Improving Child Care Facilities with Federal Relief Funding:
Lessons learned from state, Tribe, and municipal approaches to investing in child care facility capacity through the implementation of the American Rescue Plan Act
About the Project
The physical environments of child care programs are essential yet often overlooked features. A detailed account of where federal COVID recovery resources have supported the diverse facility needs of child care programs in a variety of settings, and the structures used to allocate funding can inform the practices of public and private sector entities seeking effective models to improve access to quality child care. The National Children’s Facilities Network (NCFN) supported NCFN Member First Children’s Finance in the development of a national landscape report on how federal COVID relief funds allocated to states and localities have been used to support child care facilities and infrastructure.
The report Improving Child Care Facilities with Federal Relief Funding, highlights lessons learned from the implementation of the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA), gathers data on program structures, allowable uses of funding, provider eligibility, and overall funding impact. A series of recommendations address key trends, promising practices, and ongoing gaps in the effort to enhance child care facilities through technical assistance and financial resources.
Top: A facility in Arizona before renovations from ARPA funding
Bottom: After renovations
Key Findings
Through ARPA implementation almost every state made some funding available for facilities repair and minor renovation, and at least 37 states created one or more dedicated facilities grantmaking programs.
As a result of federal and state funding allocations and program design, limited ARPA funding was used to support real estate purchases, major renovation, and construction.
States, Tribes, and municipal governments took a wide variety of approaches to designing facilities grant programs and providing technical assistance to applicants and grantees. These design decisions impacted equitable access to facilities funding.
Left: A facility’s outdoor area before repairs from ARPA funding
Center and Right: After repairs
Future Directions for Research & Advocacy
Opportunities for additional learning and evaluation: the diverse approaches used by states and other governments to craft facilities grant initiatives during ARPA implementation create a natural experiment for better understanding the impacts of these design and implementation choices. Longitudinal, comparative evaluation on the outcomes of these initiatives could significantly advance the field’s understanding of facilities development best practices and the value of high-quality technical assistance.
Increased innovation and impact in Child Care and Development Fund facilities investments: despite the prohibition on major renovation or construction, states and Tribes used a variety of approaches to leverage supplemental CCDF dollars to stabilize and improve current facilities and increase the supply of new facilities. With new clarity and flexibility on allowable renovation provided in the 2024 CCDF Final Rule, state administrators and advocates can look to examples in this report for inspiration to devise innovative, impactful, and equitable child care facilities initiatives through CCDF, including anticipating and responding to applicant and grantees’ technical assistance needs.
Models for embedding child care facility investments beyond the Child Care and Development Fund: lessons learned from the state and local fiscal recovery fund (SLFRF) can be applied to future economic and community development funding. Advocates can emphasize the importance of confirming the eligibility of capital investments in child care facilities, categorizing child care entrepreneurs as beneficiaries of federal funding, and exploring additional incentives to encourage facility development.