Happy Children’s Week 2025! We hope you joined some of the briefings and events, which tackled the metrics of early education, investing in foreign assistance for children, and the threats to children contained in the reconciliation package making its way through Congress.

But never fear: Here’s a recap — with links to the recorded sessions — for those who couldn’t join.

BRIEFING: Why Foreign Assistance Matters for Children: Development professionals, advocates and a former refugee highlighted the return on investment that foreign assistance delivers to children and to the world during this online briefing and demanded that Congress restore critical funding and avoid clawing back what’s left of foreign assistance, as requested by President Trump.

These experts also acknowledged that foreign aid must be reformed to better fit the nature of global crises that did not exist when the system was designed, such as climate disasters and online exploitation of children. “We’re not asking for unchecked increases, we’re asking for smart investments with proven return,” said Leila Milani, program director for Global Policy and Advocacy at Futures Without Violence, referencing programs that fight trafficking, child labor, online exploitation and other abuses. “These are targeted tools with measurable results.”

Highlights of this event included conversation with aid workers who were on the ground when U.S. funding screeched to a halt and with a Divine Irakoze, a youth advocate who grew up in a refugee camp in Malawi. Now a student at a U.S. university, Irakoze recalled overcrowded classrooms with very few books, and sitting on stones and under trees to attend class. “They (aid organizations) made a huge difference. They gave us the support we needed, not just to survive but to dream,” she said. “Educated refugees go on to start businesses, lead communities and give back. They are not a burden. They’re actually a blessing.”

Elana Banin, a former policy advisor at International Rescue Committee, and Lauren Murphy, a former senior technical advisor at USAID, shared on the ground experiences of children who are suffering or have died as a direct result of programming halted by the Trump Administration in February. They also outlined the need for reform in foreign assistance and its crucial position as part of U.S. global strategy. “Foreign assistance is not a handout, Banin said. “It is a cornerstone of U.S. strategy.”

Find the recorded webinar at this link.

BRIEFING: Invest in Children: During this briefing in cooperation with the Congressional Dads Caucus and the Congressional Mamas’ Caucus, advocates outlined how the budget reconciliation bill currently in the Senate will disproportionately hurt the nation’s children by cutting the programs that benefit them most. The House-passed bill slashes more than $1 trillion from Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), cuts that likely will not change much in the Senate, they said.

Michelle Dallafior, Senior VP Budget and Tax, First Focus Campaign for Children, Abuko Estrada, Vice President, Medicaid and Child Health Policy, First Focus Campaign for Children, and Salaam Bhatti, SNAP Director, Food Research and Action Center (FRAC) said the reconciliation would endanger the health care, food security and economic stability of millions of the nation’s children.

Federal spending on children accounts for just 8.87% of the total U.S. budget, according to Children’s Budget 2024, although children make up 23% of the population. But the programs Congress has targeted disproportionately serve children: 20% of Medicaid funding goes to children, 43% of SNAP funding goes to children, and of course, 100% of CHIP funding goes to children and pregnant women. Cuts to these programs will almost certainly push the share of spending on children much lower. During the first Trump Administration, the president proposed reducing this share to a record low of 7.32%.

Find a summary of the event here. Find the recorded briefing at this link.

BRIEFING: Early Gains, Lifelong Returns – What the Early Childhood Research Shows: Early education provides an economic engine for children, families and the country, experts told the audience at this Capitol Hill briefing, and it cannot succeed without public investment.

“Child care is one of the things that makes all other work possible,” Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR) said. “There’s no market solution…There has to be investment and to me that’s a good investment. We’re still fighting for that funding.”

A strong body of research going back to the 1960s has found that early childhood interventions reduced crime, improved educational attainment, boosted cognitive development, increased employment, and improved health. The benefits for taxpayers were just as impressive, with $2.50 of savings for every $1 invested due to less need for support later in life. Read Research Confirms that Early Learning Investments Increase Benefits to Children, Lower Costs to Taxpayers.

Georgetown University professor Dr. Anna Johnson presented findings from her School Experiences and Early Development (SEED) study in Tulsa, Okla., which has identified academic and other gains among children who attend universal pre-K.

Dr. Susan Savage, research director of the Los Angeles-area Child Care Resource Center, outlined the cascading impact of subsidized child care, saying that it helps families pay rent, get jobs that give them access to health care, and even escape homelessness.

The Trump Administration’s FY 2026 budget proposal would eliminate several preschool development block grants and a program that helps college students with children afford child care. It would also “flat-fund” the Child Care and Development Block Grant and the Head Start program, leaving investment at FY 2025 levels, which amounts to a cut.

“Flat funding, especially in this current economy, is essentially a cut,” said Casey Peeks, senior director, Early Childhood Policy at the Center for American Progress. “You will see less families receiving subsidies, Head Start teachers unable to get wage increases, and you’ll see Head Start programs close classrooms. “Long-term,” she added, “we want universal, free, birth-through-5 early childhood education. It’s important to call it ‘education’. This is setting kids up for success. If we have a free and universal K-12 system, we should also have free, universal pre-K.”

The post The Kid Angle: Experts Outline ROI on Foreign Assistance, Early Education, Other Programs appeared first on First Focus on Children.

Early education provides an economic engine for children, families and the country, experts said today on Capitol Hill, and it cannot succeed without public investment.

“Child care is one of the things that makes all other work possible,” Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR) told Early Gains, Lifelong Returns, a briefing hosted by First Focus on Children. “There’s no market solution…There has to be investment and to me that’s a good investment. We’re still fighting for that funding.”

The budget released this month by President Trump effectively cuts many early education programs, such as Head Start, and eliminates many other programs outright.

“When we get kids off to a good start in life, it’s better for kids, it’s better for communities, it’s better for the economy and it’s better for the country,” Bonamici said.

The evidence is more than anecdotal. A strong body of research going back to the 1960s has found that these interventions reduced crime, improved educational attainment, boosted cognitive development, increased employment, and improved health. The benefits for taxpayers were just as impressive, with $2.50 of savings for every $1 invested due to less need for support later in life.

“I’m not sure there is a policy area that has been more thoroughly vetted and more convincingly proven to be worth the money we spend than these programs,” First Focus on Children economist Chris Becker said. “The evidence base here is overwhelming.”

Many current studies, such as the School Experiences and Early Development (SEED) program in Tulsa, Okla., are adding to that body of work. Georgetown University professor Anna Johnson leads the longitudinal study that began in 2016 with children before they attended the city’s universal pre-K program. Researchers have found that students attending Tulsa’s universal pre-K exhibit better language and math skills through elementary school, and better executive function.

“There’s something about pre-K that’s teaching kids how to pay attention, persist when things get hard, and keep succeeding,” Johnson said.

Families and communities benefit as well as children, said Dr. Susan Savage, research director of the Child Care Resource Center, a non-profit organization serving Northern Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties. In the center’s service area, Savage said, government-supported child care makes it possible for more than 55,000 parents to work, creating a total of $1.3 billion in family earnings that gets invested in the local community.

“These families are making on average $25,000 a year,” Savage said. “They’re not going to the Bahamas. They’re going to the gas station, the grocery store and Walmart.”

The cascading impact of subsidized child care, Savage added, helps families pay rent, get jobs that give them access to health care, and even escape homelessness.

The Trump Administration’s FY 2026 budget proposal would eliminate several preschool development block grants and a program that helps college students with children afford child care. It would also “flat-fund” the Child Care and Development Block Grant and the Head Start program, leaving investment at FY 2025 levels.

“Flat funding, especially in this current economy, is essentially a cut,” said Casey Peeks, senior director, Early Childhood Policy at the Center for American Progress. “You will see less families receiving subsidies, Head Start teachers unable to get wage increases, and you’ll see Head Start programs close classrooms.

“Long-term,” she added, “we want universal, free, birth-through-5 early childhood education. It’s important to call it ‘education’. This is setting kids up for success. If we have a free and universal K-12 system, we should also have free, universal pre-K.”

For more information, read Research Confirms that Early Learning Investments Increase Benefits to Children, Lower Costs to Taxpayers.

The post Experts argue for more public investment in child care, universal pre-K appeared first on First Focus on Children.

Meanwhile, we’ve gathered members of Congress and fellow advocates to celebrate Children’s Week 2025, which starts Sunday and runs through Saturday, June 14. The week will feature a series of briefings and events with lawmakers, advocates, and academics on subjects including the metrics of early education, investing in foreign assistance for children, and the threats to children contained in the reconciliation package making its way through Congress. Events include:

MONDAY, June 9 | Welcome Reception

Monday, June 9, 5:30 pm ET

Join First Focus on Children, members of Congress and other advocates for food and drink to celebrate the kick-off to Children’s Week. Register here.

TUESDAY, June 10 | Why Foreign Assistance Matters for Children

Tuesday, June 10, 12:00 pm ET, VIRTUAL

As Congress considers critical decisions on the FY 26 appropriations, join us for a timely and urgent webinar exploring the real-world consequences of foreign assistance cuts on children across the globe. Hosted in conjunction with Georgetown University Collaborative on Global Children’s Issues. Register here.

WEDNESDAY, June 11 | Invest in Children Briefing

Wednesday, June 11, 10:00 am ET

Join First Focus Campaign for Children and the Congressional Dads Caucus for a briefing on the ways the budget reconciliation package puts the health, nutrition, economic security, and education of children at risk. Register here.

THURSDAY, June 12 | Early Gains, Lifelong Returns – What the Early Childhood Research Shows

Thursday, June 12, 12:00 pm ET

Join First Focus on Children and policy advocates for a briefing demonstrating the effectiveness and strong return on investment of federal early childhood programs. Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR) is scheduled to provide opening remarks. Register here.

For a full list of events, please visit our registration page: https://firstfocus.org/childrens-week-2025/.

The post The Kid Angle: Briefings Spotlight Challenges to Children appeared first on First Focus on Children.

In response to reports that President Trump plans to eliminate the Head Start program, First Focus on Children President Bruce Lesley issued the following statement:

“As a candidate, President Trump promised to address the child care crisis in this country, even going so far as to say that child care wasn’t really that expensive and that tariffs would pay for it. Yet here we are, with the Administration considering a budget proposal that would eliminate Head Start, a program that cares for more than 775 million low-income children each year, providing comprehensive early childhood learning and development, health and well-being, and family engagement and support services. The Administration began chipping away at the program earlier this year with a funding freeze, then last month made deep staff cuts, and now has eliminated half of all 10 regional offices of the Department of Health and Human Services, which play a key role in delivering the services of Head Start and other vital child care and child welfare programs. Rarely has there been such a clear, targeted attack on children.

Parents already have trouble finding available child care and early learning programs, and even when they do, they struggle to afford them. The average annual cost of center-based child care for an infant is over $15,000, more than in-state college tuition in many states. And who has the least access and greatest financial challenges to care? The children served by Head Start.

These children include kids ages zero to 5 with disabilities, those in foster care and children experiencing homelessness. But Head Start isn’t about the government giving these kids special favors. Research has shown that early learning does improve children’s personal success. But it also increases their participation in the workforce, economy and civic life as adults. It allows parents who otherwise could not afford care to hold jobs or finish their education. In other words, Head Start is good for America.

Project 2025, the conservative policy agenda created as a blueprint for the new Administration, proposed eliminating Head Start. And although President Trump has closely followed the extremist agenda’s recommendations, it is still shocking to see an Administration consider a proposal that will impose such widespread harm on children.

Congress must oppose this and other efforts to hollow out support for children. Because when we undermine our children, we undermine the nation itself.”

Read Trump Administration’s Plan to Eliminate Head Start Threatens Child Care, Families, and Economy. 

Read How Project 2025 Would Limit Family Choice in Child Care.

The post Killing Head Start bad for kids, bad for America appeared first on First Focus on Children.

Project 2025, the blueprint for a future Republican administration created by the conservative Heritage Foundation and partners, would do grave harm to the children and families who benefit from the programs under the Department of Health and Human Services, including early learning. This plan would eliminate high-quality, affordable child care slots at a time when there is a crisis in care across our country, harming children, their families, early childhood professionals, and our national economy. This document would limit choices for families and provides no new solutions to help children and families access care. 

Eliminating Head Start 

Project 2025 proposes eliminating the Head Start program, which provides early learning and development, health, and well-being services to low-income children birth to age 5 and their families. Head Start currently serves over 775,000 children and their families, including children with disabilities, those in foster care, and children experiencing homelessness, and it has served over 40 million children and families throughout its history. The Head Start programs includes preschool and child care for children ages 3 and 4; care through Early Head Start for infants, toddlers, and expectant families; the American Indian and Alaska Native Head Start program; and the Migrant and Seasonal Head Start program. Child care under Head Start can be center-based, home-based, and family child care, giving families many choices, and prioritizes the inclusion of parents as partners in decisions and operations. The programs produces both short- and long-term positive results for kids and families.  

Eliminating Head Start would decimate child care and other family services for hundreds of thousands of families that rely on it, and increase inequity in early learning. There is already an early learning and child care crisis in this country, with child care being least affordable and accessible for Black, Hispanic, and low-income working parents. Under current funding levels, Head Start is only able to serve 33% of eligible families, Early Head Start serves 11%, and the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) serves 15% of families who qualify. Costs for care are astronomical. In 2023, the cost to a family of child care for two children in a center was more than annual mortgage payments in 45 states and the District of Columbia. The cost of child care for an infant at a center was more than in-state tuition at a public university in 39 states and D.C. CCDBG, which is only able to serve a fraction of eligible families with child care assistance, would have no capacity to absorb families that formerly received Head Start services. Eliminating Head Start would leave countless families without an option for care for their children, putting their job security and our national economy at risk.  

Limiting Family Choice 

Project 2025 would limit family choice in care. The document claims that it wants to increase choice for parents, but would do this by eliminating center-based child care options and instead compensating parents (code: mothers) for staying out of the workforce to care for their children or finding family members to care for children. This is not a reality for many families. Families should have the full array of affordable, high-quality child care options, including kinship care, center-based care, family child care, and care during overnight or off-hours. Some of these choices cannot come at the expense of others, as Project 2025 would do.  

Providing No Solutions 

Project 2025 would not provide a solution to the child care crisis and instead would exacerbate it. The child care sector has not recovered in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and has not been able to permanently increase wages and benefits to attract and keep teachers. Lawmakers provided approximately $50 billion in emergency funding to the sector, much of which expired in 2023 and the remainder of which will expire in September 2024. In states that have not addressed this shortfall, the share of families who need child care and do not have it increased from 17.8% to 23.1%. States used this pandemic-era funding to eliminate copays for families, increase compensation for early learning teachers, reduce waiting lists, and expand child care assistance eligibility. These funds also increased women’s participation in the workforce. We know what works – increased investments in early learning programs produce positive results for children and their families. Eliminating programs that currently serve low-income families is not progress.  

Project 2025 would inexplicably attempt to address our crisis in child care access and affordability by eliminating existing child care slots and limiting parent choice. This is no way forward on a national priority for children and their families.  

The post How Project 2025 would limit family choice in child care appeared first on First Focus on Children.