More States Adopt ‘Tri-Share’ for Child Care, Even As Some Question Its Merits – EdSurge

Report on the Tri-Share Child Care Model and its Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: A Public-Private Partnership for Economic Empowerment

The Tri-Share child care program, initiated in Michigan, presents a public-private partnership model aimed at making child care more affordable for working families. By dividing the cost of care three ways between employees, their employers, and the state, the program directly addresses key barriers to workforce participation. This model is increasingly being adopted by other states as a strategy to advance several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), SDG 5 (Gender Equality), and SDG 1 (No Poverty). While the program has achieved milestones, its scalability and overall impact on the child care sector are subjects of ongoing analysis and debate.

Program Mechanics and Expansion in Support of SDG 8 and SDG 17

The Cost-Sharing Framework

The core of the Tri-Share model is its tripartite funding structure, which alleviates a significant financial burden on low- and middle-income households. This intervention is designed as a workforce development tool, enabling parents to enter or remain in the labor force, thereby contributing to household financial stability and broader economic growth, in line with the objectives of SDG 8.

Replication and Partnerships for the Goals (SDG 17)

The Tri-Share concept has demonstrated significant appeal, leading to its adoption or piloting in numerous states. This expansion exemplifies SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals), as it relies on collaboration between government bodies and the private sector. The model’s traction in politically diverse states highlights its perceived value as a market-involved solution to a socio-economic challenge. States with replica models include:

• Kentucky
• New York
• North Carolina
• Ohio
• West Virginia
• Connecticut
• North Dakota
• Indiana
• Missouri

A Critical Assessment of the Model’s Impact on Broader SDGs

Challenges to Achieving SDG 4 and SDG 10

A recent report from The Century Foundation raises critical concerns about the Tri-Share model’s limitations in addressing the systemic child care crisis. The analysis suggests that while the program targets affordability, it may fall short of advancing goals related to universal access to quality education and reducing systemic inequalities.

1. Failure to Increase Child Care Supply: The program does not create new child care slots, thereby limiting its ability to improve access. This is a significant barrier to achieving SDG 4 (Quality Education), which depends on the availability of early childhood development facilities.
2. Low Uptake and Equity Concerns: Due to strict income eligibility and limited funding, the program’s reach is modest. This raises questions about its effectiveness in promoting SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), as many families in need may be excluded.
3. Opportunity Cost of Public Funds: The report argues that the state funds allocated to Tri-Share could be invested in more strategic initiatives, such as general child care funds, that could more effectively increase both access and affordability, better serving the aims of SDG 4.
4. Precariousness of Employment-Tied Benefits: Linking essential services like child care to employment can create instability for families, potentially undermining progress toward SDG 1 (No Poverty) and consistent access to early learning.

Program Defenses and Strategic Adaptations

Positioning Tri-Share as a Component of a Larger Strategy

Proponents acknowledge the program’s limitations but defend it as a targeted and politically feasible intervention. They frame Tri-Share not as a panacea but as one essential tool among many. The primary objective is to support workforce participation (SDG 8) and gender equality (SDG 5) by making care affordable for the current workforce. They argue that addressing supply and access requires parallel, not alternative, programs.

Evolving the Model to Enhance Inclusivity

In response to critiques and to broaden the program’s impact, new variations are emerging. These adaptations aim to extend benefits to more families, thereby strengthening the model’s contribution to SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities).

• Co-Share (Indiana): This two-way split between the employer and employee eliminates the state’s portion, making the benefit available to a wider range of workers.
• Care Share (Michigan): This model allows employers to contribute one-third of the cost for employees whose income exceeds the Tri-Share eligibility threshold, with the employee covering the remaining two-thirds.

Furthermore, officials in Michigan emphasize that Tri-Share operates alongside other state investments in early childhood education, such as PreK for All and educator wage pilots, which collectively advance SDG 4.

Conclusion: An Incremental Approach to Sustainable Development

The Tri-Share model is a pragmatic, partnership-based approach (SDG 17) that directly supports SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) by mitigating the cost of child care for working families. While its design has inherent limitations regarding the expansion of child care supply (SDG 4) and universal access (SDG 10), its political viability has enabled its adoption where more comprehensive public programs may not be feasible. Ultimately, Tri-Share is viewed by its administrators as a critical “piece of the puzzle,” whose success in contributing to broader sustainable development is contingent upon its integration within a larger ecosystem of policies supporting early care and education.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

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

1. SDG 1: No Poverty
   • The article discusses how child care can be a family’s “biggest monthly expense.” The Tri-Share program, by splitting this cost, provides “substantial relief” to working families, particularly those with low and middle incomes, which helps alleviate financial burdens and prevent families from falling into poverty.
2. SDG 4: Quality Education
   • The program is centered on child care, which is a critical component of “early childhood development.” The article mentions that Michigan has several efforts designed to “boost child care and early childhood development,” directly aligning with the goal of providing foundational education and care for young children.
3. SDG 5: Gender Equality
   • While not explicitly stated, the issue of child care affordability is intrinsically linked to gender equality. Access to affordable child care is a key enabler for parents, particularly women, to participate equally in the labor force. By reducing the child care barrier, the program indirectly supports women’s economic empowerment.
4. SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth
   • The article explicitly states that the program is an “attractive option for leveraging child care to spur workforce participation and economic growth.” It quotes a director who clarifies that Tri-Share was designed as a “workforce development program, removing a key barrier to economic growth,” which directly connects to achieving full and productive employment.
5. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
   • The program specifically targets “low- and middle-income employees” through its “income eligibility threshold.” By making child care more affordable for these groups, it aims to reduce economic inequality and promote the social and economic inclusion of families who might otherwise be priced out of quality child care and the workforce.
6. SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals
   • The fundamental structure of the Tri-Share program is a public-private partnership. The article details how it works by “splitting the costs of child care equally among working families, their employers and the state.” This three-way collaboration is a direct example of the multi-stakeholder partnerships promoted by SDG 17.

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

1. Target 1.3: Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all, including floors, and by 2030 achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable.
   • The Tri-Share program acts as a social protection system by subsidizing a major cost for working families, specifically targeting those with limited incomes.
2. Target 4.2: By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development, care and pre-primary education so that they are ready for primary education.
   • The program’s core function is to improve the affordability of child care, which is a direct means of increasing access to early childhood development and care.
3. Target 5.4: Recognize and value unpaid care and domestic work through the provision of public services, infrastructure and social protection policies, as nationally appropriate.
   • By providing a social protection policy that subsidizes child care, the program helps families manage care responsibilities, which traditionally fall disproportionately on women, enabling their participation in the paid economy.
4. Target 8.5: By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men, including for young people and persons with disabilities, and equal pay for work of equal value.
   • The article emphasizes that the program’s goal is to boost “workforce participation,” directly supporting the objective of achieving full and productive employment by removing a significant barrier for working parents.
5. Target 10.4: Adopt policies, especially fiscal, wage and social protection policies, and progressively achieve greater equality.
   • Tri-Share is a social protection policy that uses state funds (“Michigan is investing $3.4 million a year”) to make a necessary service more equitable for families below a certain income threshold, thereby working to reduce economic inequality.
6. Target 17.17: Encourage and promote effective public, public-private and civil society partnerships, building on the experience and resourcing strategies of partnerships.
   • The program’s model, which involves collaboration between the state (public), employers (private), and families (civil society), is a direct implementation of this target. The article also notes its replication in other states, showing the promotion of this partnership model.

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

1. Number of beneficiaries served:
   • The article provides concrete numbers that can be used as indicators. It states the program has served “more than 1,000 children in the state” and has a goal of “reaching 7,500 children across 5,000 households in Michigan by 2028.” This directly measures the reach of the social protection and early childhood care program (Targets 1.3 and 4.2).
2. Level of public and private investment:
   • The article mentions specific financial commitments, such as “Michigan is investing $3.4 million a year,” “In Kentucky, it’s $2 million annually,” and Ohio has “set aside $10 million for its pilot.” These figures serve as indicators of the financial scale of the social protection policy (Target 10.4).
3. Number of participating entities and geographic spread:
   • The expansion of the program to other states (“Kentucky, New York and North Carolina,” “Ohio, West Virginia, Connecticut, North Dakota, Indiana and Missouri”) serves as an indicator of the model’s adoption. The number of participating employers is also an implied indicator, as the article mentions Indiana is “bringing on the largest employer in the region” (Target 17.17).
4. Workforce participation rate:
   • While the article does not provide specific data, it states the program’s purpose is to “spur workforce participation.” An implied indicator for measuring the program’s success would be the change in employment rates among eligible and participating families (Target 8.5).

4. SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Table

Source: edsurge.com