The “Tri-Share” model for subsidized childcare – splitting costs between employers, employees, and states – has gained traction across the US despite concerns about its long-term effectiveness. While hailed as a promising tool for bolstering workforce participation and economic growth, critics argue it falls short of addressing the core issues plaguing America’s child care system.
Originating in Michigan nearly five years ago, Tri-Share has seen modest growth. Despite serving over 1,000 children in its state, the program remains far from reaching its ambitious goal of supporting 7,500 children across 5,000 households by 2028. This limited progress hasn’t deterred other states, particularly those leaning politically red or purple, where more expansive government-funded childcare programs face tougher political realities. By the end of 2023, Kentucky, New York, and North Carolina were exploring Tri-Share variations. Two years later, Ohio, West Virginia, Connecticut, North Dakota, Indiana, and Missouri have launched their own iterations.
Proponents argue that Tri-Share’s appeal lies in its flexibility and affordability for both employers and employees. It doesn’t rely solely on taxpayer funding; it encourages private sector involvement by requiring employer contributions. This approach resonates with conservative lawmakers who view universal child care programs as excessive government intervention.
Tri-Share: Promise or Pothole?
Lea Woods, a senior policy associate at the left-leaning think tank The Century Foundation, raises several concerns about Tri-Share’s effectiveness.
- Limited Impact on Supply: While Tri-Share addresses affordability, it does nothing to increase the scarcity of child care options. This means families may still be unable to access suitable care even if they qualify for financial assistance.
-
Low Uptake and Eligibility Barriers: Woods notes that funding limitations and strict income requirements exclude many eligible families from participating.
-
Opportunity Cost: Woods questions whether states are making the most efficient use of their resources by dedicating $3.4 million annually to Tri-Share in Michigan or similar amounts in other states. She points to successful models like Iowa’s general child care fund, which pools money to increase both access and affordability.
- Tying Child Care to Employment: Woods argues that tying child care benefits solely to employment – mirroring the current approach to healthcare – is misguided.
Acknowledging Flaws While Seeking Solutions
Despite these criticisms, Tri-Share proponents acknowledge its limitations while emphasizing its role as a crucial stepping stone in addressing the complex childcare crisis. Charles Aull, vice president of policy at the Kentucky Chamber of Commerce, states that Tri-Share aims to improve affordability, not solve access issues. He believes a parallel program focusing on expanding child care supply is necessary to address both challenges comprehensively.
Allie Sutherland, executive director of the Northeast Indiana Early Childhood Coalition (NEIECC), underscores the political realities in conservative states like Indiana where public investments in early childhood education face significant hurdles. NEIECC launched Tri-Share+ alongside a complementary program called Co-Share, which expands benefits to higher-income families by eliminating the state contribution and splitting costs between employers and employees.
Michigan is also exploring this approach with “Care Share,” allowing employers to contribute one-third of childcare costs for employees whose income exceeds 400 percent of the poverty level – a point where Tri-Share funding stops.
While acknowledging that Tri-Share alone cannot solve the child care crisis, proponents like Kristina Bajtka, director of Tri-Share for United Way of Northwest Michigan, emphasize its value as a workforce development tool and a stepping stone towards broader systemic change. They stress the need for comprehensive strategies encompassing increased state investments in early childhood education alongside initiatives like Tri-Share.
Ultimately, Tri-Share represents a patchwork solution to a deeply rooted problem. While it offers tangible relief for some families struggling with childcare costs, its limitations highlight the urgent need for more expansive and sustainable policy solutions to truly address the multifaceted crisis of child care affordability and accessibility in the United States.
