Report on Child Care as a Critical Component for Sustainable Development

Introduction: Aligning Economic Growth with Sustainable Development Goals

A session at the 2025 NCSL Legislative Summit highlighted the critical role of high-quality, affordable child care as a primary driver for economic growth and the achievement of key Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Experts from public and private sectors emphasized that strategic investment in the child care system is essential for building a prosperous and equitable future. This report synthesizes the findings, framing the child care crisis and its potential solutions within the context of the SDGs.

Barriers to Sustainable Development Posed by the Current Child Care System

The inadequacy of the current child care infrastructure presents significant obstacles to achieving several SDGs, particularly those related to poverty, education, gender equality, and economic growth.

• SDG 1 (No Poverty) & SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities): The high cost of child care directly undermines efforts to eliminate poverty and reduce inequality. A 2024 analysis found the average annual cost of child care to be $13,128. This figure represents 35% of a single parent’s median income, pushing vulnerable families closer to poverty and widening the inequality gap.
• SDG 5 (Gender Equality) & SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth): The lack of accessible child care disproportionately impacts women, hindering their ability to enter and remain in the workforce, thereby impeding progress toward gender equality. For the broader economy, this results in significant losses. The U.S. economy loses an estimated $122 billion annually in lost earnings, productivity, and revenue, directly conflicting with the objectives of decent work and sustained economic growth.
• SDG 4 (Quality Education): A critical shortage of child care facilities, illustrated by states like North Carolina where only one slot is available for every five families in need, limits access to quality early childhood development and education (Target 4.2). Furthermore, the system is unsustainable for providers, who face low pay and burnout, which can compromise the quality of care and education provided.

Strategic Framework for Achieving Child Care and Sustainable Development Synergy

To address these challenges, a multi-faceted approach grounded in shared responsibility is required. The following strategies align with SDG principles and offer a path toward a sustainable child care system.

1. Embrace Shared Responsibility to Fulfill SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals): Economists concur that the benefits of child care extend to parents, businesses, and the economy at large. Therefore, a cost-sharing model involving federal, state, local, and private entities is essential. This collaborative approach is the cornerstone of SDG 17, leveraging partnerships to achieve sustainable goals.
2. Invest in Both Supply and Demand to Support SDG 8 and SDG 10: A dual-focus investment strategy is necessary to build a robust system.
   • Demand-Side Investments: States such as Arizona, Massachusetts, and Wisconsin are making investments to help low-income families afford child care, directly addressing SDG 10 by reducing financial inequality.
   • Supply-Side Investments: To increase the number of available, high-quality slots, states like Connecticut and Montana have established endowments and trust funds. These initiatives are crucial for building the infrastructure needed to support a productive workforce (SDG 8).
3. Foster Innovative Public-Private Partnerships (SDG 17): Successful models demonstrate the power of collaboration. Iowa’s Childcare Solutions Fund, which matches private dollars with state funding, exemplifies an effective partnership. Similarly, Mississippi incentivizes corporate and individual donations to early learning collaboratives with a state tax credit, proving that cross-sector cooperation can generate sustainable funding streams.

Conclusion: A Bipartisan Imperative for a Sustainable Future

Strengthening the nation’s child care system is a bipartisan issue fundamental to economic vitality and social well-being. By investing in affordable, high-quality child care, policymakers and business leaders can simultaneously advance several Sustainable Development Goals. Such investment fosters decent work and economic growth (SDG 8), promotes gender equality (SDG 5), reduces poverty and inequality (SDG 1 & SDG 10), and ensures access to quality early childhood education (SDG 4). Creating strong support systems for families is not merely a social issue but a foundational strategy for developing a resilient workforce and building a more prosperous, equitable, and sustainable future for all.

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article on the child care crisis and its economic impact connects to several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The analysis reveals a focus on education, economic growth, equality, and collaborative efforts.

• SDG 4: Quality Education

  The core subject of the article is “high-quality, affordable child care,” which is a fundamental component of early childhood development and education, a key aspect of SDG 4.

• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

  The article explicitly links the lack of child care to economic problems, stating it is a “problem with their productivity,” “attendance at work,” and a barrier to “getting back into the workforce.” It quantifies the economic loss at “$122 billion annually,” directly tying the issue to national economic health and the goal of productive employment.

• SDG 5: Gender Equality

  While not the main focus, the article touches upon this goal by stating that child care is “not just a woman’s issue.” This acknowledges the disproportionate burden of caregiving that often falls on women, and how providing accessible child care is crucial for enabling their full participation in the economy and workforce, a key element of gender equality.

• SDG 1: No Poverty

  The extreme cost of child care, cited as “35% of a single parent’s median income,” places a significant financial strain on families, particularly those with lower incomes. This cost can be a major barrier to financial stability and can push families closer to or deeper into poverty, making it relevant to SDG 1.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  The article highlights that the financial burden of child care disproportionately affects single-parent households and low-income families. Efforts mentioned, such as states “investing in helping low-income families afford child care,” are direct attempts to reduce these economic inequalities.

• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

  A significant portion of the article is dedicated to solutions that involve collaboration. It emphasizes that “shared responsibility is essential” and highlights “innovative public-private partnerships” like Iowa’s Childcare Solutions Fund and Mississippi’s tax credit system as critical strategies. This directly aligns with the goal of strengthening partnerships to achieve sustainable development.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the issues discussed, several specific SDG targets can be identified:

• Target 4.2: Ensure access to quality early childhood development and care

  The entire article is centered on this target. It discusses the need for “high-quality, affordable child care” and highlights the severe shortage, where in North Carolina, “there’s one child care slot available for every five families who need it.”

• Target 8.5: Achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all

  The article connects child care directly to this target by explaining that when parents lack child care, it negatively impacts their “productivity,” “attendance at work,” and ability to enter or re-enter the workforce. The estimated “$122 billion annually in lost earnings, productivity and revenue” underscores the link between child care and the goal of full, productive employment.

• Target 5.4: Recognize and value unpaid care work through the provision of public services

  By advocating for a robust system of “high-quality, affordable child care,” the article promotes a public service that formalizes and supports caregiving. This allows parents, often women, to pursue paid employment, thereby addressing the economic disadvantages associated with unpaid care work.

• Target 10.2: Empower and promote the social and economic inclusion of all

  The article’s focus on the affordability crisis, noting that child care costs “35% of a single parent’s median income,” points to a system that economically excludes many. State initiatives mentioned, such as those in Arizona, Massachusetts, and Wisconsin “investing in helping low-income families afford child care,” are direct actions toward achieving this target.

• Target 17.17: Encourage and promote effective public, public-private and civil society partnerships

  This target is explicitly addressed in the section “Public-Private Partnerships.” The article champions the idea that “cost-sharing among federal, state, local and private entities is critical” and provides concrete examples like Iowa’s “Childcare Solutions Fund, which matches private dollars raised locally with state funding,” and Mississippi’s corporate tax credits for donations.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article mentions several quantitative and qualitative indicators that can be used to measure progress:

• Indicator for Access (Target 4.2):

  The ratio of available child care slots to the number of families needing care. The article provides a specific example: “one child care slot available for every five families who need it” in North Carolina. Progress would be measured by an increase in this ratio.

• Indicator for Affordability (Targets 10.2, 1.2):

  The cost of child care as a percentage of median family income. The article provides clear data points: “10% of a married couple’s median income and 35% of a single parent’s median income.” It also critiques the “7% of income” benchmark, suggesting this is a key metric to track. A reduction in these percentages would indicate progress.

• Indicator for Economic Impact (Target 8.5):

  The total economic loss attributed to the lack of child care. The article cites a national figure of “$122 billion annually in lost earnings, productivity and revenue.” A decrease in this figure would signify progress in mitigating the economic consequences.

• Indicator for Workforce Participation (Target 8.5):

  Metrics related to employee productivity and attendance. The article implies these are key business concerns, stating that lack of child care is a “problem with their productivity” and “attendance at work.” These could be tracked at a corporate or national level.

• Indicator for Investment and Partnerships (Target 17.17):

  The amount of public and private funding allocated to child care solutions. The article mentions specific mechanisms like “Connecticut just passed a historic early childhood endowment” and Mississippi’s “$1 million for donations” tax credit, which are measurable forms of investment.

4. Create a table with three columns titled ‘SDGs, Targets and Indicators” to present the findings from analyzing the article. In this table, list the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), their corresponding targets, and the specific indicators identified in the article.

Source: ncsl.org