NC sees drop in child care providers as closures outpace openings – WRAL.com

North Carolina Child Care Crisis: A Threat to Sustainable Development

A report on the escalating crisis within North Carolina’s child care sector reveals a significant net loss of providers, posing a direct threat to the state’s progress on several key Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The closure of these essential facilities creates profound economic and social instability for families and undermines the foundations of quality education and gender equality.

Statistical Overview and Immediate Impacts

Provider Closure Rates

Recent data highlights an alarming trend in the availability of child care services.

• In August alone, more than 47 child care providers ceased operations.
• During the same period, only 22 new providers opened, resulting in a net loss of 25 facilities.

Economic Hardship and SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

The lack of reliable child care directly impedes the ability of parents, such as Tyaira Obie, to maintain employment. This situation jeopardizes household financial stability and obstructs broader economic growth, directly conflicting with the objectives of SDG 8. When caregivers cannot work, they are unable to provide for their families, increasing the risk of poverty and undermining economic productivity.

Systemic Challenges and Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

Operational Viability and Economic Pressures

Child care providers, including experienced directors like Cassandra Brooks of Little Believers Academy, face immense financial strain. This instability in a crucial economic sector runs counter to the principles of decent work and sustainable enterprise as outlined in SDG 8.

• Providers report a significant decrease in state funding.
• Operational costs continue to rise, creating an unsustainable financial model.
• Some facilities are forced to take out loans simply to meet payroll obligations.

Broader Implications for Sustainable Development

The child care crisis has far-reaching consequences that impact multiple Sustainable Development Goals.

1. SDG 4 (Quality Education): The closure of child care centers limits access to crucial early childhood education, which is the bedrock of lifelong learning and development. A weakened early education system compromises the achievement of quality education for all.
2. SDG 5 (Gender Equality): The burden of inadequate child care disproportionately falls on women, creating significant barriers to their full and effective participation in the workforce. This crisis reverses progress toward gender equality and the economic empowerment of women.
3. SDG 1 (No Poverty) & SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities): The inability of parents to work due to a lack of child care directly contributes to household poverty. This issue particularly affects low-income families, thereby widening socio-economic disparities and undermining efforts to reduce inequalities.

Outlook and Governmental Response

Projected Trends

Industry experts, including Cassandra Brooks, predict that the rate of provider shutdowns will accelerate. A significant number of providers are reportedly planning to close by the end of the year, signaling a deepening of the crisis.

State-Level Interventions

The North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, represented by Candace Witherspoon of the Division of Child Development and Early Education, acknowledges the severity of the issue. The department is engaged with the General Assembly to find a sustainable solution. The success of these efforts is critical to aligning state policy with its commitments to the Sustainable Development Goals.

• The General Assembly determines the funding levels and reimbursement rates for child care programs.
• State investment is required to cover the financial gap and ensure the long-term sustainability of these essential services.
• Ongoing communication and advocacy are being employed to educate policymakers on the crisis’s impact on the state’s economic and social well-being.

SDGs Addressed in the Article

1. SDG 1: No Poverty

   • The article connects the lack of child care directly to a family’s economic stability. The quote from parent Tyaira Obie, “If we can’t work, we can’t provide for our kids,” explicitly links access to child care with the ability to earn an income and avoid poverty. The closure of child care facilities threatens parents’ employment, pushing families towards financial instability.

2. SDG 4: Quality Education

   • The article focuses on the closure of child care providers and academies, which are foundational to early childhood development and education. The involvement of the “Division of Child Development and Early Education” underscores that these centers are not just for care but are a crucial part of the educational system. The loss of these facilities directly impacts children’s access to pre-primary education.

3. SDG 5: Gender Equality

   • While not explicitly stated, the issue of child care availability is intrinsically linked to gender equality. The parent quoted in the article is a woman (Tyaira Obie), reflecting the societal reality that women disproportionately bear child care responsibilities. A lack of accessible and affordable child care is a significant barrier to women’s full participation in the workforce, hindering their economic empowerment.

4. SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

   • The article addresses this goal from two perspectives. First, it highlights how the lack of child care prevents parents from maintaining employment, thereby hindering “full and productive employment.” Second, it details the economic struggles of the child care providers themselves, who are small business owners facing “rising operational costs” and having to “take out loans just to meet payroll.” The sustainability of the child care sector is essential for both the providers’ decent work and the broader economic participation of the workforce.

5. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

   • The child care crisis disproportionately affects lower-income families who cannot afford alternative, more expensive options or absorb the loss of income from a parent leaving the workforce. The article’s focus on the need for state support (“decrease in state funding,” “how much the state is going to invest to cover the gap”) implies that without public intervention, the gap in access to essential services will widen, exacerbating economic inequalities among families.

Specific SDG Targets Identified

1. Target 4.2: Ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development, care and pre-primary education.

   • This is the most direct target. The article’s central theme is the closure of child care providers like “Little Believers Academy,” which directly reduces the availability of and access to early childhood care and education services in North Carolina.

2. Target 8.5: Achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men.

   • The statement, “Parents like Tyaira Obie rely on places like Little Believers Academy to care for her kids while they go to work,” directly illustrates that child care is a critical support service enabling parents to participate in the labor force and achieve full employment.

3. Target 5.4: Recognize and value unpaid care and domestic work through the provision of public services, infrastructure and social protection policies.

   • The article discusses the need for state intervention and funding to support child care centers. This support is a form of “public service” and “social protection policy” that helps formalize and sustain the care economy, which in turn allows parents (often women) to pursue paid employment. The plea for the General Assembly to “determine the funding” and “invest to cover the gap” is a call for such policies.

4. Target 1.2: Reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women and children of all ages living in poverty.

   • The consequence of parents being unable to work due to a lack of child care is a direct threat to household income. The quote, “If we can’t work, we can’t provide for our kids,” shows how this issue can lead directly to an increase in the proportion of families living in or at risk of poverty.

Indicators for Measuring Progress

1. Net change in the number of child care providers.

   • The article explicitly provides data that can be used as an indicator: “in August alone, more than 47 closed. In the same month, only about 22 opened for business.” This net loss of 25 providers in a single month is a direct, quantifiable measure of declining access to child care services.

2. Level of public investment in early childhood education and care.

   • The article implies this indicator by repeatedly mentioning the lack of state support. Phrases like “a significant decrease in state funding” and the need for the General Assembly to “determine the funding that we receive” point to the level of government financial commitment as a key metric for the sustainability of child care programs.

3. Financial viability of child care facilities.

   • This is implied through the descriptions of the providers’ struggles. The statement that “Some people are having to take out loans just to meet payroll” suggests that indicators such as business profitability, debt levels, and the rate of insolvency among child care providers could be used to measure the health of the sector.

Summary of Findings

Source: wral.com