Across the country, there is a growing call for child care “deregulation” by state legislators. With costs increasing, legislators are hearing from constituents—both providers and parents— about the high cost of child care, the low pay of the workforce, and frustrations with regulations. Without understanding the complexities of child care programs, and with an awareness that low pay in child care is leading to staffing shortages, legislators are looking for solutions.
Many have focused on child-staff ratios as the source of the problem, thinking that by allowing more children per adult, the providers’ revenue will increase, enabling them to pay their staff more. However, increasing the number of children a teacher must care for may increase the turnover rate of teachers and negatively impact child safety and healthy development, undermining teachers’ ability to manage their classrooms. Reducing the number of staff or increasing the number of children per staff may also impact liability insurance premiums, which are already costly for child care providers.
The first question legislators should consider is their goal. What are they trying to achieve? This should consider both regulations and monitoring. Is the goal to ensure children are safe and healthy, or is the goal to ensure the highest quality care possible? How many different agencies have regulations that apply to child care, and what is the impact on child care costs? For example, the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) contributes substantially to program revenue, which impacts the bottom line for child care businesses. However, CACFP regulations may be written by a separate agency than a state’s child care or health agencies, and often conflict with other child care rules.
Second, how many other agencies have regulations impacting child care? These include health departments, fire agencies at both the state and community level, and safety offices and agencies that oversee building codes. Schools often provide before- and after-school care and part-day preschools. School regulations for playground safety, health screenings, and child-staff ratios often conflict with child care regulations. At a recent meeting related to child care facilities, community development financial institutions (CDFIs) shared the challenges of increasing project costs that are impacted by state and local ordinances and building code updates.
Third, does the state have a QRIS system and is it aligned with the licensing system? What regulatory weight does the QRIS system have? In this paper, we recommend that licensing and QRIS be integrated—in other words, any state licensed child care program should be a part of the quality rating system. At a minimum, licensing and QRIS requirements should be aligned. The goal of licensing is to ensure health and safety, and the expectations for higher levels of quality included in QRIS. How licensing and regulations relate to QRIS requirements need to be clear and any discrepancies resolved before any review of regulations begins. Ideally, the first “star” in any QRIS rating system should be a license and higher-level stars should provide a pathway to higher quality for providers.
It is important to note that some regulations are federally driven, and others are state and locally driven. There are two federal laws that impact early care and learning: the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) and the CACFP. Both provide funding and have certain minimum requirements. The CCDBG sets minimum health, safety, and training requirements for children in child care settings. CACFP provides funds for meals and snacks for millions of children. However, states have substantial discretion in how CACFP funds are spent, how the health and safety of children are protected, and how funds are used for quality investments or supply expansion.
While regulations are important, monitoring or compliance is equally important. State monitoring or inspections that seek to ensure that providers comply with regulations are the final area to consider. Without alignment and coordination among regulations, providers often face multiple monitoring visits and conflicting guidance. Here again, policymakers should be clear about what the goals of monitoring are and how the results are used to inform and improve future policy decisions.
When a state undertakes a review of child care regulations, there will be challenges. It is also an opportunity to review the entire regulatory system. Staffing requirements are only one item in a maze of regulations, jurisdictions, and enforcement authority. In many states, regulations have been layered on regulations for decades. QRIS systems that are not linked to licensing standards have been established, creating more confusion.
It’s time to rethink child care regulations and identify how to best promote the safety, health, and growth of children. It is not “deregulation” that is needed, but a review of decades of regulations layered over time that have increased the cost of care, the cost of monitoring, and are confusing for child care providers and parents. One thing is certain: no one wants to put small children in harm’s way.
The University of Nebraska System uses cookies to give you the best online experience. By clicking "I Agree" and/or continuing to use this website without adjusting your browser settings, you accept the use of cookies.
