ingresos de mi familia ya habían cambiado, y ya no éramos elegibles. Así ahora había otro problema. De acuerdo, ahora no somos elegibles por nuestros el ingresos, a pesar de haber estado en la lista. Ahora no somos elegibles y tenemos que buscar otro programa».
A los padres les cuesta encontrar cuidado infantil asequible debido a una falta generalizada de proveedores y al acceso limitado a los programas respaldados por el estado.
En todos los grupos de enfoque, los padres hablaron varias veces sobre la barrera planteada por la falta de proveedores con licencia, en especial para bebés y niños pequeños. Esta escasez obliga a muchos a utilizar cuidado infantil sin licencia, en el cual confían menos, o atrasar su regreso al trabajo. La elevada rotación de los proveedores empeora el problema ya que interrumpe el cuidado y desestabiliza los servicios. El cuidado infantil subsidiado es muy codiciado pero tiene una capacidad limitada, obligando a las familias a anotarse en largas listas de espera sin garantía alguna de ser aceptadas. Los desafíos informados en todos los grupos resaltan una necesidad fundamental de abordar la falta sistémica de opciones de cuidado infantil confiables y asequibles en el condado de Monterey.
Los padres enfrentan desafíos significativos para acceder a la información y navegar las solicitudes de ingreso al cuidado infantil apoyado por el estado, dejando a muchos sin los servicios que necesitan.
En todos los grupos de enfoque, los padres compartieron que el proceso de solicitud se les hace inaccesible debido a barreras tales como transporte limitado, inaccesibilidad de lenguaje para quienes hablan idiomas indígenas y pautas poco claras sobre la elegibilidad. Muchos padres no conocen las opciones disponibles, como por ejemplo usar vales de cuidado infantil para pagar a los parientes que proveen este servicio. Los requisitos de matriculación, como proveer comprobantes de mudanzas para los programas para trabajadores migrantes, también se les hacen demasiado onerosos. Los criterios de elegibilidad por ingresos también excluyen a muchas familias que tienen dificultades financieras pero ganan cifras apenas superiores a las cifras límite. Además, las inquietudes inmigratorias y la falta de confianza en el proceso desalientan a algunas familias que deciden no solicitar ayuda. La información de boca en boca se ha convertido en una fuente esencial de información, resaltando la necesidad de contar con recursos basados en la comunidad más accesibles para ayudar a los padres a navegar las opciones de cuidado infantil.
A las familias se les hace difícil encontrar cuidado infantil asequible, flexible y apropiado para sus prioridades culturales y de desarrollo infantil, en especial para los bebés y cuando los padres tienen horarios de trabajo no tradicionales.
La disponibilidad limitada de cuidado para bebés y niños pequeños obliga a muchos padres a atrasar su regreso al trabajo o utilizar proveedores de cuidado que no tienen licencia. Se prefieren mucho más los proveedores con licencia debido a los reglamentos de salud y seguridad, pero el costo elevado y la oferta limitada deja pocas opciones a los padres. Los horarios flexibles son cruciales para las familias que tienen turnos de trabajo tempranos, nocturnos o irregulares, pero este tipo de cuidado infantil es muy poco común. Los padres también priorizan a los proveedores que apoyan la preparación para el jardín de infantes, el desarrollo socioemocional y el crecimiento multilingüe, en especial en las comunidades donde los niños hablan varios idiomas como inglés, español e idiomas indígenas. Al no contar con opciones asequibles de alta calidad que coinciden con sus necesidades, muchas familias se fen obligadas a hacer sacrificios en el trabajo y en el cuidado de sus hijos.
"El vehículo que me lleva llega una hora antes, como a las seis de la mañana, y yo debo salir más temprano dependiendo del lugar de trabajo. Antes, cuando vivía en Eighth Street, la niñera que cuidaba a mi hijo vivía en Third Street y yo tenía que caminar varias cuadras y luego regresar. Salía aproximadamente a las cinco de la mañana y luego regresaba para esperar el transporte a las seis".
Preferencias lingüísticas de las familias
Las familias del condado de Monterey tienen preferencias lingüísticas únicas. Valoran a los proveedores de cuidado infantil que apoyan el desarrollo multilingüe, en especial en las comunidades en las que los niños están aprendiendo inglés, español e idiomas indígenas.
Los padres reconocen la importancia del desarrollo del idioma para el éxito académico y la identidad cultural de sus hijos. Muchas familias priorizan a los proveedores que pueden ayudar a sus hijos a fortalecer sus destrezas en inglés al tiempo que se mantienen los idiomas que se hablan en casa, como el español e idiomas indígenas como el triqui o el mixteco. Los padres indicaron que este apoyo multilingüe es esencial no solo para que el niño esté preparado para le escuela sino para nutrir su legado cultural. Sin embargo, también hablaron de los desafíos que enfrentan los niños que navegan varios idiomas y enfatizaron la necesidad de que los proveedores ofrezcan un desarrollo de lenguaje balanceado e intencional. Los proveedores que alientan la adquisición de múltiples idiomas se consideran esenciales para ayudar a que los niños tengan éxito tanto en la escuela como en su comunidad más amplia.
¿Qué pueden hacer los líderes estatales y locales para mejorar el acceso a opciones de cuidado infantil asequible que satisfagan las necesidades de las familias del condado de Monterey?
Las siguientes recomendaciones reflejan las opiniones e inquietudes de padres tanto en Greenfield como en Salinas que han identificado áreas clave para mejorar el cuidado infantil en sus comunidades. Estas recomendaciones buscan abordar problemas tales como la disponibilidad, asequibilidad y necesidad de cuidado que responde a la cultura con un enfoque en expandir los servicios para cubrir las necesidades diversas de las familias, en especial las que tienen hijos pequeños, trabajan horarios no tradicionales y tienen antecedentes multilingües.
Acceso y disponibilidad
Aumentar las oportunidades de cuidado de bebés y niños pequeños. Los padres enfatizaron la necesidad de contar con más opciones para los bebés y niños pequeños. Los padres desean contar con una mayor flexibilidad en el cuidado de los niños menores de dos años, ya que las opciones disponibles actualmente no tienen la capacidad de apoyar todos los grupos de edad.
Asegurar que las familias tengan opciones durante horarios no tradicionales. Los padres, en especial los que trabajan en la industria agrícola, enfatizaron la necesidad de contar con opciones de cuidado infantil disponibles temprano por la mañana, tarde por la noche e incluso opciones que cuidan al niño toda la noche. Los programas que ofrecen cuidado más tarde, tales como los programas después del horario escolar, han sido útiles para las familias de Monterey y resaltan la necesidad de programas similares temprano por la mañana para remediar las brechas de tiempo existentes antes del inicio del horario escolar. Además, los horarios flexibles, con centros de cuidado infantil que abren a las 4 o 5 de la mañana y cierran a eso de las 6 de la tarde, serían más apropiados para las familias que tienen horarios de trabajo no tradicionales.
Integrar los servicios financiados por el estado para las comunidades rurales. La conexión de las familias rurales (como las de Greenfield) con recursos adicionales (por ejemplo, servicios de desarrollo infantil) a través de centros de cuidado infantil provee un apoyo más amplio y reduce las barreras para acceder a múltiples programas financiados por el estado. Este método proporcionaría un sistema de apoyo constante y completo para las familias.
Aumentar la capacidad en los centros de cuidado infantil. Los padres también sugirieron expandir la capacidad de los centros existentes para abordar la demanda creciente de cuidado infantil con licencia. También se deben considerar centros nuevos ubicados en la comunidad, ya que muchas familias tienen barreras de transporte.
Ajustar los requisitos de elegibilidad por ingresos. Muchas familias tienen dificultades para calificar para programas existentes debido a la elegibilidad por ingresos. Ellas recomiendan ajustar la elegibilidad para el cuidado infantil subsidiado considerando los ingresos netos y no los brutos. Muchas familias, en especial las que trabajan en agricultura, no califican debido a sus ingresos brutos, pero de todos modos no ganan suficiente para pagar el cuidado infantil.
Mejorar el acceso a la información para los padres. Los padres recomiendan que la información sobre el cuidado infantil esté disponible en lugares convenientes tales como las escuelas, las tiendas de alimentos y en eventos comunitarios, así como en aplicaciones que permiten un acceso simple en varios idiomas, incluso idiomas indígenas. Además, los padres recomiendan una mayor transparencia y guía para colocarse en las listas de espera del cuidado infantil subsidiado.
Simplificar los procesos de solicitud de subsidios de cuidado infantil. Asegurar que las familias puedan fácilmente revisar su estado de elegibilidad, completar y entregar documentos y encontrar asistencia multilingüe y en persona.
“Sería bueno si el horario fuera hasta las 4:30 de la tarde, pero el problema es que solo aceptan niños de más de dos años. Así que hay ciertos lugares que abren a las cinco de la mañana y cierran a las cuatro [de la tarde], pero eso no es para todo el mundo. Así que si tienes, por ejemplo, un hijo menor de dos años, solo puedes llevar a un hijo al centro de cuidado infantil y hay que encontrar otro lugar para el otro”.
Inclusión
Multilingüismo de los centros. Dada la importancia del desarrollo del lenguaje, existe una demanda elevada de aumentar la cantidad de proveedores multilingües. A las familias les gustaría contar con entornos donde sus hijos desarrollan su pericia en inglés y apoyo educacional para los niños de familias que no hablan español, en especial aquellas que hablan idiomas indígenas como el mixteco y el triqui. Darle prioridad a estas necesidades sería un paso esencial para lograr que los servicios de cuidado infantil sean más inclusivos y eficaces.
Brindar apoyo a los niños con necesidades especiales. Los padres recalcaron la necesidad de contar con más recursos y entrenamiento para que los proveedores brinden apoyo a los niños con necesidades especiales, ya que en la actualidad muchas familias deben viajar fuera de Greenfield para obtener esos servicios.
"Creo que, si existiera la posibilidad de contar con gente que habla diferentes idiomas, sería mucho mejor para los centros de cuidado diurno, ya que nuestras comunidades están creciendo y existen diferentes necesidades. Y dependiendo de eso, creo que es importante proveer también esos idiomas en el cuidado infantil de las comunidades".
Fuerza de trabajo
Apoyar vías para convertirse en proveedor. Las familias sugirieron apoyar el reclutamiento de miembros de la comunidad local, incluso padres, para ocupar roles de proveedores con licencia ofreciendo vías e incentivos para que los potenciales proveedores cumplan los requisitos para obtener la licencia y ganen salarios adecuados.
Asegurar que los proveedores reciban desarrollo profesional. A los padres les gustaría que los proveedores tengan acceso a entrenamientos continuos de desarrollo infantil, necesidades especiales y temas de salud y seguridad. Los padres también recomiendan ofrecer mayor apoyo para que los proveedores brinden un plan de estudios educativo apropiado para la edad de los niños.
Apoyar a los familiares, amigos y vecinos que proveen cuidado infantil. Los padres reconocieron la importancia de las opciones de cuidado infantil informales y solicitaron recursos para ayudar a tales proveedores a volverse más profesionales, contando incluso con entrenamiento de desarrollo infantil. Por ejemplo, los padres mencionaron que es útil que los proveedores aprendan primeros auxilios, en especial cuando se les da prioridad al transporte y a la accesibilidad.
“Sí. Hay algunos programas que están saliendo que dicen que las mamás pueden ser proveedores. Parece relacionado, pero piden muchos requisitos y también se necesita mucho espacio para cuidar a los niños. Pero, para algunos miembros de la comunidad también sería difícil capacitarse y cuidar a los niños ellos mismos. Conocen la comunidad muy bien, así que uno siente mucha confianza cuando deja a los hijos con una persona conocida. Sin embargo, cuando se trata de solicitar una licencia, hay muchos requisitos, y creo que sería ideal para el cuidado infantil contar con algunos miembros de la comunidad con licencias”.
Entornos físicos e infraestructura
Invertir en instalaciones de cuidado infantil. Los padres desean instalaciones más grandes con más espacio y equipo de clase actualizado para que los niños aprendan, jueguen y exploren. Estas inversiones también pueden aliviar los problemas de vacantes.
Mantener tasas bajas. Los padres sugirieron contar con 1 proveedor por cada cinco niños, considerándolo ideal para que los niños reciban la atención individual que necesitan.
Asegurar que los proveedores de cuidado infantil reciban suficientes fondos para ofrecer otros productos esenciales y nutrición a todos los niños. Las familias expresaron preocupación por el costo de necesidades básicas tales como pañales, toallitas húmedas y alimentos, lo cual es una carga onerosa para muchas familias. Los padre recomendaron que los proveedores ofrezcan estas necesidades básicas par reducir los costos para las familias.
Proveer transporte. Los padres indicaron una necesidad de contar con apoyo de transporte a los centros de cuidado infantil. Por ejemplo, la opción de tener un autobús u otro servicio de transporte que reduzca las barreras para las familias trabajadoras.
Proveer cuidado de los niños enfermos en el lugar. Asegurar que las opciones de cuidado infantil tengan suficientes fondos para tener enfermeros/as en el lugar cuando los niños estén enfermos, reduciendo así la carga para los padres que frecuentemente deben salir del trabajo para pasar a buscar a sus hijos enfermos.
“Cuando estaba trabajando, me llamaban para decirme que tenía que pasar a buscar a mi hijo porque tenía un resfriado o algo así. Entonces me veía obligado a pedir permiso y buscar a otra persona que lo pasara a buscar. Era muy frustrante porque te llaman y te obligan a ir de inmediato, a veces hasta Salinas, que es muy lejos”.
En base a los hallazgos y las recomendaciones del condado de Monterey, ¿cuáles son las conclusiones para todo el estado?
Los puntos de vista y recomendaciones de los padres del condado de Monterey proveen conocimientos de cómo los encargados de tomar decisiones a nivel estatal pueden mejorar el sistema de cuidado infantil para apoyar a los padres del condado de Monterey y a las familias de toda California. Las siguientes son algunas conclusiones clave:
Revisar e implementar varias de las recomendaciones delineadas en el informe de la Comisión Distinguida del cuerpo legislativo sobre la educación en la niñez temprana.
Los puntos de vista en este informe relacionados con la expansión del cuidado infantil durante horarios no tradicionales, respaldar el multilingüismo, modificar la elegibilidad por ingresos, mejorar el cuidado infantil para trabajadores migrantes y otros aparecen en el informe de la Comisión Distinguida (BRC). La BRC fue creada con opiniones intensionales de padres y proveedores y por lo tanto refleja un punto de vista de los padres similar al de este informe. La BRC se finalizó en 2019 y, cinco años después, muchas de estas recomendaciones de los padres aún no se han materializado, como se evidencia por las recomendaciones compartidas por los padres del condado de Monterey en 2024. Este informe resalta que las recomendaciones de la BRC siguen siendo relevantes para las familias de California y presentan una oportunidad para que los líderes del estado revisen este informe importante y lo usen como mapa de ruta para mejorar el sistema de cuidado infantil de California.
Continuar priorizando la expansión del cuidado infantil subsidiado por el estado al tiempo que se reducen las barreras sistémicas de la implementación.
Aunque California cuenta con un plan de corto plazo para expandir la cantidad de vacantes de cuidado infantil subsidiado, dados los hallazgos de este informe, queda claro que debe ser una prioridad continuar enfocándose en el cuidado infantil subsidiado en California. Además de cumplir con la promesa de proveer 200 mil vacantes adicionales de cuidado infantil subsidiado para el año 2027, los líderes del estado pueden financiar una expansión adicional del cuidado infantil subsidiado para lograr que todo niño elegible para recibir cuidado infantil subsidiado tenga acceso a él, concentrándose especialmente en las regiones como el condado de Monterey, donde la necesidad insatisfecha de cuidado infantil es relativamente más alta. Además, los condados enfrentan barreras para implementar los subsidios, incluso documentación, requisitos de elegibilidad y suministro de mano de obra. Por esta razón, la expansión de vacantes de cuidado infantil subsidiadas debe combinarse con una reducción de barreras sistémicas.
Hacer inversiones robustas en la fuerza de trabajo de cuidado infantil.
La falta de oportunidades de cuidado infantil también refleja desafíos en la fuerza de trabajo. Dadas las recomendaciones de los padres relacionadas con la fuerza de trabajo, el estado podría aumentar su labor de fortalecer las vías existentes para ingresar a la industria del cuidado infantil, así como crear vías nuevas que respaldan a los potenciales proveedores para que obtengan licencia y cumplan otros requisitos. Estas políticas relacionadas con el proceso se deben combinar con un esfuerzo continuado para asegurar que a los proveedores se les pague un salario justo para que el sistema general prospere y sea capaz de prestar los servicios que necesitan las familias.
Asegurar que los proveedores estén preparados para trabajar con aprendices que hablan múltiples idiomas.
Los esfuerzos recientes a nivel estatal se han concentrado en identificar niños multilingües en los programas subsidiados. Sin embargo, el estado debe ir más allá de identificarlos y asegurar que estos niños reciban el apoyo lingüístico que sus padres desean, en especial los que hablan idiomas indígenas. Esto podría incluir hacer inversiones para aumentar las oportunidades de desarrollo profesional y reclutar más californianos multilingües para trabajar con niños lingüísticamente diversos.
Aunque este informe resalta prioridades y recomendaciones claras para mejorar el sistema de cuidado infantil en California, también resalta la necesidad de continuar enfocándose en las necesidades y prioridades de las familias en las políticas locales y estatales. Considerando el impacto de estas políticas en las vidas de las familias, ellas son expertas y saben “lo que funciona” y las mejores maneras de mejorar el sistema de cuidado infantil. En el proceso de mejorar el acceso de las familias al cuidado infantil en California y el condado de Monterey, es vital ofrecer oportunidades continuas y significativas para que las familias puedan participar en el proceso de toma de decisiones para poder crear un sistema fuerte y solidario para todas ellas.
There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Or contact us
Please check your email to confirm your signup.
key takeaway
California families face steep child care costs, with a single mother spending 61% of her income without subsidized care. In 2022, only 11% of eligible children received state subsidized care, highlighting a critical gap. Expanding subsidized spaces and tailoring solutions to diverse local needs, as seen in Monterey County, are essential for addressing this challenge and supporting families statewide.
California’s families struggle to afford child care, exacerbating cost-of-living challenges amidst soaring poverty rates. Specifically, without access to state subsidized child care, a single mother in California with an infant and a school age child spends, on average, 61% of their income on child care. Access to state subsidized child care is therefore critical for supporting families. Within California’s mixed delivery system, the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) administers state subsidized child care, providing child care programs at low- to no-cost for families with low incomes. However, the demand for subsidized child care has far outpaced supply. In 2022, only one out of every nine children eligible for CDSS’s child care and development programs received services (approximately 11%), meaning that thousands of parents and guardians must confront the reality of spending over half their income on child care.
To address this issue, the state has been working to expand the number of subsidized child care spaces. While statewide expansion of subsidized child care is an integral component to addressing challenges with access, localities also must consider how to best support families in their communities to utilize expanded access in a way that best meets families’ needs. Given California’s diversity, families across the state have a variety of child care preferences and needs. For example, family preferences vary with regards to hours of availability, setting, languages spoken, and cultural alignment. Thus, in addition to expanding the number of subsidized spaces overall, it is also critical to understand local community contexts so that expansion aligns with needs.
To spotlight the local context, this report details the unmet need for child care in one specific county, Monterey County, to uplift localized challenges and community-driven recommendations for expanding access to affordable and nurturing child care. By doing so, this report endeavors to share the experiences and perspectives of Monterey County families to make meaning of the significant gap in eligibility and enrollment in state subsidized child care and inform local and state decision makers as they work to expand affordable child care in California in a way that meets families’ needs.
About This Report
This report was supported by First 5 Monterey County. By prioritizing early childhood, fostering strong community connections, and advancing quality across systems of care and support, First 5 Monterey County enriches the lives of children, from prenatal through age 5, and their families.
Parents as experts: We extend our heartfelt thanks to Centro Binacional para el Desarrollo Indígena Oaxaqueño for their help capturing community voices and the parents who participated in the focus group. Their insights and contributions were invaluable in shaping this report.
Why focus on Monterey County?
Monterey County is home to a wide range of communities with different needs and priorities. As the seventeenth largest county in California, Monterey has nearly a half million residents with over half of all households speaking a language other than English. Additionally, compared to statewide statistics, families in Monterey County faces greater economic security challenges, namely, in 20231Monterey County data in this section are sourced from the Monterey County, California profile from the United States Census Bureau.:
14% of the Monterey County population was in poverty, compared to 12% at the state level;
Women in Monterey County spend, on average, 45% of their income on rent, the highest percentage across all 58 California counties;
Median household income was $88,035 in Monterey County, compared with $95,521 at the state level; and
29% of the Monterey County population has a Bachelor’s Degree or higher, compared with 38% at the state level.
These statistics point to racial and gender inequities in Monterey County as well as income inequality and barriers to opportunities for families with low incomes. Many families in Monterey County work in agricultural settings and speak indigenous languages. As compared with the more affluent coastal communities in the county, these families face greater barriers to economic security, including accessing affordable child care that meets their needs.
While families in Monterey County have community-specific needs, the same challenges of poverty and income inequality are mirrored at the state level, pointing to an opportunity to understand how barriers and solutions to affordable child care in Monterey County can inform improvements across the state. Listening to and uplifting the perspectives of Monterey County residents impacted by the lack of affordable child care not only supports working toward a more equitable Monterey County, but also sheds light on the possibilities for creating a California where families that have been historically underrepresented can thrive.
What is the unmet need for child care in Monterey County?
Compared with the statewide trend, the unmet need for child care in Monterey County is even wider. Specifically, approximately one in every twelve children eligible for subsidized child care in Monterey County received services in 2022. In other words, out of the roughly 27,000 children in Monterey County eligible for subsidized child care, about 2,235 are enrolled (approximately 8%). This fraction of children served versus children eligible is lower than the state average of 11%.
Disaggregating Monterey County’s unmet need for child care by race/ethnicity highlights that overall, Latinx children are disproportionately eligible for subsidized child care. Namely, nearly half of all Latinx children in Monterey County are eligible for subsidized child care. Therefore, when access to subsidized child care is limited, Latinx families in Monterey County are the most impacted.
About the Focus Groups
Themes and quotes from this report reflect the perspectives from families across four focus groups. These focus groups included families from Southern Monterey County, namely Greenfield and surrounding communities. All four focus groups were conducted in Spanish with one focus group including interpretation for families speaking Mixteco and Triqui. In total, twenty parents participated across the four focus groups. Two were conducted in-person at Centro Binacional in Greenfield, and two were conducted virtually. While the proceeding narrative summarizes salient themes from these focus groups, specific information and themes pertaining to each focus group can be found at the links below:
Focus groups intentionally centered the perspectives of families representing indigenous, agricultural, and rural communities to amplify the unique child care challenges they face in Monterey County.
What child care options do parents have in Monterey County?
As shown, the number of children eligible for subsidized child care in Monterey County far outpaces enrollment. This low percentage aligns with parent experiences. Specifically, while some parents were aware that they can access subsidized child care through the state — mainly the migrant child care program — no parent had actually accessed this care. Given that so few families enroll their children in subsidized child care programs, they must access other types of child care. The following list outlines the options that parents have accessed or are aware of in their communities.
Informal care was the most discussed option utilized by parents. Parents shared that unlicensed family child care homes were most affordable and offered flexibility with caring for their children during nontraditional hours (as needed for families working in agricultural settings). However, some parents expressed concern about informal care options given the lack of accountability to health and safety regulations and higher provider-to-child ratios. Parents had mixed success with informal care, with many parents choosing to no longer utilize informal care settings due to negative experiences.
Family, Friend, and Neighbor Care
Family and friends in the community have supported parents with providing care, particularly when other options were not available. Parents, however, were not aware that if a family met qualifications and completed necessary paperwork, a state child care voucher could be used to pay family, friend, and neighbor providers.
Licensed Family Child Care or Center-Based Care
Overall, parents shared that licensed settings were limited. Parents in Greenfield only knew of a few options and noted that parents mostly had to travel to Salinas if they wanted a licensed child care setting.
School-Based Options
For parents with school age children, some utilized afterschool programs to provide care. Additionally, families with four year olds have enrolled their children in school-based transitional kindergarten.
Head Start
A few parents were aware of Headstart programs in Monterey County. However, parents shared that Head Start programs preferred to take 3-4 year olds. The limited age range was restrictive for some parents and inconvenient for others that had children across age ranges.
In addition to the care options described above, many parents shared that they stopped working in order to provide care for their child. For some families, they do not have a friend or family member to help provide care during working hours. Given less than ideal experiences with unlicensed care and the high cost and lack of availability of licensed care, they choose not to work in order to provide care for their child.
“I used to work in the fields with my husband. But then the kids were born, and it didn't make sense to pay for their care plus my own, and I was almost left with nothing. Yes. When my twins were born, I stopped working.”
Monterey County Community Assets
Given the limited child care options for families in Greenfield, many families rely on community support to provide care for their children and make ends meet. Specific examples include:
Families in Greenfield rely on one-another to know about available child care options and advice on the best child care settings for their children.
Parents working together in agricultural settings collaborate to coordinate transportation for their children to help reduce cost and increase efficiency.
Most families referenced engagement with specific organizations in Monterey County that supported them with finding child care and other services. This included nonprofits and foundations. These organizations provide services, distribute information to families, and have helped community members become child care providers themselves.
Overall, the strong community network and growing nonprofit infrastructure has been a resource for families in Monterey County. As a result, more families are learning through word-of-mouth where to apply for subsidized child care. Given that the process feels inaccessible for so many Greenfield families, having someone in the community to explain the process can be helpful and may help increase enrollment in subsidized child care programs. The following quote from a nonprofit staff member underscores this community asset.
“Many parents don’t know about the programs or the providers available. We’re starting to spread the word in the community to encourage people to apply for these programs. Like I mentioned earlier, the office is all the way in Salinas, and if they don’t drive or don’t know how to get there, they miss out on applying for these programs.”
Why do Monterey County parents struggle to find affordable child care that meets their needs?
Families from different communities in Monterey County struggle to find affordable child care that meets their needs. At a high level, parents face this struggle for a few key reasons: 1) As it is the case in many other localities across California, there is an insufficient supply of child care providers and subsidized programs; 2) Even when some programs are available, families find it difficult to navigate the enrollment process; and 3) There’s also a lack of alignment between what parents need or prefer and the limited opportunities available to them. The following points provide further detail into the reasons why Monterey County parents are challenged when finding child care.
“If slots are full, then there is a waiting list. If you don't respond, they move on to the next person, or if you don't have the required documents or [your position moves] based on income. I once applied for my daughter, and they didn’t call me until about a year later. By the time I went, my family's income had already changed, and we no longer qualified. So now it was another issue: okay, now we don’t qualify because of the income, even though we were already on the list, now we don’t qualify and we have to look for another program.”
Parents struggle to find affordable child care due to a widespread shortage of providers and limited access to state-supported programs.
Across focus groups, parents repeatedly cited the scarcity of licensed providers, particularly for infants and toddlers, as a key barrier. This shortage forces many to rely on unlicensed care, which they trust less, or delay returning to work altogether. High turnover among providers adds to the problem, disrupting care and stability. Subsidized child care is in high demand but has limited capacity, leaving families on long waitlists with no guarantee of placement. The challenges reported across groups highlight a critical need to address the systemic shortage of reliable and affordable child care options in Monterey County.
Parents face significant challenges accessing information and navigating applications for state-supported child care, leaving many without the care they need.
Across focus groups, parents shared that the application process feels inaccessible due to barriers such as limited transportation, language inaccessibility for indigenous language speakers, and unclear guidance on eligibility. Many parents are unaware of available options, such as using child care vouchers for relative care. They also find enrollment requirements, like proof of relocation for migrant programs, too burdensome. Income eligibility criteria also exclude many families who struggle financially but earn slightly above the income limits. Additionally, concerns about immigration status and a lack of trust in the process discourage some families from applying. Word-of-mouth has become a critical source of information, underscoring the need for more accessible, community-based resources to help parents navigate child care options.
Families face challenges finding child care that is affordable, flexible, and responsive to their cultural and developmental priorities, particularly for infants and nontraditional work schedules.
The limited availability of infant and toddler care forces many parents to delay returning to work or rely on unlicensed care. Licensed care is strongly preferred due to health and safety regulations, but high costs and limited supply often leave parents with few options. Flexible hours are critical for families working early shifts, night shifts, or irregular schedules, yet this type of child care option remains scarce. Parents also prioritize providers that support kindergarten readiness, socio-emotional development, and multilingual growth, especially in communities where children speak multiple languages like English, Spanish, and indigenous languages. Without affordable, high-quality options that align with their needs, many families are left to make difficult trade-offs between work and caregiving.
"The ride comes an hour earlier, like at six o'clock, and you have to leave depending on how far it is. Before, when I lived on Eighth Street, the babysitter who took care of my child lived on Third Street, and I had to walk several blocks and then return. I would leave around five in the morning and come back to wait for the ride at six."
Families' Linguistic Preferences
Families in Monterey County have unique language preferences. They value child care providers who support multilingual development, particularly in communities where children are learning English, Spanish, and indigenous languages.
Parents recognize the importance of language development for their children’s academic success and cultural identity. Many families prioritize providers who can help children strengthen English skills while maintaining their home languages, such as Spanish and indigenous languages like Triqui or Mixteco.
Parents expressed that this multilingual support is essential not only for school readiness but also for nurturing their cultural heritage. However, they also noted the challenges children face in navigating multiple languages and emphasized the need for providers to offer intentional, balanced language development. Providers who foster multilingualism are viewed as essential in helping children succeed in both school and their broader communities
What can state and local leaders do to improve access to affordable child care that meets Monterey County families’ needs?
The following recommendations reflect the voices and concerns of parents in both Greenfield and Salinas who have identified key areas for improving child care in their communities. These recommendations aim to address issues such as availability, affordability, and the need for culturally responsive care, with a focus on expanding services to meet the diverse needs of families, especially those with young children, nontraditional work hours, and multilingual backgrounds.
Access and Availability
Increase opportunities for infant and toddler care. Parents emphasized the need for more care options for infants and toddlers. There is a desire for more flexibility in care for children under two years old, as current offerings don’t have the capacity to support all age groups.
Ensure families have options during nontraditional hours. Parents, particularly those working in agricultural settings, emphasized the need for child care options that accommodate early mornings, late evenings, and even overnight shifts. Programs that extend care later in the day, such as afterschool programs, have been helpful for families in Monterey and highlight the need for similar early-morning programs to bridge gaps before school starts. Additionally, flexible schedules, with child care centers opening as early as 4-5 a.m. and closing around 6 p.m., would better align with the nontraditional work hours many families face.
Integrate state-funded services for rural communities. Connecting rural families (like those in Greenfield) to additional resources (e.g., developmental services) through child care centers provides broader support and reduces barriers to accessing multiple state-funded programs. This approach would provide a seamless, comprehensive support system for families.
Increase capacity in child care centers. Parents also suggested expanding the capacity of existing centers to address the growing demand for licensed care. New centers should also be considered and should be located inthe community, as many families face transportation barriers.
Adjust income eligibility requirements. Many families struggle to qualify for existing programs due to income eligibility issues. They recommended adjusting eligibility for subsidized child care by considering net income rather than gross income. Many families, particularly those working in agriculture, don't qualify based on gross income but still struggle to afford child care.
Improve access to information for parents. Parents recommended that child care information be made available in convenient locations such as schools, grocery stores, and community events, as well as through apps that allow easy access in multiple languages, including indigenous languages. Additionally, parents recommended more transparency and guidance about how to be placed on subsidized child care waiting lists.
Simplify application processes for child care subsidies. Ensure families can easily check their eligibility status, complete and submit paperwork, and find multilingual and in-person assistance.
“It would be nice if the schedule went until 4:30 in the afternoon, but the problem is that they only accept children from two years old. So, there are certain places that open at five in the morning and close at four [in the afternoon], but it’s not for everyone. So, if you have, say, a child under two, you can only take one of them to that daycare, and the rest have to find another place.”
Inclusivity
Center multilingualism. Given the importance of language development, there is a strong demand to increase the number of providers who are multilingual. Families would like environments where their children develop English proficiency and educational support for children from non-Spanish-speaking homes, especially those speaking indigenous languages like Mixteco and Triqui. Centering these needs would be a critical step in making child care services more inclusive and effective.
Support children with special needs. Parents stressed the need for more resources and training for providers to support children with special needs, as many families currently have to travel outside of Greenfield to access services.
"I believe that if there are possibilities to have people who speak different languages, it would be much better for daycare centers since the communities are growing and there are different needs. And depending on that, I think it’s important to also provide those languages in child care for the communities."
Workforce
Support pathways to becoming a provider. Families suggested supporting recruitment of local community members, including parents, into licensed provider roles by offering pathways and incentivizing prospective providers to meet licensing requirements and earn a thriving wage.
Ensure providers receive professional development. Parents would like that providers have access to ongoing training in child development, special needs, and health and safety practices. Parents also recommend enhanced support for providers to offer age-appropriate educational curriculum.
Support for Family, Friend, and Neighbor providers. Parents recognized the importance of informal care arrangements and called for resources to help these providers become more professionalized, including child development training.For example, parents mentioned that first aid training for providers is useful, especially when transportation and accessibility are prioritized.
“Yes, there are some programs that are coming out saying that moms can be providers. It seems related, but they ask for many requirements, and there is also a lot of space needed for them to care for the kids. But, there are also some in the community who would find it difficult to train and take care of the kids themselves. They know the community well, so there's a lot of trust in leaving the children with someone familiar. However, when it comes to applying for the license, there are many requirements, and I think it would be good for an ideal daycare to have some community members with licenses.”
Physical Environments & Infrastructure
Invest in child care facilities. Parents want larger facilities with more space and updated classroom equipment for children to learn, play, and explore. These investments can also improve capacity issues.
Maintain low ratios.Parents suggested that a 1:5 provider-to-child ratio would be ideal for their children to get the individualized attention they need.
Ensure child care providers receive sufficient funding to offer essential products and nutrition to all children. Families expressed concerns over the cost of basic needs such as diapers, wipes, and food, which can be a burden for many families. Parents recommended that providers offer these basic necessities to reduce costs for families.
Provide transportation. Parents expressed a need for transportation support to child care centers. For example, the option for bus or another transportation service, which will reduce barriers for working families.
Provideon-site sick care. Ensure child care settings have sufficient funding to include on-site nurses when children are sick, reducing the burden on parents who often have to leave work to pick up sick children.
“When I was working, they called me to say I had to come pick up my child because he had a cold or something. So I had to ask for permission and look for someone else to pick him up. It was very frustrating because they call you, and you have to go right away, sometimes even to Salinas, which is far.”
Based on the findings and recommendations from Monterey County, what are the statewide implications?
The perspectives and recommendations from Monterey County parents provide insight into how state-level decision makers can improve the child care system to support Monterey County parents and all families across California. Key implications include the following:
Revisit and implement several of the recommendations outlined in the Assembly Blue Ribbon Commission on Early Childhood Education report.
The perspectives in this report related to expanding care during nontraditional hours, supporting multilingualism, revising income eligibility, improving migrant child care, and others are mirrored in the Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC) report. The BRC was created with intentional parent and provider input, thus reflecting a similar parent voice as this report. The BRC was finalized in 2019 and, five years later, many of these parent-driven recommendations have yet to materialize, as evident by the recommendations shared by Monterey County parents in 2024. This report highlights that the BRC recommendations remain relevant for California’s families, presenting an opportunity for state leaders to revisit this important report as a roadmap for improving California’s child care system.
Continue to prioritize state subsidized child care expansion while reducing systemic barriers to implementation.
While California has a short-term plan to expand the number of subsidized child care spaces, given the findings shared in this report, it is clear that continued focus on increasing subsidized child care in California is a priority. In addition to following through on the promise of 200,000 additional subsidized child care spaces by 2027, state leaders can fund additional expansion to state-subsidized child care to work toward ensuring that every child eligible for subsidized child care has access, particularly focusing on regions like Monterey County where the unmet need for child care is relatively higher. Additionally, counties face barriers to implementing subsidies, including paperwork, eligibility requirements, and workforce supply. Thus, expanding subsidized child care spaces must also be coupled with reductions to systemic barriers.
Make robust investments in the child care workforce.
The lack of child care opportunities also points to workforce challenges. Given parent workforce-related recommendations, the state could increase efforts that strengthen existing pathways into the child care field, as well creating new pathways that support prospective providers with licensing and other requirements. These pipeline-related policies should be coupled with ongoing efforts to ensure providers are paid a fair wage so that the overall system thrives and is able to provide the services families need.
Ensure providers are prepared to work with multilingual learners.
Recent state-level efforts have focused on identifying children in subsidized programs who are multilingual. However, the state should go beyond identification and ensure children receive the linguistic support parents want for their children, especially those that speak indigenous languages. This could include making investments to enhance professional development opportunities and recruiting more multilingual Californians to work with linguistically-diverse children.
While this report outlines clear priorities and recommendations for improving California's child care system, it also highlights the need to continue centering families’ needs and priorities in local and state policies. Given the impact of these policies on families’ lives, they are the experts in knowing “what works” and the best ways to improve the child care system. As California and Monterey County work toward improving child care access for families, ongoing and meaningful opportunities for families to engage with the decision-making process is vital for creating a strong and supportive system for all families.
There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Or contact us
Please check your email to confirm your signup.
Access to affordable child care remains a challenge for families with low incomes in California. Despite decades of effort, a large gap between supply and demand persists. In 2015, 85% of eligible children lacked access to subsidized child care, a figure that grew to 89% in 2017 and remained the same in 2022. This means that in 2022, only 1 in 9 children eligible for subsidized child care programs received services.
These statewide trends are mirrored at a more local level. County-level trends reflect the same disparity, as shown in the map below, which highlights the unmet need for child care across California.1The following counties are grouped together due to small sample sizes when calculating the number of eligible children: 1) Alpine, Amador, Calaveras, Inyo, Mariposa, Mono, Tuolumne; 2) Del Norte, Lassen, Modoc, Plumas, Siskiyou; 3) Colusa, Glenn, Tehama, Trinity; 4) Sierra, Nevada, Butte; 5) Lake, Mendocino; 6) San Benito, Monterey; 7) Sutter, Yuba. This analysis focuses on programs administered by the Department of Social Services for children 0 to 12 and excludes programs overseen by the California Department of Education — the California State Preschool Program and Transitional Kindergarten — due to changes in program structure and eligibility.
Unmet Need for Child Care Across California Counties
The proportion of eligible children enrolled in a state-funded program remains low across nearly all counties, with the vast majority below 15%. This suggests substantial barriers to child care access, with the state struggling to provide needed resources coupled with county-level challenges.
Rural parts of the state face greater gaps in child care access.
Rural counties show some of the lowest rates of enrollment of eligible children — around 9-11% — which are at or below the statewide average of 11%. This highlights persistent challenges that may be unique to these areas of the state.
Access to subsidized child care varies significantly across urban areas.
Urban counties like San Francisco (27%) show relatively higher rates of enrollment, others like Los Angeles (11%) or Orange County (6%) have much lower enrollment rates. San Francisco’s above-average enrollment likely reflects local efforts, including funding boosts from Proposition C, enacted in 2018, to address early care and education funding gaps. These disparities highlight uneven access even within urban and highly populated regions.
Counties in the Central Valley face severe gaps.
Counties like Fresno (9%), Kern (9%), and Merced (4%), have some of the lowest enrollment rates in the state. Similar to rural counties, this underscores this region’s unique challenges that exacerbate the barriers to child care access.
Statewide Policy Implications
While the supply of subsidized child care has increased since the dramatic cuts made during the Great Recession over a decade ago, California is still a long way away from meeting families’ child care needs. In the current context, state leaders must continue to prioritize increasing capacity in subsidized care. This includes following through on the promise of 200,000 additional child care spaces by 2027 and ensuring resources are available to work toward ensuring that every eligible child has access, particularly in regions where unmet need is higher. The state can also help address challenges counties face with utilizing available slots by streamlining paperwork, improving outreach to families, adjusting rigid eligibility requirements, and improving facilities. Additionally, state leaders need to make robust investments in the child care workforce. This includes strengthening pathways into the child care field as well as ensuring providers are paid a fair wage so that the overall system thrives and is able to meet families’ child care needs. To achieve these goals, a comprehensive, sustained commitment from state leaders is essential to build a stronger, more equitable child care infrastructure for all California families.
The following counties are grouped together due to small sample sizes when calculating the number of eligible children: 1) Alpine, Amador, Calaveras, Inyo, Mariposa, Mono, Tuolumne; 2) Del Norte, Lassen, Modoc, Plumas, Siskiyou; 3) Colusa, Glenn, Tehama, Trinity; 4) Sierra, Nevada, Butte; 5) Lake, Mendocino; 6) San Benito, Monterey; 7) Sutter, Yuba.
You may also be interested in the following resources:
There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Or contact us
Please check your email to confirm your signup.
key takeaway
Despite California’s efforts to expand preschool access, many children, particularly those from families with low incomes and children of color, are missing out on these crucial early learning opportunities. The complex early learning system makes it difficult for families to navigate and enroll their children.
Children and their families deserve early education opportunities that promote whole-child development and support overall family well-being. Preschool programs are an essential component in providing these experiences for 3- and 4-year-old children. While California has made significant strides in expanding access to preschool, thousands of preschool-age children still lack access to the state’s early learning programs. This is especially true for many children of color and children from families with low incomes who do not participate in any early learning program, whether it is in a preschool setting or in any other setting within California’s early learning system.
The early learning system is complex, and families are expected to navigate this system and make decisions on early learning options available in their communities. This report shares findings on the number of children served in the California State Preschool Program (CSPP) in the context of the mixed delivery system and equitable access to early learning.
What is the California State Preschool Program?
CSPP serves 3- and 4-year-old children from income-eligible families — children are eligible if their family’s income level is at or below 100% of State Median Income ($84,818 for a family of 2). The program offers part-day and full-day preschool to families who meet certain eligibility requirements — in addition to income, families must meet other requirements to access full-day preschool.1A 3- or 4-year-old child is eligible for full-day preschool if their family meets one additional requirement under the category “needs childcare.” This category includes whether the child is identified as being in danger of harm or neglect, or if the parent is in vocational training, is enrolled in an English language learner educational program, is employed or looking for employment, is seeking housing, or is incapacitated. California Education Code, title 1, sec. 8208 (d)(1). The California Department of Education (CDE) administers CSPP, including allocating funding to contractors.
At the local level, schools and colleges, nonprofits, and local governments offer the program. CSPP is part of California’s publicly funded mixed-delivery system that serves the early learning and child care needs of California families through several programs. In 2022, the entire system, including federally funded programs, served approximately 309,000 3- and 4-year-old children — most of these children are from families with low incomes.2Total enrollment is likely overestimated because families may participate in more than one program, and available data do not provide unduplicated numbers.
How many children have enrolled in CSPP over the years?
As shown in the chart below, enrollment for 3- and 4-year-old children in CSPP has not fully recovered after sharp declines in 2020. Since then, enrollment has steadily increased but still lags behind pre-pandemic numbers. From 2019 to 2022, the program served around 41,000 fewer 3- and 4-year-old children. This trend was particularly pronounced for 4-year-old children. After slightly recovering in 2021, the number of 4-year-olds in CSPP started to dip again while enrollment for 3-year-olds continued to increase — from 2021 to 2022, 4-year-old children in part-day programs experienced the largest drop.
How many children could potentially be served by CSPP?
Data show a clear gap between the number of children eligible for CSPP and current enrollment levels. In 2022, the program enrolled only 17% of all 3- and 4-year-old children from income-eligible families. Specifically, more than 560,000 children were eligible for CSPP in 2022, but the program served only about 96,000 children. Of the number eligible, 469,000 (84%) were children of color. This gap is partially addressed by other preschool and child care programs serving 3- and 4-year-old children from low-income families. However, even after accounting for other programs, many children still do not benefit from any form of publicly funded early learning services.
What is the demand for CSPP?
Despite the gap in access to CSPP, the total number of available slots significantly exceeds demand. In fiscal year 2022-23, CSPP funding could have served about 211,000 children, but total program enrollment was less than half of the total capacity (100,080 children). The state has made investments to expand the program, such as increasing income eligibility thresholds, but demand is still significantly lower than it was prior to 2020. This means that dollars intended to provide access to preschool are not reaching those families who technically have a spot available to them.
Why might CSPP supply outpace demand?
While there is not enough information to fully understand why enrollment lags behind available spaces, some reports point to potential reasons such as:
workforce challenges that limit providers’ ability to staff classrooms;
the long-lasting impacts of the pandemic;
4-year-old children moving to Transitional Kindergarten (TK);
programs may not meet families’ needs (e.g., inconvenient hours or location); and
families facing access challenges, such as not having enough information about the program.
More research is needed to understand these challenges and target solutions, especially related to how families navigate the system and the factors that guide their decisions.
Implications
The findings presented in this report highlight key implications for policymakers, state agencies, and other early learning advocates. The trends in CSPP amplify continued efforts to expand access for families with the most need. Overall, failure to engage families to enroll in state preschool exacerbates ongoing disparities at the intersection of race and income. Additional implications include:
Low take up rates of preschool slots result in millions of dollars intended to expand access for low-income families being utilized for other purposes.
Traditionally, the state reverts unused dollars to the General Fund and the Proposition 98 General Fund, which can be used for other purposes that may not support the early learning system, potentially hurting CSPP and the entire mixed delivery system.3Unused dollars could also be the result of overappropriations for a policy change.
Low enrollment points to families choosing other programs.
Research on families’ perspectives on the mixed delivery system, including preschool, shows that families from diverse backgrounds prioritize affordability, quality, safety, and specific program features when choosing early learning for their children.4Early Education Division – Opportunities for All Branch, UPK Mixed Delivery Quality and Access Report (February 9, 2024), 36, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KJjCKg4RwLU7kRVcTwhao3oxbSVfc5Px/view.Given this under enrollment in CSPP, this research may point to areas of improvement for the program.
TK and other programs are likely impacting low enrollment in CSPP.
In 2022, enrollment of 4-year-old children in CSPP continued to drop, in part due to families enrolling their children into TK, which is gradually becoming universal for all 4-year-olds. CSPP, TK, and other preschool programs now have less demand from a limited number of families interested in enrolling their preschool-age children in a program. Eligible families also have the option to send their preschool-age children to other child care and development programs — those administered by the California Department of Social Services — but since CSPP only serves 3- and 4-year-old children, CSPP is more susceptible to declining enrollment due to TK expansion.
What can state leaders do to better support families with preschool-age children?
Strengthening CSPP requires policy changes and investments at the program and system level. The 2023-24 enacted budget included significant investments that will strengthen CSPP and other programs in the mixed delivery system, such as provider rate supplements and family fee reform.
State leaders can further strengthen CSPP by implementing changes that center families and enacting needed reforms to support the early learning workforce. Those include:
greater coordination across preschool programs, early learning and K-12 infrastructure, and resource and referral agencies;
a statewide communications campaign to increase awareness of preschool options that attends to the racial, cultural, and linguistic diversity of the state; and
streamlining eligibility and enrollment across state agencies so that families know what’s available to them.
Ensuring all preschool educators are paid a living wage.
CSPP teachers are paid significantly less compared to teachers in TK. This disparity presents an opportunity to fairly compensate CSPP educators and strengthen programs by ensuring experienced and diverse educators join and stay in the field. To accomplish this, state leaders need to develop a plan to generate needed revenues to implement a rate-setting methodology that pays CSPP providers a living wage.
Making CSPP more flexible.
Program provisions related to age requirements, contracts, and teacher requirements do not allow programs to adapt to the pressures of the current early learning landscape. Flexibility in these areas can support and strengthen programs, allowing them to serve more families. For example, expanding the CSPP age range to include younger 2-year-olds would allow more families to take advantage of this program.
Increasing participation in preschool is crucial to promoting whole-child development and addressing deep inequities in outcomes later in a child’s life. California is making progress in creating a more robust mixed delivery system that works for families. However, there is still much more to be done to ensure children benefit from these investments. As state leaders consider changes to state preschool and the mixed delivery system, policy developments should be informed by those most impacted, namely, providers and caregivers.
A 3- or 4-year-old child is eligible for full-day preschool if their family meets one additional requirement under the category “needs childcare.” This category includes whether the child is identified as being in danger of harm or neglect, or if the parent is in vocational training, is enrolled in an English language learner educational program, is employed or looking for employment, is seeking housing, or is incapacitated. California Education Code, title 1, sec. 8208 (d)(1).
2
Total enrollment is likely overestimated because families may participate in more than one program, and available data do not provide unduplicated numbers.
3
Unused dollars could also be the result of overappropriations for a policy change.
There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Or contact us
Please check your email to confirm your signup.
key takeaway
California has a significant unmet need for affordable child care, with only a fraction of eligible children receiving subsidized care. The state needs to make significant and sustainable investments in expanding subsidized child care options, particularly for infants and toddlers.
Affordable child care is critical for supporting California’s families to grow and thrive. Within California’s mixed delivery system, the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) provides child care programs at low- to no-cost for families with low incomes. For far too long, the demand for subsidized child care has outpaced supply. Specifically:
In 2015, 85% of children eligible for subsidized child care did not receive services.
In 2017, 89%of children eligible for subsidized child care did not receive services.
An analysis of 2022 data shows an unfortunate continuation of this trend, underscoring the need for a larger supply of subsidized child care spaces in California.
Child Care and Development Transition
This analysis only includes child care programs within CDSS. The 2020-21 Budget Act transferred the child care and development programs from the California Department of Education (CDE) to CDSS. This transfer was intended to support a more integrated and coordinated system of care that could more effectively serve children, families, and the workforce. Thus, as of July 1, 2021, CDE only maintained oversight of two early learning programs: 1) The California State Preschool Program (CSPP); and 2) Transitional Kindergarten (TK) — both of which are now a part of CDE’s “Universal Pre-K” system. Previous Budget Center analyses of unmet need included CSPP. However, given the transition of programs from CDE to CDSS and related changes to eligibility requirements and other aspects of these programs, this analysis does not include CSPP. A forthcoming publication will explore eligibility and enrollment specific to CSPP.
What is the unmet need for child care?
In 2022, only one in nine of California’s children eligible for child care actually received services. The number of children eligible for subsidized child care has grown from 1,479,000 in 2015 to 2,161,000 in 2022. While the number of new subsidized child care spaces has increased — notably, 146,000 new spaces were added since 2021-22 — the number of new slots has not kept pace with the growing demand. The chart below provides a visual of the unmet need for child care in California.
What are the implications of failing to meet California’s child care needs?
Failure to adequately address the unmet need for child care disproportionately impacts families and children of color.
Key Implication #2
Expanding the supply of infant and toddler care is particularly critical.
Families of color in California have historically been denied access to key services and opportunities. These inequities continue to negatively impact Californians of color as recent analyses have shown that poverty rates nearly doubledfor Black and Latinx adults in California from 2021 to 2022. Moreover, Californians of color are more likely to struggle with paying for basic expenses.
The chart belowshows that children of color are disproportionately eligible for subsidized child care. As the demand for subsidized child care continues to far outpace supply, families of color are most impacted by this insufficient supply. Therefore, the lack of subsidized child care continues to exacerbate the historical and unjust inequities that impact Californians of color.
CDSS’s child care and development programs serve ages zero to twelve. Within this age range, the cost of providing care is the highest for infants and toddlers; yet, providers that serve infants and toddlers typically make less money. Given this context, as well as the potential impacts ofTK expansion on the mixed delivery system, there is concern around a diminishing supply of infant and toddler care options.
The chartbelow shows that across all age groups, only a fraction of those eligible for care are actually enrolled. However, children ages 0-2 are the only age group that is solely served by CDSS’s child care programs (other age groups have access to programs hosted by CDE). Thus, the unmet need for child care is particularly acute for infants and toddlers and failure to expand subsidized child care may disproportionately impact this age group. While school-age children have access to alternatives, it's important to note that the unmet needs stretch beyond infants and toddlers.
How can policymakers address the unmet need for child care?
While the supply of subsidized child care has increased since the dramatic cuts made during the Great Recession, California is still a long ways away from meeting families’ child care needs. Specifically, to help address the unmet need for child care, the 2021-22 enacted budget set a goal of adding 200,000 new child care slots. While 146,000 of these slots have been funded, slot expansion has been delayed for the last two fiscal years. The governor maintains his commitment to fund all 200,000 slots by 2026-27; however, the timeline for funding the remaining 54,000 slots by the deadline remains unclear.
The administration can increase the number of new slots in the 2024-25 budget to make immediate and needed progress on addressing the unmet need for child care. The unmet need for child care in California is an issue that requires state leaders' attention regardless of the cyclical ups and downs of the state budget. State leaders should make significant and sustainable investments in increasing access to affordable child care that meets families’ needs. Failure to do so keeps thousands of families — mainly families of color — on child care waiting lists, hampering their economic mobility and ability to find nurturing care for their children.
There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Or contact us
Please check your email to confirm your signup.
This website uses cookies to analyze site traffic and to allow users to complete forms on the site. The California Budget & Policy Center does not share, trade, sell, or otherwise disclose personal information. By using our website you agree to our Privacy Policy.
