Grounded Approaches to Federal Uncertainty

Local Implementation Meets Federal Challenge

In January, our cohort discussed what a federal transition might mean for local early childhood programs. In February, the convening returned to the group’s core focus on local implementation, focused on action, and asking: how are individual communities responding to federal actions, and what tactical lessons for program administration can we take from each other?

Given the sensitive nature of the conversation, the following summary of this conversation is largely anonymized, but we think it’s important to share broad points from the conversation for a few reasons:

• Early childhood leaders outside of the working group may be feeling isolated and demoralized during this time of disruption and rapid change. Public service can be lonely, thankless work and perhaps even more so right now. The working group has been a consistent source of support for its members, and would like to extend that sense of support with others who share our mission of serving children and families with high quality, continuous early childhood programs.
• Specific strategies that group members shared might be helpful to leaders in other cities and counties considering how to respond to new challenges.
• One of the most powerful actions that policymakers can take right now is to share stories about the impact that harmful policies are having, so that the effects of recent policy choices and trade-offs can be better understood.

Taking Stock of Federal Actions in Trump’s First Month

Summarizing the federal actions taken to date that impact early childhood education feels challenging – this post will be outdated as soon as it is written. Even since the working group met in early February, new actions have been taken, including the firing of employees at the Department of Health and Human Services who work on child care and Head Start and the continued dismantling of the Department of Education. While other parts of the federal government have arguably seen bigger shifts, the first month of the Trump Administration has included a number of announcements that have shaken local early childhood education program administrators.

Notably, these include:

• The federal funding freeze which, while temporarily paused, has still caused major delays in access to some critical funds—including Head Start funds for many centers and Child Care and Development Block Grant dollars for a few entire states
• Executive Orders that directly or indirectly impact early childhood education, including those that speak to restrictions on racial equity work in educational settings and school choice. The President’s school choice order explicitly names programs funded by the Child Care and Development Block Grant
• Dismantling of some funding and structures at the Department of Education, including cuts to the research and data infrastructure that tracks student outcomes and progress nationally, including cuts to the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, which tracks students from birth through elementary school and helps make the case for the efficacy of early childhood education. Other cuts at the Department of Education may indirectly impact early childhood education through the cancelation of many research and teacher training grants and firing of staff members, including staff focused on special education, civil rights, and equity work
• Immigration actions, including the revocation of the sensitive locations policy, which could open early education programs up to visits by immigration authorities

These policies have concrete impacts on local programs, though impacts vary based on state context and community reliance on federal funding. At a high level, some of the effects to date in local communities include:

• Child care providers faced a risk of closure, jeopardizing services to families, because of delayed access to Child Care and Development Block Grant and/or Head Start funds
• Communication freezes from federal agencies overseeing early childhood programs cut off access to critical information for local, state, and regional program leaders
• Some grant reports were reportedly sent back to states and communities with guidance to remove language about diversity, equity and inclusion, even when these activities had been part of the application’s scoring.
• Early childhood programs experienced dips in attendance among immigrant families and mixed-status families, though data is still limited. Some are also concerned about teacher attendance given the number of early childhood teachers who may be immigrants or members of mixed-status families themselves

This list is likely not comprehensive, as the working group represents a small sample of communities and reporting on local impacts is an ongoing challenge for reporters spread thin by the overwhelming volume of news in the administration’s first month. As the Trump Administration announces new Executive Orders, prepares a budget, and enables Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency to impound funds and conduct mass firings of career civil servants at relevant agencies, there are likely more consequences for local early childhood education programs on the horizon.

Supporting and Sustaining Local Early Childhood Work

So, what are local early care and education leaders supposed to do at this moment? For many, the answer is to double down on continuing to provide high-quality services and offering additional support to their children, families, and educators. Many local early childhood programs have operated for a decade or more, successfully weathering both the uncertainty of the first Trump Administration and disruptions of the COVID-19 pandemic. While the events are not directly comparable, many leaders are now practiced in rapid resource deployment, emergency communications, information collection, and coalition building. Those are all useful skills now, too.

For some group members, uncertainty about federal funding is catalyzing conversations about raising new local revenue to sustain early childhood programs. The need for sustained revenue feels especially strong in places where state funding for early care and education may be under threat, too. (For communities that are beginning conversations about whether and how to raise local revenue, the Children’s Funding Project can be a powerful resource and support.)

As leaders navigate the new normal, there is ample opportunity to learn from each others’ experiences. Some of the tactical lessons that working group members shared—and that may be relevant to leaders in communities across the country are included here.

• Collect data to better understand impact, provide support, and share stories. Many program leaders are thinking about how to collect rapid response data, particularly related to child attendance and funding gaps. This will help program administrators adjust policy where needed (for example, delinking attendance and funding where possible, to avoid penalizing programs) and to deploy support (for example, connecting programs to emergency funds within the community).

  More broadly, collecting information is critical to understanding the impact that federal policies are having on children and families to ensure members of the public and policymakers alike understand the local impacts of federal choices. The National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) created a regularly updated survey to collect impact stories from the field that speak to a variety of the federal actions, which we hope all local leaders can amplify.

• But, be mindful about who is collecting the data and how it is being used. Many program leaders are thinking carefully about collection of sensitive data and how that data could be accessed and weaponized against families and young children in the future. To avoid these unintended effects, a local partner that does not receive any public funds could support efforts. Program leaders are reviewing applicable state, county, or local data safety protocols and considering how to leverage anonymized data about families and providers wherever possible.
• Provide early childhood program leaders with as much reassurance as possible about their financial stability. Group members administering payment and support to early childhood educators are developing communications to reassure providers. Many municipal early childhood programs rely primarily on local funds, meaning the federal funding disruptions are actually less threatening than providers might fear. For example, the Denver Preschool Program sent this message to providers to clarify that the program does not rely on federal funding, and that providers would continue to receive payment and resources they need.
• Equip early educators with practical resources to create safe, stable classroom environments. Several groups have been leaning on the CLASP toolkit (also shared in our January meeting recap) to support educators. Others are using data from rapid response surveys to better understand the specific needs that educators have right now and pull together the necessary resources to meet those needs.
• Create new spaces or leverage existing ones to share information frequently and widely. In a few communities, existing community- and state-wide early childhood coalitions have been meeting more regularly and using their meetings to discuss policy updates, hear about how the updates are impacting people on the ground, and strategize next steps. In one state, what was a monthly call is now a weekly two-hour open session; the focus of these calls have already shifted from information sharing to brainstorming about collective action. In another community, local nonprofit leadership groups have organized regular update calls for nonprofit organizations to hear from their congressional representatives directly.
• Find pathways to safely continue equity work. All communities that participate in the working group are committed to implementation with equity – it was one of the few requirements for communities to join in the first place. The term equity has become a political lightning rod and deserves further definition to clarify what we mean here: fairness and justice in the delivery of early childhood services so that all children can benefit from them–even, and especially, the ones who lack transit, whose parents lack resources or language skills, or who need higher touch support–and so the educators who work in early childhood programs can be supported and respected.

Early childhood program administrators use various strategies to build equity into their work. For many, this includes intentional partnership with community-based child care providers, building parent and provider voice into policymaking, specific professional development resources and support for teachers and leaders, curricula that reflect the experiences of the children in their classrooms, and policies that ensure programs are reaching all eligible families, including those who are hard to reach and enroll.". The level of threat that program administrators feel now varies based on how they publicly describe their work, what their mix of funding is, and what initiatives they have underway that specifically touch on diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Many programs are continuing in their work, including proceeding with training for educators that had been previously planned. In some cases, folks are changing the language in their flyers and other materials to avoid crossing any lines. In one community, members of the local legal community are holding weekly briefings for nonprofit organizations. These calls give nonprofit leaders access to resources and advice (though not legal counsel) and creates a space where nonprofit leaders can ask questions about what they are hearing and reading. For others looking to replicate a structure like this, the local bar association’s pro bono arm could be a useful resource.

• Lay the groundwork for future advocacy. Many communities are focusing on how to continue making a compelling case for early childhood education investment and how to shore up local support. Some local leaders are engaged in power-mapping exercises to try and identify who in their network has relationships that might be relevant in the current federal administration. In communities where they have not been engaged well before, there is a big emphasis on how to effectively target the business community.

Looking Ahead

In the months to come, the ECE Implementation Working Group will continue to do what it was designed for—serve as a unique place for the people driving local implementation of early childhood education programs to share lessons and strategies. The broader federal landscape may continue to shift, and so therefore may the specific themes the group discusses, but the core value of this space as a community for local practitioners will remain the same; these blog posts will continue to help local implementation lessons reach an even wider audience. Local efforts to fund and sustain early education programs may become even more important than ever. Through this work, we will continue to support them.

You can reach out to us with questions about the group and its work at npl_work@newamerica.org.