Recent conversations at both the federal and state levels have renewed attention to the role of regulations in the child care system. The current administration has expressed interest in reducing regulatory requirements across sectors, and similar discussions have also emerged in early childhood education, including around Head Start and the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF). Recent media reports and notice of an upcoming federal proposal to reduce child care regulations have raised new questions about the direction of future regulatory changes in early childhood education. 

At the state level, policymakers are also examining regulatory requirements as they confront increasingly constrained fiscal conditions. After several years of strong revenue growth, many states are facing tighter budgets, while last summer’s federal policy changes are expected to increase state administrative costs and program obligations related to SNAP and Medicaid, placing additional pressure on state budgets and increasing the risk of funding reductions for early childhood programs and services. 

In this environment, policymakers may view deregulation as a “quick” way to expand child care supply without having to include additional investments into the system. Proposals such as increasing child-to-staff ratios, expanding group sizes, or lowering educator qualification requirements are sometimes presented as strategies to reduce costs and increase program capacity. These approaches, however, involve difficult tradeoffs for child and educator safety, program quality, and workforce stability, and evidence suggests they are more likely to exacerbate longstanding underlying challenges facing the child care sector than improve it. 

To help advocates navigate these conversations, NAEYC has updated two resources on child care deregulation. The first resource, designed for policymakers, outlines why expanding access to affordable, high-quality child care requires sustained investment—not weaker health, safety, staffing, or educator qualification standards. It reinforces existing research showing that deregulation is not a solution to the child care crisis and can create additional challenges for programs, educators, and families. 

The second resource is designed for advocates and provides practical strategies for responding to deregulation proposals. It highlights policy options to modernize and strengthen regulations, such as streamlining licensing processes, improving background check systems, aligning regulatory requirements, exploring establishing professional licensure for the ECE field, and investing in provider supports—like providing tools and technical assistance to modernize data systems or having states cover the costs of facilities improvements. It also offers advocacy strategies to help advocates build coalitions, elevate educator and family voices, and engage policymakers in advancing strong, effective child care regulations. The resource also features two state case studies from Idaho and Illinois, where advocates successfully pushed back against proposals that would have significantly weakened early childhood regulations, and outlines the strategies they used to achieve those outcomes. 

Check out the updated resources, available here in versions for policymakers and advocates.