How to Increase Access to Early Education

Rethinking Access: What Japan’s Mobile Study Buses Teach Us about Education in India In Japan, there is a grassroots innovation: mobile study buses that traverse neighbourhoods lacking libraries or dedicated study spaces for teens. Equipped with WiFi, books/tables/seating, and staffed by volunteer tutors, these buses offer post-school support - especially for students whose home environment may not afford quiet study or who have working parents. Meanwhile, India’s data reveals a troubling trend: according to official figures, from 2014-15 to 2023-24, the number of government schools dropped by 89,441 (an 8 % decline) while private schools increased by ~42,944. Why this matters: Schools are not just classrooms-they are access points: for mentorship, peer learning, supportive infrastructure, safe environments. A reduction in public school infrastructure can translate into lost opportunity for millions - especially in underserved zones. Claims of being a “Vishwaguru” must be matched with inclusive access and innovative outreach. What we can learn from the mobile-bus model: Deploy mobile learning hubs in areas where built infrastructure is weak. Integrate tutoring, mentoring and peer-group study into community outreach rather than rely solely on brick-and-mortar. Provide quiet spaces, connectivity and resource access to students whose home setups may not allow for focused study. Prioritise equity of access, not just numbers of institutions. For leaders in education, policy & industry: It is time to ask: Are we ensuring our youth have the spaces and resources to learn effectively? How can organisations (public/private/civic) collaborate to bring learning-on-wheels or similar outreach to underserved zones? Can we shift our metrics from “number of schools” to “effective access to learning and mentorship”? I believe: the infrastructure we build today must include mobility, flexibility, and equity. Let’s model systems not just for those who already have access-but for those who don’t. #EducationReform #SkillDevelopment #Mobility #IndiaEducation #InnovationInLearning #Leadership

The Inconvenient Truth About Education Elite educational institutions often present themselves as neutral pathways to opportunity, yet their underlying structures tend to reproduce existing social and economic hierarchies. The dominant meritocratic narrative suggests that access is determined by talent and effort. In reality, access is shaped long before admissions by early exposure to enriched learning environments, private tutoring, and high‑quality preparatory schools. These advantages correlate strongly with household income and parental educational attainment. As a result, admissions processes frequently reward accumulated privilege rather than isolate innate ability. Entrance examinations are widely regarded as objective assessments, but they largely measure the long‑term effects of unequal resource distribution. By the time students reach the testing stage, disparities in nutrition, literacy development, school quality, and parental availability have already influenced their academic trajectories. The exam functions as a symbolic equalizer that obscures the structural inequities embedded in the educational pipeline. Policymakers often rely on this symbolism to justify existing systems, despite consistent evidence that opportunity gaps emerge years before formal schooling begins. For individuals who succeed within this architecture, achievement reflects both genuine effort and the presence of enabling conditions that many students never experience. These conditions include stable households, functional schools, psychological safety, and access to mentors who can translate potential into performance. Many equally capable individuals are excluded from the competition long before selection occurs. Their absence is not a reflection of lower ability but of systemic barriers that restrict participation. A policy‑informed response requires interventions across multiple stages of the educational pipeline. Early childhood programs must be expanded to ensure that foundational skills are not determined by socioeconomic status. Public investment in teacher quality, school infrastructure, and community‑based learning resources can reduce disparities in basic education. Admissions processes should incorporate contextual indicators that recognize structural disadvantage rather than relying solely on standardized tests. Targeted scholarships, mentoring programs, and bridge curricula can support high‑potential students who lack preparatory advantages. Without such reforms, elite education will continue to reproduce inequality while maintaining the appearance of fairness.

Four school districts were about to waste months solving a problem that didn't exist. Because nobody asked parents one simple question. The challenge: Pre-K enrollment was terrible in their primarily Latino communities. Most organizations would have immediately jumped to solutions: workshops, outreach programs, informational campaigns. We said: "Before we design anything, let's get incredibly clear on what's actually stopping families from enrolling." We partnered with local churches and interviewed parents directly. The #1 barrier we heard? "What's Pre-K?" In their home countries, school starts at 5. These parents thought 3-year-olds were "too young for school." Other real concerns: "I don't trust a stranger driving my baby on a bus." "My child isn't potty trained yet." The assumptions we walked in with? Not even in the top five. Instead, we built solutions around what families actually told us: → Education sessions at churches where they already gathered → Bus programs with trusted classroom aides families knew → New potty training support programs → Ongoing parent feedback loops Result: 120% enrollment increase across all four districts. Still sustained three years later. This is the gap between good intentions and real impact: We say we "empower communities", but are we truly empowering anyone if we never ask what they actually need? We say we "serve families", but are we really serving them if we're solving problems we assumed they had? We design from boardrooms, not living rooms. We solve for what we think they need, not what they tell us they need. Intent ≠ Impact. Mission statements aren't lies. But without deep listening, they become empty promises. If you want to create real change: Stop assuming what people need. Start asking what they actually need. The difference between guessing and knowing is the difference between 0% growth and 120% growth.

Too often the case for early years investment gets made on moral grounds alone. This new report makes it on fiscal ones, and does so with a level of precision that Ministers of Finance & Planning can actually use. Big Wins for Early Childhood, published this month by Theirworld with the Learning For Well-Being Institute and NYU Global TIES for Children, is an investment guide rather than another advocacy paper. It sets out seven proven interventions across healthcare, preschool and family support, each costed per child, each with a return on investment figure drawn from evidence at scale in low and middle-income countries. The interventions are organised around the three Act for Early Years campaign goals: 1. Universal access to quality primary healthcare across pregnancy, birth and early childhood. 2. Universal access to quality, inclusive preschool and affordable childcare. 3. Universal support for families, including child benefits and parent and caregiver support. Three points are worth pulling out. The cost of inaction in low-income countries can exceed 9% of GDP for missing quality preschool alone. The poorer the country, the higher the price of waiting. This is not a future crisis. It is a recurring fiscal drag that compounds quietly across childhoods. Universal provision outperforms targeted approaches on every outcome measured. Coordinated packages of child benefits, parental leave and childcare deliver faster and fairer results than means-tested alternatives, and they reach the children most likely to be missed by eligibility rules. Not all returns sit decades away. Research by the Learning for Well-being Institute shows measurable shifts in poverty, women’s employment and pre-primary enrolment within a single political cycle. That changes the political calculus, which is often what has held these conversations back. The report is designed to feed directly into the 2027 International Financing Summit for Early Childhood. Governments arriving will be asked to make specific, costed pledges across the three Act for Early Years goals. This is the clearest set of options any of them have been given to do that. Link to the report in the comments.

She wanted to get a million children into early learning. So she stopped building schools. One third of children aged 3 to 5 in South Africa have no access to early childhood education. The conventional response is infrastructure. Build centres. Fund classrooms. Wait for government. Grace Matlhape looked at the same problem and saw something different. The infrastructure already existed. Women's homes. Community spaces. Assets sitting inside the very communities that needed them most. The barrier was the system surrounding them. So SmartStart South Africa built that system instead. Training, coaching, peer networks, curriculum, compliance support. Everything a woman needs to convert her existing space into a licensed early learning enterprise. A social franchise model that turns a structural constraint into a scalable opportunity. This is what sophisticated behavioural design actually looks like in practice. A redesign of the conditions that make a behaviour possible. SmartStart didn't ask women to do something new, they changed what women had access to, who surrounded them, and what felt achievable. The results are what you'd expect when the design is right. Over 26,000 entrepreneurs. 160,000 children reached every week. Developmental outcomes improving significantly within eight months. We talk a lot in this sector about sustainable change. Grace Matlhape built it by asking a different question: what already exists that we haven't designed around yet? A wonderful choice for a Skoll Foundation award!

Strong early education systems aren’t built along political lines. They’re built by putting effective solutions first. One approach we’ve seen consistently deliver results is the mixed delivery model. Colorado is a great example. They’ve blended bipartisan strategies with real impact: - Tax credits that unlock private investment in child care - A commitment to equity, ensuring resources reach the right places - Creation of the Department of Early Childhood to streamline administration - Language translation for all services so every family can access the system Even more powerful is how these policies show up in practice: - Coordinated enrollment systems that centralize provider information, reduce duplication, and make it easier for families to apply across programs - A single eligibility screener that helps families understand what they qualify for, across multiple funding streams - Data infrastructure that gives leaders visibility into trends, access gaps, and areas for improvement Colorado’s progress shows that when you combine flexibility, equity, and collaboration, the result is a stronger, more inclusive early education system. As you can probably tell, I’m excited by what’s happening in Colorado. If you’re curious about how these ideas might apply to your community, I’d love to chat. #ECE #ChildCareForAll #EarlyEducation #MixedDelivery #ChildCareMatters

Early childhood policies: Investing in early childhood development, and especially the first 1,000 days, is the focus of this new 2026 edition of #PointsOfPower, highlighting one of the highest-return policy choices governments can make. 29 per cent of children aged 3–5 are not developmentally on track. Around one in three children under five, nearly 200 million globally, are failing to grow and develop to their full potential due to early childhood malnutrition. Additionally, in countries with available data, more than two in five children aged 3–4 do not receive adequate early stimulation, responsive care, and parenting support. Yet public spending remains “too little, too late,” with children under six in low-income countries receiving just 6.7 per cent of child-focused budgets. Prioritizing the first 1,000 days—from conception to age two—delivers lifelong gains in health, learning, and productivity. For instance, breastfeeding boosts brain development and child survival, while paid parental leave improves health outcomes and school readiness. These early investments lower future health costs, improve educational outcomes, and strengthen national human capital. What can policy leaders do now? ✓ Support breastfeeding with quality counselling, strong regulation of breastmilk substitute marketing, and workplace nursing facilities and paid breastfeeding breaks. ✓ Expand family-friendly policies, including paid maternity and parental leave and affordable, accessible quality childcare, to enable bonding and responsive care without income loss. ✓ Integrate nutrition with social protection by combining nutrition services with cash transfers to reduce stunting and anaemia. ✓ Invest in early stimulation through parenting and caregiver programmes, along with an enabling ecosystem of care and support, that promote early learning and protect children from violence and stress. What governments choose to do in a child’s earliest years sets the trajectory for lifelong outcomes and shared prosperity. Lasting change begins with strong investment in the first 1,000 days. Based on evidence from UNICEF’s Policy Solutions report on accelerating progress for children and adolescents: https://lnkd.in/g79gKnY2 #PointsOfPower #EarlyChildhoodDevelopment #ForEveryChild

Childcare Is Economic Infrastructure — Not a Perk In Georgia, the workforce problem no one can ignore isn't talent. It's childcare. Every day, parents across our state miss shifts, turn down promotions, or leave jobs altogether, not by choice, but because childcare is too expensive, too hard to find, or simply unavailable. This is no longer just a family issue. It's an economic one. The impact reaches far beyond individual households. According to a study by GEEARS: Georgia Early Education Alliance for Ready Students, childcare challenges cost Georgia at least $1.75 billion in economic activity each year, along with an additional $105 million in lost tax revenue. At the same time, early learning programs are closing or reducing capacity, educators are leaving for higher-paying jobs, and families are facing long waitlists and rising costs. The system is under strain, and businesses are already feeling the effects. If your organization is struggling to recruit, retain, or fully engage employees, childcare is part of the equation. It's time to stop treating childcare as a workplace perk and start recognizing it for what it is: essential infrastructure. Like roads, broadband, and utilities, childcare enables people to show up, contribute, and grow within the workforce. The good news is that employers don't need to build onsite childcare centers to make a meaningful difference. Companies can offer childcare stipends or subsidies, partner with trusted providers, reserve slots for employees, create schedules that better support working families, and invest in community-based programs. These solutions are practical, scalable, and increasingly essential to building a resilient workforce. Creating a stronger childcare system is a shared responsibility. Public investment matters, and employer engagement is equally important. When childcare works, businesses are more productive, employees are more stable, and children are better prepared for the future. That isn't simply a social benefit. It's a smart economic strategy. If we want a stronger workforce in Georgia, we must build a stronger childcare system. The future of our economy depends on it. Investing in high-quality early childhood education isn't simply an investment in children and families. It's an investment in our businesses, our communities, and our state's long-term economic success. At Sheltering Arms, we are committed to working alongside employers, policymakers, and community partners to strengthen Georgia's childcare system and the workforce it supports. Together, we can build solutions that help children thrive, families succeed, businesses grow, and our state's economy remain strong. Sheltering Arms Early Education and Family Centers #childcare #economics #infrastructure

Of seventy-four interventions studied for their effect on children's cognitive development before kindergarten, only four showed measurable IQ gains. Omega-3 and LC-PUFA supplementation during pregnancy and early infancy produced gains of 3.5 or more IQ points — the only supplement category in the analysis that showed real results. Quality preschool with a language focus produced gains of seven or more points, with shorter programs proving just as effective as longer ones. Interactive reading before age four produced gains of six or more points — not reading to a child passively, but the back-and-forth engagement, the questions, the conversation built around books. Language-rich, cognitively complex environments produced gains of seven or more points — particularly when adults asked open-ended questions and encouraged children to narrate their own experiences. The common thread across three of the four is a present, interested adult. Not a program. Not an app. Not a curriculum. An adult who asks questions, who responds, who treats the child's thoughts as worth engaging with. That is the delivery vehicle for the gains. The research is confirming something straightforward: children's brains grow fastest inside conversations with people who take them seriously. Parents without resources should read this as reassurance. The most expensive item on this list — quality preschool — is one of four. The others require attention, not money. A language-rich environment is built from how often you talk with your child, what questions you ask, and how much you encourage them to think out loud. That costs nothing. And according to the research, it is among the highest-return investments a parent can make in the years before school begins.