The Faces of ECE series is designed to raise awareness of the many early care and education professionals who are supporting one of the most important fields in America today. From the people on the front lines working with children to those working behind the scenes to prop the system up from within, everybody has a role to play and a story to tell. Child Care Matters is committed to sharing those stories.

One of the great joys of creating this series has been the opportunity it has afforded me to learn from people who have been there and done that across the spectrum of ECE. All of our guests have been accomplished professionals who are very good at what they do and who are making a difference in this field every day. Even so, you would be hard pressed to find anyone who has crafted a stronger legacy than this month’s guest, Linda Smith.  

If you have followed this space at all over the past three decades, you know who Linda is. Her leadership has helped usher in so many of the programs and policies that have moved the field forward, and she continues to be a vocal advocate for the strategies and actions that can lead to a more well-funded and well-functioning system. 

One of the things about Linda that shines through in her work (and in our conversation) is her bias toward action. She has little interest in rehashing all the things that are wrong with our current system. Rather than dwell on what’s broken, Linda leads with what works and what we can all do right now to make things better? Her standing call to action can best be summed up as “What are you waiting for?” 

All this to say, this is already more introduction than Linda needs. Here she is, in her own words: 

Introduction and Background

John Jennings: Hello and welcome, Linda, to Faces of ECE! It’s an honor to have you on. I’d love to start at the very beginning. What is your ECE origin story? 

Linda Smith: I actually started on a reservation in my home state of Montana. I was born and raised on the Flathead Reservation in northwestern Montana and began working in early childhood on the Northern Cheyenne Reservation in the eastern part of the state. That was one of the most impactful times in my entire career, being given the responsibility and flexibility to set up two different programs. 

John: After that, you helped  create the United States military child care program. Can you tell us how the initiative came about and how you became involved with it? 

John: Once you accomplished everything you set out to do for military child care, what did you take on next? 

Linda: I went from the defense department on a fellowship to the Senate. Senator Kennedy at the time had been one of the primary sponsors of the Military Child Care Act and he was really happy with what we had done there, so he asked me to come over and see what the country could learn from what the military did. So I worked on the hill on the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions committee for two years. It just so happened that in that time period I retired from DoD and was hired on the Senate staff. From there, I went to Child Care Aware of America.

John: What were some of your biggest takeaways from supporting CCR&Rs throughout the country? 

Linda: Well, one of the things I was trying to work on in the Senate was how we could create a “system” for child care in the U.S. I think most people would agree that we still don’t have one, but we need one. In looking at what we had learned from the military experience, I felt like the child care resource and referral agencies could serve as a natural fit for how we could systematize child care at the local level. It was a way to get information both to and from local communities into Washington policy at the time. 

We were able to implement many of the programs that are still in place at CCAoA today, specifically the work with the Department of Defense. We set up a subsidy program that was nationwide to subsidize military families off base. 

John: The next stop in your journey was a stint with the Department of Health and Human Services. You were with ACF, where you oversaw Head Start and the child care subsidy system, among other things. How would you describe your time there? 

John: This marked the end of your time working for the federal government, where you got a firsthand look at how important bipartisan cooperation is to any kind of meaningful improvements to the system. How did that translate to your next stop at the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC)?

Linda: What I was able to do at BPC, which was pretty much an independent thinktank, was to take on some of the issues that I knew we needed to tackle from a policy perspective. One of those was supply. We have a gap of about 28 percent of the kids who need care don’t have access to a child care space.  We have to figure out the financing and how we’re going to pay for the gap between what parents can afford to pay and the cost to do this well. Getting back to my roots, I was able to work on what we need to do to train the workforce, pay them incrementally better as they move up in their profession, and so on.

John:  That brings us to Buffet Early Childhood Institute. What was your role and focus there? 

Linda: My role was Senior Director of Federal Policy.  My work focused on what we can learn from research and that can translate that into policy recommendations. I primarily looked at what we can learn from what states are doing. There’s a substantial amount of work that needs to be recognized and used by other states. 

One issue I looked at was the Tri-Share model that came out of Michigan. There’s controversy in the field—some say “it doesn’t fix the problem”—however  it was never intended to fix ALL the problems. What it does is create a “shared responsibility model of financing” that brings businesses to the table, and it does focus on those families that don’t qualify for CCDBG funds, but still can’t afford child care in this country.  There are a substantial number of families in that position.

John:  I understand you have big news to share. What’s next for you? 

Linda: I am just a believer that there’s a lot that we can learn from almost everything states are trying, and instead of criticizing, we should be supporting any innovation we can, because lessons learned matter. 

I am in the process of setting up an independent, nonpartisan organization called “The Child Care Trust.” This is being launched with the support of Child Care Aware of America.  Our goal will be to move beyond describing the problems with child care to SOLUTIONS that are based in research, data, and actual lessons learned from the various state and federal initiatives.  

For example, we have learned a lot from the Early Head Start-Child Care partnerships.  How can we translate that into actionable steps for states and communities?  We also know a lot about the actual child care gap.  How do we fill that gap and what will it cost?  I believe we know more than we think we do.  It’s just time to turn what we know into policies that states and communities can implement.  

Going back to my roots, another area we will be focusing on is Native American issues.  Some of the best child care I have seen are Tribal Programs, but they are seldom acknowledged or shared.  It’s time to open up communications between tribes and state governments.  There is a lot to learn from how our Native Americans approach the early years.  

Next Steps for Improving the System

John: You have been very vocal about the need for more action and more solutions as opposed to a continued emphasis on what’s not working. What advice do you have for those who are advocating for the field today? 

John: Given your stance on workforce compensation and the work you’ve done to close the gap between what parents can afford to pay and what it takes to run a sustainable child care business, how do you feel about the recent shift away from market rate surveys in favor of cost estimate models? 

John: You were heavily involved in the launch of the Child Care Gap website, which was a multi-year project to map supply throughout the country.  You’ve already mentioned how 28% of children don’t have access to child care within a reasonable distance. What are some next steps we can take to fix that very fundamental problem? 

Linda: It is painfully apparent that we need investment in the supply. We don’t have enough of it, and what we have is so fragile that these programs can’t afford to raise the pay of their workforce because if they lose one or two children, they’re in trouble. So how do we get enough money both in building supply and figuring out how to keep these businesses stable and pay people better. That goes back to the military model.

When we built the military model, we gave the money to the programs and we said “Here’s the money. You’re going to pay people more, you’re going to train them, you’re going to give them benefits, and—oh by the way—you’re not going to charge parents any more money.” I think we keep missing that. It is not so simple to just pay them more. Where’s the money coming from? How do you get it in their paychecks? 

I worry that we’re losing the lessons learned from the stabilization money during Covid. We stabilized child care, and then the money went away, and now we’re back to the old model. When I hear people just talk about “Increase the subsidy rates,” that’s not going to be enough to fix this. It’s not enough of a share of the market for it to fix the market. Subsidies are around 8% of the total market. That won’t change things. 

Modernizing the System

John: Speaking of the Child Care Gap project, that vision of clear supply and demand data throughout the country has been a longstanding white whale/unicorn for the field. There are no data standards, we don’t have a lot of visibility in some places, and so on. What were some of the challenges you encountered when trying to get that data at scale throughout the country?

John: Let’s turn to recent events. In the wake of the administration’s claim of rampant fraud at the start of this year, you came out with a statement about the need for the system to strengthen its checks and balances and move beyond manual processes and paper compliance. Why do you think it’s taking so long for states to modernize their infrastructure?

Linda: I wish I had the answer to that. I think that as funds are getting tight since the Covid dollars ran out, we’re seeing more states look at governance, and I believe governance is a big impediment to progress. In one state, which I won’t name, the child care dollars go to the Department of Education, the subsidy dollars are here, and the licensing dollars are over here. The point I was trying to make in that statement I put out is that when those three systems aren’t talking to each other, that sets the stage. When you have widespread fraud, it’s because you have systemic problems, it’s not because an individual provider has figured out how to game the system.

States need to come to grips with the fact that they don’t have checks and balances. Ohio’s Governor DeWine held a press conference recently where he laid out very clearly what Ohio was doing in terms of checks and balances and he was dead on about it. You can disagree with him on some things, but he was right on when it came to that issue. 

If licensing is going out to do an inspection, are they taking a list of which subsidy children should be there and doing a visual check of who’s in attendance? It’s not that hard to do. But our licensing and our quality rating systems don’t always talk; subsidy doesn’t talk to quality; it really is a problem. The states that have been successful have addressed this issue of governance. 

John: You have such a unique vantage point, having seen the system from so many different angles. What is the most important piece of advice you would give to the people working to improve the system right now? 

Linda: We have got to stop focusing on all of this other “stuff,” if you will, and start focusing on what it is children are getting. Are they safe? Are they healthy? Are they cared for by people who care for them? If we can get to the shared goal of the child being in a quality, healthy, and safe setting, we can fix this. As long as we keep thinking about “the system” and just taking one piece bit by bit, we won’t get there. The goal really needs to be focused on the children and what they’re getting, and—backing away from that—parents, and what are their choices. 

----

Additional Resources

• Follow or connect directly with Linda on LinkedIn here
• Sign up for Child Care Trust updates here