Beyond the Headlines

What the surveys say:

The National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) workforce survey of early childhood educators highlights a system under mounting financial and operational strain. Rising operating costs are driving tuition increases and contributing to program instability, even as a majority of leaders reported under-enrollment and greater family financial insecurity.

2,741 program leaders were asked: "Over the past year have the following facility and staff-related aspects of your program increased, decreased or stayed the same?" "I don't know" and "N/A" responses not include, thus some rows do not sum to 100%.

These pressures are not limited to center-based programs. The National Association for Family Child Care (NAFCC) Annual Survey reports that 71 percent of family child care providers work 50 or more hours per week, nearly half work more than 60 hours, and 35 percent report take-home pay below $10 per hour after expenses, underscoring the fragile business model across settings. 

In 2025, a large share of respondents report working well beyond standard fulltime hours each week.

While more than half of program leaders in NAEYC’s survey raised wages in 2025, attention to compensation has not been sufficient to stem staff turnover or ease recruitment challenges. Nearly a quarter (22 percent) of educators reported they are considering leaving the field within the next year, with many citing better wages and benefits as key factors.

The NAFCC report further notes that most family child care providers operate as sole proprietors without access to employer-sponsored health insurance, paid leave, or retirement benefits, and that the workforce skews older, raising additional concerns about long-term supply and succession. 

This chart pulls from two survey questions directed at program leaders. "Over the past year, have the following staff-related aspects of your program increased, decreased, or stayed the same?" and "Compared to this time last year, have you experienced more or less difficulty with any of the following aspects of your program?"

Program leaders also reported public funding stagnating or declining relative to need, and more than half of leaders reported that families had withdrawn due to lost subsidies or being unable to afford tuition. Another 57 percent said their trust in institutions has dropped over the last year. Subsidy rates frequently fail to cover the true cost of delivering quality care, forcing program leaders into difficult tradeoffs that affect both program sustainability and family affordability.  

Sarah’s take: 

This data reflects a system under sustained structural strain. Programs are absorbing higher operating costs without a corresponding increase in reliable public investment. When leaders raise tuition to remain viable, families struggle to afford care, enrollment becomes unstable, and workforce challenges intensify. Nearly one in four educators considering leaving the field is not simply a workforce issue. It is a warning about overall system stability. Family child care programs report similar pressures, including razor thin margins, fluctuating enrollment, and difficulty covering basic expenses despite long hours. Many communities are seeing more programs close than open, further limiting supply. 

From a policy standpoint, this reinforces a long-standing reality: the child care system cannot, on its own, deliver affordability for families, fair compensation for educators, and high-quality experiences for children. Without sustained public investment aligned to the true cost of quality, programs will remain fragile and educator attrition will continue. Family child care educators, many operating as sole proprietors without benefits or administrative infrastructure, face even greater vulnerability. Strengthening compensation strategies, reforming subsidy rates using cost-of-quality methodologies, and committing to predictable, long-term funding are essential to building a stable and equitable system. 

These surveys confirm what educators and leaders have navigated for years: a workforce model stretched beyond sustainable limits. Staffing shortages mean remaining teachers absorb additional responsibilities while managing their own financial uncertainty. Leaders face constant tradeoffs between affordability, compensation, and quality within a financing structure not designed for stability. In family child care, business risk and household income are directly linked, so enrollment dips or delayed subsidies immediately affect family stability. 

Over time, this strain accelerates burnout and pushes committed educators out of the profession. Burnout is not a resilience gap. It is a system design failure. If we want stability for children and families, we must build a financing structure that treats early educators as professionals, with compensation and supports aligned to the true cost and value of their work.