Reimagining Child Care in California: New Research Charts a Path Forward
By Rachel Sampson
February 2, 2025
February 2, 2025
|
Finding reliable, affordable child care for infants and toddlers has become one of California’s most urgent—and least solvable—challenges. New research from the UC Irvine School of Education, the UC Irvine Center for Population, Inequality and Policy, and UC Berkeley Equity and Excellence in Early Childhood examines why California’s child care system continues to fall short for families and providers—and what it would take to fix it.
The policy brief, “Zero to Three: A Vision for Universal Child Care in California,” is co-authored by UC Irvine School of Education Associate Professor Jade Jenkins and UC Berkeley researcher Austin Land. It offers a practical roadmap for expanding access to quality care for children ages zero to three - centered on unified funding, workforce stability, and reducing barriers that limit child care supply. Former Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen has famously stated, “This is a textbook example of a broken market. It does not work for the caregivers. It does not work for the parents. It does not work for the kids.” |
Jade Jenkins
|
The research arrives at a pivotal moment. California is estimated to lose up to $23 billion in economic output each year as families struggle to access child care, forcing many parents, particularly mothers, to reduce work hours or leave the workforce entirely.
“This isn’t just a family issue, it’s a statewide economic issue,” Jenkins said. “When parents can’t find care, it affects workforce participation, household stability, and long-term opportunity.”
At the same time, policymakers nationwide are nearing a tipping point. Major cities like New York and San Francisco are driving toward universal child care, while states such as New Mexico and Vermont are moving to implement it. The question is increasingly urgent: can California—now the world’s fourth-largest economy—keep up?
The paper highlights what families already know: child care is not just expensive, it is incredibly difficult to navigate. Families often face outdated provider information, long waitlists, and confusing eligibility requirements.
For providers, the system is equally strained. Jenkins and Land identify that California’s child care system is funded through a maze of 14 different funding streams, creating administrative burdens and regulatory barriers that limit growth and stability.
Even when new investments are made, the system hasn’t reliably translated funding into new supply. The authors note that a $3.1 billion increase in funding for child care and preschool between FY 2019 and FY 2023 yielded zero growth in licensed capacity for children under six. Funding alone cannot create child care teachers or facilities; funding that is paired with practical strategies, as Jenkins and Land have laid out, can.
A central takeaway from the paper is simple: California cannot expand access without stabilizing and professionalizing the child care workforce.
“This isn’t just a family issue, it’s a statewide economic issue,” Jenkins said. “When parents can’t find care, it affects workforce participation, household stability, and long-term opportunity.”
At the same time, policymakers nationwide are nearing a tipping point. Major cities like New York and San Francisco are driving toward universal child care, while states such as New Mexico and Vermont are moving to implement it. The question is increasingly urgent: can California—now the world’s fourth-largest economy—keep up?
The paper highlights what families already know: child care is not just expensive, it is incredibly difficult to navigate. Families often face outdated provider information, long waitlists, and confusing eligibility requirements.
For providers, the system is equally strained. Jenkins and Land identify that California’s child care system is funded through a maze of 14 different funding streams, creating administrative burdens and regulatory barriers that limit growth and stability.
Even when new investments are made, the system hasn’t reliably translated funding into new supply. The authors note that a $3.1 billion increase in funding for child care and preschool between FY 2019 and FY 2023 yielded zero growth in licensed capacity for children under six. Funding alone cannot create child care teachers or facilities; funding that is paired with practical strategies, as Jenkins and Land have laid out, can.
A central takeaway from the paper is simple: California cannot expand access without stabilizing and professionalizing the child care workforce.
|
The median wage for child care workers in California was $17.92 per hour in 2023—around the level of cashiers and retail sales jobs—driving annual turnover of 19–29 percent. This constant churn disrupts continuity of care and is especially detrimental to infants and toddlers, whose development depends on trusted relationships with consistent caregivers.
“No parent wants a revolving door of adults caring for their child,” Jenkins said. “If we want quality and stability for children, we have to treat early educators like professionals—and compensate them accordingly.” |
Rather than recommending incremental changes, the policy brief proposes a system-level redesign built around four core strategies:
“We’re offering a realistic path forward,” Jenkins said. “Not a perfect system overnight—but a set of building blocks that would allow California to move toward universal child care in a way that actually works for families and providers.”
- Unify funding and eligibility so families can enroll through a “no wrong door” approach and providers can expand without navigating fragmented rules.
- Invest in facilities and infrastructure by reducing zoning and permitting barriers and repurposing spaces that could be converted into child care centers.
- Strengthen the early educator pipeline with wage standards, career pathways, training, and recruitment efforts that reduce turnover and improve quality.
- Create a single statewide marketplace where families can find real-time openings and providers can update vacancies and access public funding in one place.
“We’re offering a realistic path forward,” Jenkins said. “Not a perfect system overnight—but a set of building blocks that would allow California to move toward universal child care in a way that actually works for families and providers.”
Research Collaboration Across UC Irvine, UC Berkeley, and Stanford
This work reflects a growing collaboration across UC Irvine and UC Berkeley, and was released alongside a complementary economic analysis led by Stanford researchers examining the broader costs of inaction and the economic return of early childhood investment.
Together, these papers point to a shared conclusion: child care is essential infrastructure—and California cannot afford to treat it as optional.
Read the policy brief here: https://www.cpip.uci.edu/files/briefs/zero-to-three.pdf
This brief was released in conjunction with a new policy brief by the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR) that unpacks the economic cost of California’s broken child care market and quantifies the public investment needed for a universal child care program aimed at improving access and affordability for families with infants and toddlers.
This work reflects a growing collaboration across UC Irvine and UC Berkeley, and was released alongside a complementary economic analysis led by Stanford researchers examining the broader costs of inaction and the economic return of early childhood investment.
Together, these papers point to a shared conclusion: child care is essential infrastructure—and California cannot afford to treat it as optional.
Read the policy brief here: https://www.cpip.uci.edu/files/briefs/zero-to-three.pdf
This brief was released in conjunction with a new policy brief by the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR) that unpacks the economic cost of California’s broken child care market and quantifies the public investment needed for a universal child care program aimed at improving access and affordability for families with infants and toddlers.
About the Authors
Jade Jenkins is an Associate Professor at UC Irvine’s School of Education and Co-Director of the Center for Population, Inequality, and Policy. Her work examines early childhood policies and their impacts on children, families, and providers. She also serves in several leadership roles supporting early childhood policy and practice in Orange County and across the UC Irvine community.
Austin Land is the Policy and Evaluation Lead for Universal Preschool at UC Berkeley Equity and Excellence in Early Childhood, focusing on the impact of early childhood programs on children’s developmental trajectories.
Jade Jenkins is an Associate Professor at UC Irvine’s School of Education and Co-Director of the Center for Population, Inequality, and Policy. Her work examines early childhood policies and their impacts on children, families, and providers. She also serves in several leadership roles supporting early childhood policy and practice in Orange County and across the UC Irvine community.
Austin Land is the Policy and Evaluation Lead for Universal Preschool at UC Berkeley Equity and Excellence in Early Childhood, focusing on the impact of early childhood programs on children’s developmental trajectories.
