Building Stronger Early Childhood Coalitions

Coalition building is a critical topic to the ECE Implementation Working Group because it matters at every stage of running a program: cross-sector coalitions consolidate political and public support for new investments in early childhood, help strengthen and streamline implementation, and mobilize supporters to help sustain progress in early learning programs during difficult times. Now more than ever, as federal funds come under threat and state budgets face constraints, it feels critical for local leaders to think about how alliances in their communities can support public investment in early childhood programs.

In every community, the coalition and the work to build it looks different. There is important foundational relational and trust building work to be done within the early childhood community. Historic disinvestment in the early childhood sector has sometimes hurt coalition building because of real and perceived competition over limited resources. The needs of parents are at times pitted against those of providers, educators in different settings have not been treated equitably, and early childhood services have been used as a political football in budget fights. The first step to coalition building has to be collective reflection and recognition of these past battles, to then work together with a unified focus on the needs of children and families.

The people who administer early childhood programs are not always actually in the coalition and in fact are often on the receiving end of pushback from the advocacy community. People who want the same things still have different ideas about how to achieve them, and differences emerge between organizers who are pushing for progress and the staff who will have to make it happen. This varies somewhat; some programs are led by independent or quasi independent agencies who may be more likely to play a coalition role. Regardless, forging relationships between administrators and advocates can sometimes feel awkward or odd. However, when the very existence of programs for kids is on the table—from the shuttering of regional Head Start offices to disruptions to child care subsidy payments—there may be room for advocates and administrators to together take on immediate and existential threats to the programs and services that families want and need.

It can be incredibly powerful to unite the early childhood sector toward a common aim. However, that power is limited if the early childhood community of advocates, providers, parents, and administrators talks only to each other. Successful coalitions are often broader, bringing diverse leaders from business, labor, and the civic sector to the table. A resounding theme from the Working Group’s recent convening is that every issue is a child care issue. The way we care—or don’t care—for the country’s youngest children and their families will impact businesses, the workforce, and future economic development. A broad tent of supporters will help this message land where it needs to, and put communities on a path to better meeting the needs of their children and families.

At our recent convening, leaders in the ECE Implementation Working Group and expert panelists shared stories and lessons about how to build successful, sustained multi-sectoral coalitions to support investments in early childhood education.

• Understand who holds formal and informal power in your community. Many leaders have started with a power mapping exercise to better understand who has decision-making authority over relevant budgets and policy and who holds sway with those officials. This kind of exercise may reveal natural, but untapped connections to early childhood education. For example, are any business leaders on the boards of major early childhood programs?
  
• Bring in unexpected allies. Because the benefits of early care and education are so wide-reaching, potential champions can be found everywhere if we make the right case. In one state, the American Academy of Pediatrics chapter has made early childhood education a legislative priority because of the importance to children’s health and development. In another community, the ‘Divine Nine’ fraternities and sororities have been big champions and turned out voters for the early education ballot initiative.
  
• Give allies a chance to put skin in the game. While many organizations are willing to sign onto letters, write op-eds, or appear at rallies—all incredibly important—there is also great power in finding champions who will put in their own resources, too. In Atlanta, the Rotary Club of Atlanta adopted early childhood education as a three-year project and is running a teacher incentive program with cash bonuses. In San Antonio’s Pre-K 4 SA program, public-private partnerships are a focus, and business leaders can adopt an early education center. Businesses of all sizes have participated; one large company is partnering on the construction of a new state-of-the-art early childhood facility, while a small business owner formed a multi-year relationship with a center and gave moderate but sustained contributions to support them over time. Time, connections, and expertise are also important resources; in communities where the early childhood initiative is governed by a Board of Directors, those board seats can be filled by champions from across the community and other sectors.
  
• Recognize you can’t win everyone over. Sometimes, people and organizations that may on the face seem to be allied with the early childhood sector are not on board. In some communities, the public school district leadership and unions have actively opposed the expansion of early childhood education services. The reasons vary, and include concerns about the impact to public school enrollment and to the teaching workforce, and the risk of spreading public resources too thin. In some communities, it may be harder to win over business leaders because of concerns for how proposed funding mechanisms for early childhood education might impact their bottom line. For early childhood leaders working to build broad-based coalitions, it is important to at least try to make the case for each stakeholder group that addresses their concerns. In some cases, it may be possible to shift them from outright opposition to neutral. But the tough reality is that not everyone will be an early childhood champion—at least not yet.
  
• Don’t wait for an emergency. When the threat of funding cuts comes, it is important to already have your allies on speed dial. When the work is going well, celebrate it and bring leaders from other sectors in: invite business leaders to visit local early childhood programs, host roundtable discussions to share data and research about impact, and create opportunities for families to share what the impact of their program participation has been. Developing proactive partnerships and building these deeper relationships helps ensure your allies will stand the program when times are tougher and it will make those requests for solidarity feel more genuine, rather than transactional.
  
• Own the agenda. As one local program leader shared when reflecting on their work with local business leaders, “we have built the coalition to orient them around our values, not the other way around.” Other members of the coalition will bring valuable perspectives and may have valid ideas about how to shape services and programming. Ultimately though, early childhood system leaders should still be the ones to design what services look like in the community, informed by the input of families and providers.
  
• Package data and information in ways that feel tangible and personal. Some stakeholders will be motivated by anecdotes when considering why to support early childhood investments. Others will need to see the hard numbers. There can be powerful ways to share this information that hit close to home. For example, show elected officials the numbers of children in their district who benefit from early childhood services and the gaps that are specific to their constituents. As the federal government threatens Head Start funding, many local leaders are translating those potential cuts to children in specific zip codes as a strategy to drive response from their elected officials and partners, and tools like this table from the Center for American Progress make this information easy to find. Many local leaders regularly bring families and providers to their state capitol to share firsthand experiences with elected officials. As a best practice, families and providers should be given messaging training and compensated for their time to ensure they are fully supported and empowered to share their perspectives.
  
• Build power with other coalitions, too. Unexpected partnerships across issue areas can strengthen early childhood coalitions. This builds on another important takeaway from the Working Group’s convening: rejecting narratives of scarcity applies to coalition building too. Too often, public goods are pitted against each other to fight for the same budget scraps: early childhood education, affordable housing, education, services for the elderly, and so on. In some communities, early childhood coalitions have found strength by building power with coalitions fighting for other issues. In Washington, DC, the Under 3 DC Coalition worked alongside housing and homelessness advocates; the tax that funds the city’s early childhood workforce compensation program, the DC Early Childhood Educator Pay Equity Fund, also funds the construction of new affordable housing.

The ECE Implementation Working Group is a group of early childhood education leaders from cities and counties across the country. These leaders gather to share best practices from their experience working with families and local communities, and their work aligns with the New Practice Lab’s theory of change: that implementation lessons should inform policy design from the start. More information about the Working Group can be found here. You can reach out to us with questions about the group and its work at npl_work@newamerica.org.