This plan is not intended to be the final answer on universal child care in Alaska. It is a starting point for a long-term conversation about how we can make child care more affordable and accessible while building the providers, workforce, facilities and sustainable funding necessary to make it work.

​

As I talk with Alaska parents, child care providers, employers, educators, tribal organizations, local governments, rural communities and taxpayers, this plan can and should change. New ideas should be considered. Problems we identify should be addressed. If evidence shows that 1part of the plan will not work, we should be willing to change it.

​

Over a 25-year period, Alaska’s economy, population, technology and child care needs will also change. The plan must be flexible enough to change with them.

The goal remains consistent: build a sustainable child care system that strengthens Alaska families, our workforce and future generations. The path we take to reach that goal should continue improving as we learn.

​

Future Generations First

​

Child care is one of the largest expenses facing many Alaska families. At the same time, many communities simply do not have enough child care providers or available spaces.

This is more than a child care issue. It is a cost-of-living issue, a workforce issue, an economic-development issue and an investment in Alaska’s future generations.

​

I believe Alaska should begin working toward a long-term goal:

​

Affordable, accessible child care for every Alaska family that needs it.

​

But we should not simply declare child care free and expect the system to magically appear. Alaska must first address shortages of providers, workers, facilities and available child care spaces.

​

That is why I believe universal child care should be developed as part of Alaska’s 25-Year Plan for Future Generations, expanding responsibly as we build capacity and establish sustainable funding.

​

Build Capacity and Affordability Together

​

Universal child care requires more than helping families pay their bills.

​

If Alaska provides thousands of families with child care assistance but there are not enough providers or spaces available, we have not solved the problem. We have simply created more families competing for the same limited number of openings.

​

My approach is:

​

Build capacity and affordability together.

​

That means investing in the child care system itself while gradually reducing the financial burden on families.

​

This could include:

​

Startup assistance for new licensed child care providers.

​

Grants or financing to help existing providers expand.

​

Training and licensing assistance for new providers.

​

Recruitment and retention incentives for child care workers.

​

Support for licensed home-based child care.

​

Targeted efforts to increase infant and toddler care.

​

Partnerships with employers, tribes, nonprofits and local governments.

​

Development of facilities in communities where adequate child care does not currently exist.

Every public dollar should produce measurable results.

​

If Alaska invests money to expand child care, we should know how many spaces were created, how many families were helped, whether providers remained in business and whether the investment strengthened the local workforce.

​

Learn From Seward, Alaska

​

We already have an Alaska example demonstrating what targeted investment can accomplish.

In 2021, Norwegian Cruise Line donated $1 million to Seward for economic recovery. The community identified housing and child care as two important barriers to maintaining its workforce.

​

About half of that $1 million was used for child care.

​

Instead of spending all of the money simply paying families’ child care bills, Seward invested in building its child care system.

​

The investment helped train providers, assist new child care businesses with startup costs, expand existing programs, provide retention incentives to workers, pay for early-educator training and temporarily help families with child care expenses.

​

Five years later, Seward’s licensed child care capacity had increased by approximately 150 percent.

​

Seward still faces challenges, particularly with infant and toddler care and recruiting workers, so its experience should not be presented as a complete solution.

​

But it demonstrates an important principle:

​

If we want affordable child care, we must also invest in the people and facilities that provide it.

That principle should be at the heart of a statewide Alaska plan.

​

Phase One: Understand the Need and Build Capacity

​

During approximately the first five years, Alaska should concentrate on determining where the greatest shortages exist and building the system.

​

That means identifying how many families need care, where they live, what types of care they need, how many licensed spaces already exist, where provider shortages are most severe and what prevents new providers from entering the field.

​

We should establish measurable statewide and regional goals for increasing capacity.

At the same time, we should begin reducing costs for families most in need.

 

Phase Two: Expand Capacity and Reduce Family Costs

 

Approximately years five through ten should continue expanding providers and facilities while increasing financial assistance.

 

As additional spaces become available, assistance could gradually reach more families.

 

The goal should be to avoid creating demand that the child care system cannot handle.

 

Phase Three: Move Toward Universal Access

 

Approximately years ten through fifteen, if Alaska has developed sufficient capacity and sustainable funding, eligibility could continue expanding toward universal access.

 

Universal should mean that families who need child care can obtain safe and affordable care without child care consuming an unreasonable portion of their household income.

 

Phase Four: Make Child Care Part of Alaska’s Long-Term Education and Workforce Strategy

During years fifteen through twenty-five, child care and early childhood development should become part of Alaska’s larger education, workforce and economic-development strategy.

 

The system should continue adapting as Alaska’s population, economy, technology and workforce change.

 

Rural Alaska Requires Local Solutions

A statewide program cannot assume that what works in Fairbanks, Anchorage or Juneau will work in a small rural community.

 

Rural communities may need different approaches, including:

Licensed home-based child care.

 

Tribal partnerships.

 

Cooperative or micro-child care programs.

 

Employer-sponsored care.

 

Shared facilities.

 

Multipurpose community facilities providing child care, preschool, after-school and summer programs.

 

Local communities should have a major voice in determining what works for them.

The state’s role should be to help make care affordable and accessible, maintain reasonable health and safety standards and ensure public money produces measurable results.

 

Universal child care does not have to mean government-owned or government-operated child care centers.

Parents should continue to have choices among qualified private, nonprofit, faith-based, tribal, home-based, employer-sponsored and community providers.

 

How Do We Pay for It?

This may be the most important question.

 

I do not believe Alaska should begin by creating a new tax and then figure out what to do with the money.

 

We should work in the opposite direction.

First determine what we need. Identify every existing funding source available. Maximize federal and matching dollars. Then determine what funding gap remains.

 

Alaska already receives federal child care funding. Federal child care programs also provide opportunities to combine different funding sources and, under certain programs, obtain additional federal matching funds when state spending and other federal requirements are met.

 

A statewide Alaska plan should examine every legitimate funding source available, including:

Federal Child Care and Development Fund and Child Care and Development Block Grant funding.

 

Federal matching funds for which Alaska qualifies.

 

Federal competitive grants for child care, early childhood development, facilities and workforce development.

 

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and other federal programs that legally permit qualifying child care expenditures.

 

Tribal child care funding and partnerships.

 

Existing state child care and early-education funding.

 

Employer participation and employer-sponsored child care.

 

Public-private partnerships.

 

Local government and community partnerships.

 

Philanthropic and private investment similar to what helped Seward expand its system.

 

Our goal should be to leverage Alaska dollars whenever possible.

 

If investing state money makes additional federal funding available, we should consider the total return produced by that investment.

 

We should also examine whether private, employer, local or other eligible contributions can help Alaska qualify for federal funding when federal law allows it.

 

Only after identifying existing funding, federal opportunities, matching funds, grants and partnerships should we determine the remaining funding gap.

 

A Modern Education Contribution

​

If additional revenue is eventually necessary, one concept worth discussing is a modern version of Alaska’s historic education contribution.

 

One possibility for discussion is a modest annual contribution from people working in Alaska.

 

For example, a $100 annual contribution from approximately 414,000 workers represented in Alaska’s worker-residency statistics would generate roughly $41 million per year before exemptions, administrative expenses, collection issues and other adjustments.

 

Another possibility would be a sliding-scale contribution.

Under that approach, lower-income workers could pay little or nothing, while contributions gradually increase with earnings.

 

We should also examine how workers who live outside Alaska but earn their income here could appropriately participate in supporting the future workforce of our state.

These are concepts for discussion, not finalized tax rates or legislation.

 

We should determine what the program actually costs and what federal, state, private and other resources are available before deciding whether any new contribution is necessary or how it should be structured.

 

Automation and Artificial Intelligence

 

We also need to think beyond today’s economy.

 

Over the next 25 years, artificial intelligence, robotics and automation will perform some work currently done by people.

 

If Alaska eventually establishes a worker-based contribution to help support our future workforce, we need to consider what happens when companies replace human positions with technology.

​

Should the contribution supporting the next generation disappear simply because the human job disappeared?

 

One possibility worth studying is an automation contribution, potentially based on full-time-equivalent positions displaced by automation or another measurable standard.

​

The details would require careful study. The broader principle is that our funding systems

should adapt as our economy changes.

 

Avoid the Benefit Cliff

 

Affordable child care should make families financially stronger, not accidentally punish them for earning more money.

 

Affordable child care may allow a parent to return to work, work additional hours, finish an education or accept a higher-paying job.

 

But increased earnings can sometimes cause families to lose eligibility for other income-based assistance.

 

We should design Alaska-controlled programs so that, wherever legally possible, assistance phases down gradually as family income increases rather than suddenly disappearing.

 

A raise, promotion, additional hours or better job should always leave a family financially better off.

​

For programs controlled by federal rules, Alaska should coordinate benefits wherever possible while complying with federal requirements.

 

Child Care Is a Cost-of-Living Issue

 

No single policy is going to solve Alaska’s cost-of-living problem.

 

Housing, health care, child care, food, energy, transportation, wages and education are interconnected.

 

When a family is spending hundreds or thousands of dollars every month on child care, that is money unavailable for rent or a mortgage, groceries, heating, electricity, transportation, health care, debt reduction or savings.

 

Reducing child care costs can put money back into family budgets and the Alaska economy.

 

Reliable child care can also help parents remain in the workforce and help employers recruit and retain workers.

 

This is why child care should be considered not only a family issue but also part of Alaska’s economic infrastructure.

​

Every Public Dollar Must Produce a Return

 

I believe every tax dollar we invest should produce a measurable return for the people of Alaska.

 

We should continuously measure:

 

How many new child care spaces are being created?

 

Are family child care costs decreasing?

 

Are more parents able to work or increase their hours?

 

Are providers remaining in business?

 

Are we recruiting and retaining child care workers?

 

Are employers having an easier time finding workers?

 

Are rural communities gaining access to care?

​

Are young families remaining in Alaska?

 

Are children entering school better prepared?

 

How much federal, private and other outside funding are we leveraging with Alaska’s investment?

 

If a program is not producing measurable results, we should change it.

Success should not be measured by how much government spends. Success should be measured by whether Alaska families and communities are better off because of the investment.

​

Why a 25-Year Plan?

​

Children born in Alaska today will be approximately 25 years old at the end of this plan.

They will become Alaska’s teachers, mechanics, nurses, doctors, construction workers, engineers, first responders, entrepreneurs and community leaders.

​

They will become taxpayers and parents themselves.

 

Eventually, they will also become the generation caring for many of us as we grow older.

 

That is why I continue to ask one basic question:

​

What decisions can we make today that will give a child born in Alaska today a better Alaska 25 years from now?

Affordable and accessible child care can be part of that answer.

This is why this plan began by calling itself a living document.

​

Parents, child care providers, employers, tribes, rural communities, educators, taxpayers and local governments should all have a voice in developing it.

​

We can learn from what has worked in Seward, learn from other states, identify what fits Alaska, reject what does not and improve the plan as we gain experience.

​

Build the capacity. Find the funding. Reduce the cost. Measure the results. Expand as we can sustain it.

​

That is how we can work toward universal child care as a responsible long-term investment in Alaska’s future.

​

Future Generations First.

​

Not Left. Not Right. Forward, Together.