From Kazakhstan to the UK, U.S. governments at all levels can—and should—look to other countries around the globe for lessons on advancing digitization and access to public services. The Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation has recently been engaging internationally to better understand diverse approaches to technological innovation for public service, with the eventual goal of helping replicate some of these at home. 

Through this extensive global engagement, the Beeck Center has celebrated the opportunity to share experiences and initiatives with others across the world, yet it has also shone a light on where the U.S. can improve its own digital innovation efforts.

Shaping new ideas through international collaboration 

In October, Beeck Center’s Executive Director Lynn Overmann and Fellow Dominic Campbell spoke on the opening panel at the Solace Summit, a three-day conference in Birmingham, England, that hosted 400 senior leaders from local governments in the UK, as well as visitors from around the world. Overmann and Campbell joined Marc Stears—director of University College London’s Policy Lab—to reflect on government transformation in both the U.S. and UK since 2010. The panel shared thoughts on what countries can learn from this journey when imagining the inevitable acceleration of government change in the coming decade.

Above all, the panel pointed to the role of strategic leadership in navigating through transitions in government administration, particularly the shifting nature of federal relations with state and local governments. Beyond DC and Westminster, panelists also highlighted a shift in the way other governments are partnering with communities and focusing on putting citizens at the heart of public services—a trend that is set to continue and be supercharged as institutions take one redesign and modernization efforts.

Overmann also met with several leaders in the digital governance space in the UK, including Public Digital and Nesta. Public Digital—a global consultancy that hires, develops, and supports digital teams and services—is made up primarily of former members of the founding team of the UK Digital Service, and now consults to governments around the world to support them on the route to digitization. At Nesta—an innovation agency for social change—the Beeck team met with Chief Practices Officer James Plunkett to discuss the role of external bodies in government innovation who are shaping change through multi-disciplinary teams. 

In December, the Beeck team welcomed a Japanese Digital Services delegation to the Beeck Center to discuss opportunities and challenges around innovation in service design and delivery. The representatives from Japan highlighted difficulties related to their country’s insulated government and a lack of familiarity with new technology. Overmann, Campbell, and Beeck Fellow Aaron Snow spoke about small recent successes in the U.S. around the federal government’s online COVID-19 test ordering initiative, and the launch of  new digital tools for state and local governments, but stressed that the U.S still has a long way to go in its digital service-delivery work. 

Catching Up: Where the U.S. is Lagging in Digital Service Design 

While this international engagement has led to a positive sharing of ideas, it also proves that the U.S. has significant work to do in order to be on par with other countries’ and organizations’ digital systems and adoption of digital services. 

In November, Snow and Beeck Center former analyst Ashlee Sellung joined Bogdan Ivanel—CEO of Commit Global—for a meeting at the White House to learn more about the organization’s “civil society infrastructure” and the open-source software emergency response systems they have built and deployed in several countries. One such initiative has allowed more than 1.4 million Ukrainian refugees to find reliable and timely information through the dopomoha.ro platform. Commit Global works directly with humanitarian organizations and government agencies to provide useful, up-to-date information in four different languages through the site.

In October, the Beeck Center hosted a delegation from Kazakhstan, organized by the Eurasia Foundation, to discuss the country’s whole-of-government digitization initiative. During these meetings, Beeck learned about their model, saw a demo of their digitization work, and discussed the difficulties of this kind of work in the American context. Kazakhstan’s success in the digitization of public services and documents is just one example of many countries taking strong steps toward improving public service delivery through technology.

“The awkward truth is, 10 years on, that the US is now lagging quite seriously,” Campbell said. “Kazakhstan showed that. We were like, ‘I don’t know how much we have to teach you.’”

Centering digital transformation in government 

Ukraine has also had significant success in their digital transformation, successfully creating a platform to facilitate digital service delivery and digital documentation and identification. Led by Snow, the Beeck Center has had ongoing conversations about the country’s recent digital advancements with Gulsanna Mamediieva, a tech and public policy research fellow at Georgetown University’s McCourt School of Public Policy, and director general for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration in Ukraine’s Ministry of Digital Transformation. Beeck is working toward formalizing a partnership with the ministry to explore the success of their government’s “Diia” app, which allows for convenient and secure interaction between the government and Ukrainian citizens. Ukraine was the first country with a digital ID valid everywhere in the country, and aims to make 100 percent of public services available online in the coming years. 

“Part of it’s about the code, but part of it’s about political prioritization,” Snow said. “It’s about how you manifest that in your government hierarchy and authorities. That’s the tricky bit.” 

This international engagement at the Beeck Center coincides with the global lens that both Snow and Campbell have applied to their work throughout their careers: Snow as the first CEO of the Canadian Digital Service and Campbell as the founder and former CEO of FutureGov, a UK-based consultancy that helped bring digital and design to governments around the world. It also builds upon efforts from the Beeck Center’s Digital Service Network, who hosted a discussion in March 2022 with the UK’s Public Digital team focused Universal Credit—an initiative to replace six social benefits and tax credits with a single, means-tested program to simplify the benefits system and take a “digital by default” approach. Last November, the Beeck Center hosted a panel and workshop at FWD50 and Snow returned to the conference this November to discuss the use of open source software in government systems. 

“I think a lot of the lessons that came out of these meetings was that America is great at funding, and inventing,” Campbell said. “But when it comes to adoption and mainstreaming of all of these tools and techniques, we’ve got a real problem in the US in terms of making mass adoption happen and the US really needs to sort of catch up.”

As the Beeck Center connected with international experts and officials throughout 2023, it’s evident that while the U.S. continues to spearhead innovation, there exists a clear need for increased adoption and integration of digital tools within the government. Moving forward, the Beeck Center remains committed to bridging these gaps and facilitating the exchange of ideas to drive meaningful digital transformation in service delivery.

Think about what your home means to you. 

It might be a safe haven full of memories and feelings of comfort, or a place where you can be yourself. Now, imagine suddenly being forced out of your home with less than 30 days to pack everything you own and move somewhere unknown.

Across the United States, housing insecurity is rising, with nearly 2.7 million evictions—court-ordered removals of tenants from the property in which they reside—reported annually. Evictions can be caused by numerous factors, from renters being unable or unwilling to pay their rent to landlords retaliating against tenants who lodge a formal housing complaint against them. Additionally, many tenants face dire living conditions that violate their right to safe and secure housing, including exposure to mold, mice, and toxic chemicals, among others. These circumstances often result in both  emotional and physical trauma.

In particular, the City of Akron—with a population of 189,347 residents—files, on average, 300 evictions each month, resulting in an eviction rate of roughly 1.9 percent. Most of those evicted each month identify as low-income, Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC), with a disability, or elderly. 

Trey, a tenant in Akron, described their experience of living in their unit as part of discovery research in The Opportunity Project for Cities (TOPC) 22-week design sprint program:

To address the issues facing Trey and many other tenants across the city, the City of Akron partnered with United Way of Summit & Medina, Google.org, the Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation, and the Centre for Public Impact on the TOPC program and designed a prototype of a digital platform to help tenants find safe and livable housing. They demonstrated the platform to the public on November 2 at the TOPC Demo Day.

The platform helps tenants easily search a property’s history of evictions and complaints by address and search for the property owner. Once implemented, the tool will give step-by-step instructions on filing a complaint and what resources are available to prevent existing tenants from being evicted. Tenants can access culturally relevant and linguistically appropriate resources, including housing rights; file a complaint connected to the City’s 311 system; and connect to legal services. 

Throughout the design sprint, the City of Akron and United Way of Summit & Medina conducted user research, ideation, prototyping, and usability testing with tenants and experts in property management. The research showed three key insights:

Tenants face barriers to accessing information to resolve housing issues 

Tenants who are predominantly low-income, BIPOC, with a disability, and elderly experience many challenges and poor living conditions in Akron. They struggle to understand their rights and appropriate living standards, report their housing issues to their landlords and the housing compliance agency, and follow up on solutions. They are afraid to report their concerns because they don’t want to be evicted or be sued, among other reasons. Tenants want to know what their potential housing looks like before they commit to renting a unit. 

A digital tool from the City helps close this knowledge gap by increasing transparency in data access. Tenants will spend less time searching for information in various sources, improving their ability to make informed decisions and find livable housing for themselves and their families.

There are disparities in the balance of power between tenants and landlords.

Many residents lack the basic knowledge of the Akron housing-eviction process protocol to combat their impending legal issues or avoid a housing crisis. With eviction filings in Akron on the rise, especially post-COVID-19 pandemic, numerous city and state officials have called the impending situation a crisis, resulting in high rates of housing insecurity. During discovery research, one tenant exclaimed:

Tenants and landlords have limited access to advocacy resources and organizations.

The research highlighted that tenants and landlords are overwhelmed with lengthy and cumbersome legal processes related to housing. There is a disparity in accessing legal knowledge and representation, especially for tenants who have been wrongfully evicted. The lack of education on advocacy for both tenants and landlords makes it confusing for both to understand their rights, roles, and responsibilities. It also precludes honest and direct communication. 

Prior to leasing, better access to legal information could reduce these challenges. The City’s digital platform will provide access to community resources that will reduce friction between tenants and landlords. As a result, tenants and landlords will spend less time in court and tenant satisfaction and landlord operational efficiency will likely increase.

Akron residents were a driving force in the design and the “product was shaped by lived experience in our [Akron] community,” the City is excited to unveil its first functional platform to its community in 2024.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has been a subject of intensive research and discussion between private-sector firms and public-sector advocates long before the release of OpenAI’s ChatGPT. Civil society groups like the AI Now Institute, Data for Black Lives, and the Future of Privacy Forum have led explorations of algorithmic bias, data privacy, and anti-surveillance providing the foundation for discourse around AI’s use in daily life that has now reached the mainstream. 

On October 30, President Biden signed the landmark Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence (fact sheet), followed shortly by draft guidance from the Office of Management and Budget (fact sheet). These build on the previously released Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights and NIST AI Risk Management Framework that provided governments with guidance on the responsible and ethical use of AI.

The Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation works directly alongside governments and civic technologists using digital innovation to strengthen the pillars of American government at federal, state, and local levels. As these governments and institutions continue to use AI as a tool for improving digital public infrastructure and the delivery of public services and benefits, many of them are looking to the future to understand what AI can do within its existing privacy and governance constraints. With the private sector taking a forward leaning role in ramping up the use of facial recognition, surveillance, and other predatory forms of AI. Advocates in the field of public-interest technology should stay well informed of both the opportunities and risks posed by AI in all its forms, particularly as it relates to data governance, people-centered technology, procurement, benefits delivery, and hiring tech talent. We collected insights from the Beeck Center’s leaders in each of these areas to give us a glimpse of what to expect next.

Snapshots from Beeck’s leader

What do policymakers and practitioners need to know about using AI in the public interest? 

The present moment is an outstanding opportunity to shine sunlight on systems for benefits delivery that have been historically opaque and potentially encode bias into technical systems. Increasing transparency in how these systems collect, store, and build off of data is going to be critical—methods like rules as code may help bring standardization, visibility, and shared understanding across stakeholders. Additionally, policymakers and practitioners need to be equipped with best practices, like ensuring that test data uses privacy-preserving methods, engaging individuals impacted by systems, and conducting evaluation on impact, risks, and harms. Shared tools like the NIST AI Risk Management Framework and forthcoming federal agency guidance will help set the national path forward, and it will be important for states and local governments to champion those approaches and learn from each other. – Ariel Kennan, Fellow, Digital Benefits Network

AI represents an unprecedented opportunity for public services. While ensuring the appropriate guardrails are put in place, we must also find ways in which we test, learn, and adopt AI for good. Following on from approaches elsewhere—such as the UK’s NHS AI Lab—there are design-led approaches to helping government better understand AI and how it might vastly improve efficient service delivery, such as transforming case management in health and human services and elsewhere—traditionally one of the most time consuming and unproductive uses of public servants’ time. While much of the narrative is currently one of caution, as long as we find ways to use human-centered design approaches to test and shape the use of AI around true needs and in a way that is collaborative and transparent, I have high hopes for AI in government. – Dominic Campbell, Fellow

The need and the purpose of public services—education, health services, social assistance, safety, and help during crises or emergencies—has not changed much over time, but the tools have. Data collected and generated by government agencies is even more important as AI is becoming a more commonly used tool. Now is the time to invest in learning more and understanding how AI works, what tools can produce, and what challenges they cannot solve. For example, Estonia has a grand vision to use AI and integrated data to offer a Burokratt—a virtual-government assistant that can even renew passports via a short chat and a photo snap on a phone. Policymakers and practitioners have an outstanding moment to recalibrate public services in ways that bring dignity and meaningful support for the public. Continuing to learn from one another by joining networks and sharing lessons learned, practical resources, and substantive training is a prerequisite for such transformation. – Milda Aksamitauskas, Fellow, State Chief Data Officers Network

AI stands as a transformative tool for modernizing government, with the unprecedented promise of empowering government agencies to distill vast datasets into actionable insights. To harness the full potential of AI in data-informed policymaking, we must recognize its integral partnership with robust data governance, a crucial linchpin in maintaining the integrity, privacy, and security of data. By steadfastly upholding these pillars, we can more effectively identify bias, mitigate risks, and foster AI applications that build public trust. – Ali Benson, Data Labs Program Lead

AI presents great opportunities for municipalities to improve the efficiency of municipal services: by automating tasks or providing real-time data analysis; enhancing citizen engagement by providing personalized information or allowing citizens to participate in decision making; or to make targeting decisions simpler. I especially hope that we can use AI to make data more open, making pdfs and other documents more machine readable or better integrating applications for resources. AI also could potentially scale harmful or discriminatory systems, invade privacy, or reduce transparency and accountability or leave less tech savvy folk behind. The responsible use of AI is something we all can and should contribute to, focusing on the people who underpin those algorithms. – Harold Moore, The Opportunity Project for Cities Program Lead

Policies, Statements & Resources

Executive Order Fact Sheet

Full Executive Order Text

OMB guidance

NIST debrief

Statements 

• Future of Privacy Forum
• Center for Democracy and Technology
• Federation of American Scientists
• Code for America
• Brookings
• Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)

Resources 

• Data & Society, “Shaping AI Systems by Shifting Power”
• Data & Society, “Democratizing AI: Principles for Meaningful Public Participation”
• Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence (HAI), “The Privacy-Bias Trade-Off”
• AI.gov catalog of government AI use cases
• Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), “Outsourced and Automated”
• National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) “AI Risk Management Framework”
• Tech Policy Press, “Five Takeaways from NIST AI Risk Management Framework” 
• Federation of American Scientists, “Unlocking American Competitiveness: Understanding The Reshaped Visa Policies Under The AI Executive Order”
• Tech Talent Project, “Building the Foundations of AI”
• Center for Democracy & Technology “AI Policy Tracker”
• The Coleridge Initiative’s Applied Data Analytics training program

This month, the Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation at Georgetown University welcomed Jessica Yabsley as its new director of communications. With deep experience in both the non-profit and public sectors, Yabsley will spearhead the center’s communications strategies around its efforts to improve systems for all using data, design, and technology. 

“Jessica Yabsley’s deep experience in strategic communications and proven track record helping lead mission driven organizations will accelerate the Beeck Center’s work driving positive change through data, design, and technology,” said Lynn Overmann, executive director of the Beeck Center. “We are thrilled to welcome her to the Beeck Center leadership team and look forward to the many valuable contributions she will bring to the center’s initiatives.”

“At the Beeck Center we’re not just talking about change—we engineer it through data, design, policy, and technology, ” said Yabsley. “I am delighted to join the Beeck Center’s growing team, and lead the strategic communications efforts as we build a more informed, inclusive, and equitable society.”  

Yabsley joins the Beeck Center from the Data Foundation—a D.C.-based organization focused on improving government, business, and society through open data and evidence-based public policy—where she served as the senior director for external affairs. Most notably, in that role she led the strategic communications team for the organization’s COVID Household Impact Survey, developing and executing a communications plan that launched a $1.74 million national survey about the impacts of COVID-19 on U.S. households. Previously, as the Data Foundation’s senior communication strategist, she fostered relationships with various stakeholders—including the Board of Directors, association members and peer organizations, industry leaders, journalists, and policymakers such as members of congressional and federal agency leaders—to advance practical policy solutions related to federal data. Yabsley was also the communications lead that  launched the Data Foundation in 2016. 

Before joining the Data Foundation, Yabsley served as the Director of Communications at the Data Coalition, a trade association that advocated for the open data law like the DATA Act of 2014 and Evidence Act. Prior to her tenure at the Data Coalition she gained legislative and policy experience by working for Australian members of Parliament at the federal and state levels, as well as serving as a legislative fellow in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Members of the Unemployment Insurance (UI) Technology Coordinating Coalition met in person for the first time on June 13 as part of the Digital Benefits Conference (BenCon), the first-annual convening of the Digital Benefits Network (DBN) at the Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation at Georgetown University.

The Coalition, which includes legal aid advocates, technologists, industry representatives, and unions, has been meeting virtually on a bi-weekly basis for more than two years to discuss opportunities to improve the technology for UI delivery.

A focus of the Coalition since its inception has been the administration of the funds provided to the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) through a one-time appropriation in the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA) of $2 billion to improve timeliness, increase equity, and prevent fraud in the UI system. While approximately $1 billion of that appropriation was rescinded in June 2023 by the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (FRA), DOL has administered a variety of grant programs to help state agencies find technology solutions to discrete problems faced by those systems.

Event Recap

The day started and ended with sessions designed to set the stage and chart a course for the Coalition’s next year. The Coalition also held a series of panel discussions with 17 experts covering modernization efforts at the state and federal level; developments in technology, identity proofing, and tools; and perspectives from state merit staff working on UI in labor agencies in Colorado and Washington. We were also joined by representatives from New Jersey’s Department of Labor and the DOL’s Office of Unemployment Insurance Modernization (OUIM). The Coalition spent the day looking at what has changed over the last few years and highlighting resources, many developed by the DOL, that could help the 53 state-level UI systems improve in the next year. What we learned will help the Coalition chart a course to support beneficiary-centered change.

Session Learnings

• A one-size-fits-all approach at the federal level to UI technology modernization will not work. With the $2 billion federal appropriation to modernize UI, experts anticipated a solution in the form of a series of technology modules that would work across the 53 UI systems. According to the panelists, a one-size-fits-all approach will not work due to states’ varying needs and the nature of the federal-state partnership, which prevents the DOL from operating some aspects of the UI program on behalf of states. Additionally, effective modernization at a national scale requires supporting legislative and policy changes and long-term funding. Because there are too many variables with how the states and territories administer UI, the DOL has to play a role in helping state labor agencies succeed based on their individual circumstances. DOL intends to accomplish this by setting overall standards and supporting administrative funding to boost UI technology development at the state level, including focusing on modular software development. Advocates can also play a role in federal policymaking by sharing success stories from the state level that can be replicated in other states.
• UI modernization projects need to focus on equity, should implement  user testing, and require strong leadership at the state labor agency. Testing and iterating new technology with the experience of the claimant as the metric for success is critical to ensuring legitimate claimants are not denied benefits. Advocates and technologists working at the state level explained that many of the technology problems they encounter could be addressed by allowing claimants to participate in testing systems before they are released. The advocates found problems around forms that are not mobile-friendly or designed in accordance with accessibility standards. Additionally, they shared that even in states that have more modernized UI forms, poor translations persist for claimants in languages other than English. Technologists at the sessions highlighted the work they have done in small programs with specific states to improve language access and encourage user testing as part of an Agile approach to developing UI tech. A representative from a state labor agency also emphasized that strong leadership allows a paradigm shift in the agency’s approach. A strong leader can maintain open lines of communication with the legislature, executive, workers, claimant advocates, and vendors.
• Creating feedback loops among technologists, users, advocates, and agencies can improve UI tech-modernization efforts. Coalition members who are building technology solutions observed that building feedback loops where users and managers provided continuous input to refine the system improved outcomes for beneficiaries and agencies. Often in the procurement of large government technology projects, significant requirements are imposed at the outset and most forms of testing are relegated to the end of the process when change is difficult or impossible. As Jennifer Pahlka puts it in her book Recoding America, government technology is too often “policy vomit,” where every requirement in a law or regulation is directly written into the technology product, making it nearly impossible for an ordinary user to navigate the system. Recognizing these challenges, the technologists who have worked with the Coalition have adopted an Agile approach with the goal of “satisfy[ing] the customer through early and continuous delivery of valuable software.” To implement this, the customer is the claimant interfacing with the UI system directly. These technologists have put the claimant’s experience at the center of their development process, made sure to test their solutions with that user, and developed the product based on feedback and observations.
• A unionized workforce in state labor agencies makes a difference. Three frontline workers in both Colorado and Washington shared the challenges they faced processing claims during the pandemic. In their experience, increased outsourcing of UI claims created additional administrative challenges,  as outsourced employees were not trained on the complexities of UI benefits,  often resulting in incorrect information to claimants. Additionally, the outsourced employees had a higher turnover rate than unionized staff. Combined, these factors resulted in more work for merit staff employees and caused further delays in processing claims. The workers in Colorado are represented by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) local Colorado WINS and, in Washington, American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Council 28. The workers noted management should create more opportunities to listen to frontline employees and learn from them on how the technology can be improved in UI, and also recommended a more customer-centered approach to improve their lives and the lives of claimants.
• It has been a game changer for Coalition members to work together and connect with people who share an interest in using technology to improve UI benefit delivery. Several legal aid advocates shared that the Coalition has provided access to other advocates facing similar problems, as well as offered connections to technical experts who have solutions to the systemic problems they face. One advocate expressed how the Coalition has allowed them to learn the language of technology so they can operate on the same level when meeting with the state labor department on UI technology related issues. Coalition members expressed that the community created has filled a gap in the civic technology space.

Conclusion

Over the next year, the Coalition will continue to learn more about state labor agencies’ procurement and implementation processes for building UI technology in order to drive a claimant- and worker-centered approach.

Additionally, the Coalition is in a feedback loop with OUIM at DOL, which supports its efforts to assist state agencies. The Coalition will look for ways to increase the reach and impact of OUIM’s work and help the office learn from the communities directly impacted by the UI system.

Finally, community building among legal aid advocates, technologists, industry representatives, and unions is among the core work of the Coalition, conducted through our bi-weekly meetings. The Coalition will continue to expand its membership among advocates, experts, worker representatives, and technologists. Please reach out to the authors if you are interested in learning more about how you can participate in the work of the Coalition.

Our focus

Only 2 million children currently receive child care subsidies out of the 12.5 million that are federally eligible, according to a recent report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO).This was deemed to be the result of factors including insufficient funding, difficulties finding affordable care in appropriate locations, lack of crucial information leaving families unaware about their eligibility in existing programs, and high-friction application processes. 

It was these last two challenges, onerous applications and the lack of available information, that we felt might be particular areas where the Beeck Center’s expertise could play a role. 

In May of this year, we announced our study on how technology might play a part in improving the overall child care subsidy onboarding process and increase the percentage of eligible families receiving subsidies by improving the user experience (UX) of early childhood technology systems. Given the Beeck Center’s previous work, we speculated that a state-level intergovernmental software collaborative, in which state governments could share software to improve user accessibility, could mitigate such technical challenges by helping states implement better technology systems at lower costs. 

Through a research partnership with Child Care Aware of America (CCAoA), our work centered on federally-funded child care assistance as seen largely through the eyes of early childhood system leaders in Child Care Resource and Referral (CCR&Rs) agencies and home-based child care providers (HBCCs) in Arizona and Oregon. 

By focusing our mission through this lens, we brought a fresh perspective to these efforts and new voices to the conversation, ensuring to not  duplicate efforts of important work done by teams like New America’s New Practice Lab, Code for America, U.S. Digital Service, and the Administration for Children & Families’ Office of Child Care.

While this project originally sought to offer technology solutions, it quickly became clear through our research that the broader systemic challenges underlying user-facing systems outweighed the technology challenge. Consequently, we shifted from our original hypothesis-led approach of seeking technology solutions alone in favor of a discovery-oriented, iterative project that allowed us to consider the complex governance, policy, operational, market, and technical nuances each state faces. This multifaceted approach prioritized areas where CCR&Rs and government partners at State and Federal levels have the levers to drive long-term change.

Our findings

Our findings and insights are the product of a 12-week research sprint designed to elicit a better understanding of the challenges faced by key actors in federally-funded child care assistance programs. We summarized our findings and insights in both a full report and a shorter, action-oriented summary, both of which outline findings and actionable insights from our research, including: 

• A discussion of systemic failures in the child care assistance landscape that tech-centric interventions often fail to account for, including a dysfunctional marketplace, fractured state-level administration and operations, and ineffective policy mechanisms. 
• A bold vision for a federal-state partnership program informed by a test-and-learn experimentation strategy to promote more productive change in child care assistance delivery.
• Key takeaways from interviews with home-based child care providers (HBCC), child care resource and referral agencies (CCR&R), families, and state government administrators.

We highlight systemic failures in three key areas:

• A dysfunctional marketplace: the two-tiered marketplace for child care provision in the United States disadvantages the less well-off.

• Fractured and siloed state-level administration: child care assistance programs across the U.S. are often exceedingly difficult to navigate for families and providers alike. 
• Ineffective policy mechanisms: legislative and policy decisions made by state policymakers and administrators to govern child care assistance programs are overdetermined by the needs of administrators and fear of fraud rather than the needs of families and providers. 

Our research makes clear that civic tech practitioners must adopt a more systems-informed mindset as they intervene in the child care assistance system landscape to address these failures. 

We argue that, in partnership with states, stronger federal intervention is critical to accomplishing meaningful, systems-oriented change across the child care assistance system. The federal government could and should support states with a number of initiatives that might be difficult for them to achieve alone, including: 

• Experimenting with system-level solutions by enabling a “sandbox” that reduces impediments and friction in the policy and regulatory environment.
• Building simple, legible front-end delivery systems for families and providers participating in child care assistance programs. 
• Moving through the more difficult and long-term work of back-end organizational redesign to support front-end delivery systems.

Our recommended way ahead

In order to achieve this we propose:

A Federal-State partnership program to deliver an innovation lab-style approach to experimentation and change. Led by a single service owner in each state, we imagine a program that conceptualizes, designs, tests, and delivers equitable and effective changes to child care assistance programs across the currently complex and fragmented  structure with the aim of delivering a simplified and unified child care system.

To deliver this daunting change, we recommend a “test and learn” approach to improvements across the child care system as a way to identify and implement equitable, effective, and elegant changes that take into account system-wide complexities. This involves identifying a prioritized list of improvements and interventions where the service owner and their team can start small, test, and learn before full investment and implementation. In this dynamic process we see a way to progress change that is realistic and achievable in a complex and interrelated system of delivery. Simultaneously, we must accept that no one action will resolve the citizen experience, but instead this goal requires a range of deliberate, tested, and coordinated interventions coming together to create tangible improvements at scale.

Our conclusion

State child care assistance systems face a number of complex and interconnected market, operational, and policy challenges. In this reality, states and the CCR&Rs they rely on as delivery partners struggle to engage in proactive, future-focused, strategic work to shift the status quo. 

To gain traction on these issues, we propose a strong federal-state partnership that can broker bold experimentation in child care assistance systems. We envision this partnership as rooted in sizable, state-led experiments that “test and learn” with the goal of increasing receipt and improving delivery of child care assistance for families and providers.

The call to improve child care assistance programs is clear and urgent. The systems-oriented strategy we lay out can empower and enable states to radically transform these programs in a way that is scalable and sustainable, and bring about meaningful, positive change for both families and providers.