Q&A: What can Virginia learn from New Mexico’s new free child care policy? – UVA Today

Report on New Mexico’s Universal Child Care Program and its Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

1.0 Introduction

In November, New Mexico initiated a universal child care program, becoming the first state in the nation to offer free child care to all families, irrespective of income. This policy represents a significant advancement in social and economic support, with direct implications for several United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The program is projected to save families an average of $12,000 annually, providing a critical model for other states and policymakers to observe.

2.0 Program Mechanics and Structure

The operational framework of New Mexico’s initiative is designed for broad accessibility and is structured as follows:

• Eligibility: Families must be working or enrolled in school to qualify. Exemptions exist for certain guardians, such as grandparents raising grandchildren.
• Application Process: Eligible families are required to apply for the universal child care benefit.
• Provider Network: Enrollment must be with a provider approved by New Mexico’s Early Childhood Education & Care Department. This network includes:

1. Child care centers
2. Family day home providers
3. After-school programs
4. Summer programs

3.0 Contribution to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

The universal child care policy directly supports the achievement of key SDGs by addressing foundational issues of poverty, education, equality, and economic growth.

3.1 SDG 1: No Poverty & SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

• The program alleviates a significant financial burden on families, contributing to poverty reduction (SDG 1).
• By providing reliable and free child care, the policy acts as an economic necessity, enabling parents to maintain employment and participate in the workforce, which fosters economic growth (SDG 8). In Virginia, for example, 70% of children under six have all available parents in the workforce, highlighting the economic importance of such support.

3.2 SDG 4: Quality Education

• The initiative is a critical investment in early childhood development. Access to high-quality early education provides benefits that last a lifetime for children, directly aligning with SDG 4, Target 4.2, which aims to ensure all children have access to quality early childhood development and pre-primary education.
• The emphasis on approved providers underscores a commitment to maintaining standards of quality in early learning experiences.

3.3 SDG 5: Gender Equality & SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

• Universal access to child care is a powerful tool for promoting gender equality (SDG 5), as it enables parents, particularly women who often bear a disproportionate share of caregiving responsibilities, to pursue and sustain careers.
• By eliminating income requirements, the program reduces inequalities (SDG 10). This universal model removes the stigma often associated with means-tested benefits and ensures that all children, not just those from low-income families or with disabilities, have the opportunity to access quality early education.

4.0 Analysis of the Universal Model

The decision to implement a universal system without income restrictions presents distinct advantages and challenges that are crucial for assessing its long-term viability and replicability.

4.1 Advantages

• Reduces Stigma: A universal approach supports all families, fostering social cohesion.
• Equitable Access: Ensures that early education opportunities are not limited by a family’s income level, contributing to SDG 10.

4.2 Challenges

• Financial Sustainability: The primary challenge is the requirement for significant and sustainable public funding to support the program at a universal scale.
• Implementation Strategy: While full universal access is the goal, expert Amanda Williford notes that a phased approach, prioritizing families most in need, can be a pragmatic step toward achieving this objective.

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 highlights that New Mexico’s universal child care program will help families “save an average of $12,000 per year.” This significant cost saving directly addresses the financial burdens on families, contributing to poverty reduction and economic stability.

2. SDG 4: Quality Education

   • The article emphasizes the importance of “high-quality early education” for a “child’s long-term development.” The program provides access to various providers, including “child care centers, family day home providers, after-school programs and summer programs,” directly linking to the goal of ensuring inclusive and equitable quality education and promoting lifelong learning opportunities for all.

3. SDG 5: Gender Equality

   • By providing free and reliable child care, the policy enables parents to participate in the workforce. The article notes that in Virginia, “70% of children younger than 6 have all available parents in the workforce, making reliable child care both an economic necessity and a family need.” As child care responsibilities disproportionately fall on women, such policies are crucial for achieving gender equality by empowering women to pursue economic opportunities.

4. SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

   • The program supports parents who are “working or in school,” thereby facilitating full and productive employment. By removing the barrier of child care costs, the policy enables more parents to join or remain in the workforce, contributing to overall economic growth.

5. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

   • The policy is universal, with “no income requirements,” meaning “all families, regardless of income, will be eligible for free child care.” This approach “removes stigma and supports all families,” directly addressing inequalities by ensuring that access to a critical service like child care is not determined by a family’s economic status.

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

1. Target 1.3 (under SDG 1)

   • Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all… and achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable.
   • The article describes New Mexico’s “universal child care program” as a state-level social protection system. Its universal nature, covering “all families, regardless of income,” directly aligns with the goal of implementing broad social protection measures.

2. Target 4.2 (under SDG 4)

   • 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 purpose is to provide access to child care and early education. The expert quoted in the article explicitly states that “High-quality early education is one of the best investments we can make,” reinforcing the connection to this target.

3. Target 5.4 (under SDG 5)

   • Recognize and value unpaid care and domestic work through the provision of public services, infrastructure and social protection policies…
   • The free child care program is a public service and social protection policy that directly reduces the burden of unpaid care work, enabling parents (particularly women) to engage in paid employment or education.

4. Target 8.5 (under SDG 8)

   • Achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men…
   • The article states that families qualify for the program if they are “working or in school.” This condition shows the policy is designed to support and enable workforce participation, which is a key component of achieving full and productive employment.

5. Target 10.2 (under SDG 10)

   • Empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of… economic or other status.
   • The universal design of the program, which has “no income requirements,” is a direct measure to promote the social and economic inclusion of all families by removing financial barriers to a crucial service.

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

1. Indicator for Target 1.3

   • Proportion of population covered by social protection floors/systems.
   • The article implies this indicator by stating the program is “universal” and available to “all families.” The success of the program could be measured by the percentage of eligible families (i.e., all families with children) that enroll and are covered by this social protection system.

2. Indicator for Target 4.2

   • Participation rate in organized learning (one year before the official primary entry age).
   • The article implies this by mentioning that families must “enroll their child with a child care provider.” Tracking the enrollment numbers in approved child care centers, family day homes, and other programs would directly measure the participation rate in organized early childhood education.

3. Indicator for Target 5.4

   • Proportion of time spent on unpaid domestic and care work.
   • While not directly measured, the article implies a reduction in this indicator. The provision of free child care frees up time that parents, especially mothers, would otherwise spend on unpaid care. The impact could be indirectly measured by tracking the increase in the labor force participation rate of parents, particularly mothers, after the policy’s implementation.

4. Indicator for Target 8.5

   • Unemployment rate, by sex, age and persons with disabilities.
   • The article’s focus on supporting parents who are “working or in school” implies that a key measure of success would be an increase in the employment rate (or a decrease in the unemployment rate) among parents of young children.

5. Indicator for Target 10.2

   • Proportion of people living below 50 per cent of median income.
   • The article’s emphasis on the program being universal and for “all families, regardless of income” suggests an aim to reduce economic disparities. While not a direct measure of inclusion, tracking whether the financial relief of “$12,000 per year” helps reduce the number of families living below a certain income threshold would be a relevant indicator of the policy’s impact on reducing inequality.

Summary of Findings

Source: news.virginia.edu