In recent years, states like New York and New Mexico have demonstrated that universal child care is possible. However, despite widespread awareness of the value of child care and positive progress at the state level, the Trump Administration has continued to dismantle the existing child care and early education system through funding freezes and fraud allegations. As a result, the administration has further destabilized an already fragile sector. But what if the fight to protect child care is also our opportunity to transform it?
CLASP’s next installment of Equity Matters, “What if the Current Fight to Protect Child Care is also an Opportunity to Transform it?” will examine what it means to build a truly equitable universal child care system—and why the building process matters as much as the vision itself.
Our panel of experts will discuss how meaningful engagement with families, providers, and other directly impacted communities—particularly communities of color, people with low incomes, and immigrants—strengthens policy design, informs implementation, and centers equity.
Attendees will gain a deeper understanding of why centering the leadership and expertise of those most impacted is essential to advancing racial equity and building a universal child care system that is just, inclusive, and responsive to all who rely on and sustain it.
Tune in on October 22 to learn more and join the conversation. We will share additional event details soon. In the meantime, please register below:
By Alecia Murray
What if the people most impacted by child care and early education policies helped design them?
This brief explores why systemic parent engagement is essential, how gaps at the federal level impact families locally, and why solutions like a state-level Parent Cabinet could transform how policy is shaped. This transformation is needed, because when parents move from being heard to having influence, systems do not just improve- they become more equitable, responsive, and effective.
By Lily Ana Marquez
Having a child can be one of life’s most profound joys. Yet, parenthood also means a constant balance between nurturing, protecting, and advocating.
This brief discusses how underinvestment in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act undermines the implementation of Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) and requires parents to be the primary advocates for their children. Her report offers an IEP roadmap example for parents starting the process and highlights why stronger investment and meaningful parent-school partnerships are essential to improving outcomes for children with disabilities
CLASP submitted comments opposing a new federal policy that would allow citizenship and immigration data from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program to be shared with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The comments warn that expanded data sharing could deter eligible immigrant families from accessing cash assistance and other public benefits, increasing financial hardship for children and families with low incomes.
By Diana Rocha
My Indigenous Mexican heritage shaped how I understand community. I was raised with the belief that our responsibility to one another extends beyond our immediate families—that our well-being is intertwined with that of our neighbors, our elders, and the generations that come after us. That understanding has also shaped how I view other Indigenous communities. While our Nations each have their own histories, cultures, and traditions, the struggles of other Indigenous communities are not distant from my own. They are part of a broader story of resilience, responsibility, and the enduring pursuit of self-determination.
That belief followed me to Arizona, where my work addressing food insecurity brought me alongside Tribal communities in ways that profoundly shaped my understanding of federal nutrition policy. From supporting food access in the Grand Canyon to working with child nutrition programs serving rural reservation communities throughout the state, I witnessed challenges that extended far beyond whether food was available. Families spoke of wanting healthier options for their children, while broader barriers—including limited infrastructure like a lack of grocery stores, inadequate food distribution systems, and limited transportation; geographic isolation; and policies that often failed to reflect Tribal priorities—continued to shape daily life. Those experiences made clear that addressing food insecurity requires more than expanding food assistance. It requires recognizing Tribal Nations as leaders in designing policies and programs that affect their communities.
The Farm Bill shapes many of the nutrition programs that support children and families across the country, making it one of the federal government’s most important tools for addressing food insecurity. At a time when millions of people are already losing access to nutrition assistance, the next Farm Bill will play a critical role in determining whether federal policy expands opportunity or deepens existing inequities. For Tribal communities, the Farm Bill is one of the most important federal opportunities to strengthen Tribal food sovereignty, improve children’s health and nutrition, and advance racial equity by ensuring Tribal Nations have a greater voice in shaping the systems that nourish their communities. As Congress negotiates the next Farm Bill, Tribal food sovereignty should be understood as an early childhood and racial equity priority.
Colonization, Food Systems, and Racial Equity
Indigenous food insecurity did not emerge by chance. It is rooted in centuries of federal policies shaped by settler colonialism that displaced Tribal Nations from their homelands, fractured Indigenous food systems, and undermined Tribal self-determination. Policies such as the Indian Removal Act of 1830 and the General Allotment (Dawes) Act of 1887 dispossessed Tribal Nations of millions of acres of land, disrupting traditional practices of farming, hunting, fishing, and gathering that had sustained Indigenous communities for generations. As access to land and natural resources diminished, many Tribal communities became increasingly dependent on federal food assistance programs and commodity foods to meet basic nutritional needs.
While programs like the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR) have long played a critical role in reducing hunger, they also reflect a broader history in which the federal government largely addressed food insecurity for Tribal Nations rather than with them. Early commodity foods often replaced nutritious, culturally relevant traditional foods with highly processed alternatives, contributing to disproportionately high rates of food insecurity, diabetes, and other diet-related illnesses that persist in many Tribal communities today. These disparities are not simply public health concerns. They are the enduring consequences of historical federal policy and long-standing racial inequities in the government’s treatment of Tribal Nations.
Tribal Food Sovereignty Matters for Young Children
These investments are especially meaningful for young children. Nutritious foods support healthy growth and development during the earliest years of life, while culturally relevant food systems help preserve the traditions, knowledge, and relationships that connect children to their families and communities. Strong Tribal food systems also strengthen the economic stability of caregivers and create healthier environments in which children can thrive. Nearly three-quarters of Farm Bill funding supports nutrition programs, making it one of the federal government’s most significant investments in food security and the health of children and families.
The Farm Bill Is an Opportunity to Advance Tribal Food Sovereignty
The Farm Bill is the nation’s primary food and agriculture law. In addition to legislating farming policy, the bill also governs nutrition assistance, conservation, forestry, rural development, and agricultural research.
The 2018 Farm Bill included 63 Tribal-specific provisions that expanded Tribal self-governance, strengthened nutrition programs, and supported local food production, Native agriculture, and traditional foodways. These investments helped create new opportunities for Tribal Nations, but persistent disparities in food security demonstrate that more remains to be done.
In 2022, more than 78,000 American Indian and Alaska Native Producers stewarded 58,336 farms and ranches across 63 million acres, generating more than $6 billion in agricultural sales annually. Yet despite this significant agricultural presence, Native communities continue to experience disproportionately high rates of food insecurity. A nationwide survey of Native households found that half of the respondents experienced food insecurity, while one in four experienced very low food insecurity, with households raising children facing even greater challenges. Together, these data reveal that food insecurity in Indian Country is not simply a matter of food production. Despite the strength of Native agriculture, enduring structural barriers continue to prevent many Tribal communities from fully benefitting from the food systems they have long sustained.
The 2026 House Farm Bill includes nearly 40 provisions specifically referencing Tribes, including a new 638 demonstration project for the Commodity Supplemental Food Program, which would give Tribes greater authority over food procurement for older adults; a cooperative purchasing program that reserves 10 percent of funding for Tribes; and conservation initiatives that recognize Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK), the ecological knowledge and land stewardship practices developed by Indigenous communities over generations, and provide Tribes with enhanced federal cost-sharing opportunities. These provisions reflect meaningful steps toward expanding Tribal self-determination. However, they exist within a broader Farm Bill that does not adequately respond to the growing food insecurity facing families across the country. At a time when over four million people have already lost access to SNAP, the bill misses a critical opportunity to strengthen the nation’s nutrition safety net and instead advances policies that are likely to deepen hardship for millions of households.
While certain provisions would make important progress, significant gaps remain. The 2026 House Farm Bill does not make the existing FDPIR 638 Demonstration Project— which allows participating Tribes to directly procure culturally relevant foods through Tribal self-determination agreements—permanent, leaving one of the most significant Tribal-led nutrition initiatives without long-term certainty. Several Tribal initiatives also remain dependent on pilot authorities or future appropriations, creating uncertainty for Tribal governments seeking to make long-term investments in local food systems. In addition, persistent gaps in federal data collection on Native food insecurity continue to limit policymakers’ understanding of community needs, making it more difficult to ensure that federal investments effectively reach Tribal communities. These shortcomings are especially concerning given the broader erosion of nutrition assistance nationwide. Together, these limitations suggest that meaningful progress toward Tribal food sovereignty requires not only recognition in federal law but also sustained implementation, funding, and accountability.
Advancing Tribal Food Sovereignty
While the Farm Bill offers one of the strongest opportunities to advance Tribal food sovereignty, lasting progress will require sustained federal commitments that extend beyond a single piece of legislation. Priorities for Congress must include:
The Path Forward
The next Farm Bill presents an opportunity to recognize that Tribal food sovereignty is a matter of child well-being, racial equity, and Tribal self-determination. The choices made in this legislation will shape more than food programs; they will shape who has the authority to nourish communities, preserve cultural knowledge, and define what food security looks like for future generations. A truly equitable food system cannot be built without recognizing Tribal Nations as leaders in shaping their own food futures. The impact of this legislation cannot be measured solely in acres cultivated or dollars appropriated, but in whether Native children inherit not only food security but also the freedom and authority to define it on their own terms.
By Alyssa Fortner and Shira Small
This brief provides an overview of the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF), the primary federal funding source for child care assistance for families with low incomes. It examines the program’s history, funding structure, eligibility requirements, and participation trends, while highlighting persistent gaps in access for eligible families and declines in provider participation. The brief also explains how federal and state policies shape families’ ability to access affordable child care.
By Rachel Wilensky, Shira Small, and Stephanie Schmit
Beginning in the summer of 2025, the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP) engaged with the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) to support a workgroup of administrators of the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) Child Care program. CalWORKs Child Care is a critical supportive service associated with California’s Welfare-to-Work program. It is funded by Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) dollars and the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF), as well as supplemental state funding.
Since 1997, CalWORKs Child Care has had three stages designed to provide care and to facilitate paths to self-sufficiency for CalWORKs participants. Stage One is currently administered by county welfare departments, and Stages Two and Three shift the family’s child care from county social service and welfare offices to Alternative Payment Programs (APPs), contracted organizations that administer child care vouchers.
The focus of the workgroup was to solicit feedback on factors that would be important for the state to understand when considering consolidation of the existing program. The administrator workgroup was established to enable CDSS and the State to learn from the expertise and experience of the counties and child care contractors to create a program that is more supportive for families and easier to administer—giving administrators more time to focus on the families they serve. The workgroup aimed to elicit insights and ideas using various feedback strategies, with the goal of informing a consolidation proposal for CDSS.
This report, drafted by CLASP, reviews the context for how the workgroup was initiated, outlines the feedback that was elicited in the workgroup, offers considerations and insights from CLASP based on the workgroup’s feedback, and documents the work materials from the group.
>Learn more information about the CalWORKS Child Child Consolidation Project.
Excerpt:
Washington: US Democratic lawmakers introduced legislation to block federal funding for the Trump administration’s new “public charge” rule, warning that it could deter immigrant families from seeking health care, food assistance and housing support.
Representative Judy Chu and Senator Mazie Hirono introduced the Protect American Values Act ahead of the rule’s scheduled September 18 implementation. Indian American lawmakers Pramila Jayapal and Raja Krishnamoorthi are among more than 50 House members cosponsoring the measure…
Wendy Cervantes of the Center for Law and Social Policy said uncertainty about immigration consequences often causes eligible families to avoid essential programmes. “Research has consistently shown that when families fear immigration consequences, many avoid services that they or their children are eligible for, putting children’s health and development at risk,” she said.
By Sophia Rerucha
Excerpt:
“ Every day I take her there’s a constant struggle because she doesn’t want to stay. She clings to me, she hugs me. The lady has to distract her with toys or activities so she feels safe staying there. ”
This behavior is related to the sudden absence of their father. Even though they are very young, girls and boys can react this way, says Wendy Cervantes, director of immigration and immigrant families at the Center for Law and Social Policy .
This statement can be attributed to Wendy Chun-Hoon, executive director and president of the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP)
Washington, D.C., August 6, 2026—Today, the Department of Health & Human Services released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) titled, “Reducing Federal Burden for Head Start Programs.” This NPRM would deregulate and dismantle the program’s valuable education, health, safety, and other core components by removing long-standing regulations that govern the implementation and delivery of services.
This is yet another attempt by the Trump Administration to undermine essential programs that support children and families dressed up as an effort to “streamline,” “enhance,” and “modernize.” Head Start was originally designed in 1965 to target systemic inequality, empower marginalized Black communities in the Deep South, and provide crucial health and educational resources. Today, this program is so much more and reaches far higher numbers of children and families with valuable support and services.
The NPRM’s proposed changes threaten the foundational purpose of the Head Start program: to support the school readiness of children—especially those with the lowest incomes. These detrimental changes would have long-lasting consequences and create inequities in implementation. By not responding to the diverse needs of children and families across the country, these changes would lead to inequitable impacts for children and families. For over 60 years, Head Start has been making a difference for children and families, reaching more than 40 million Americans since its founding and currently serving over 750,000 children annually. Because of the program’s significant, positive effects on children and families, we must not compromise Head Start.
CLASP opposes this rule and any effort to dismantle essential programs that support the well-being of children and families. Along with our partners, we are ready to respond and have plans to support others interested in sharing how these proposed changes will impact their family, community, or organization.
Please reach out to Stephanie Schmit at sschmit@clasp.org with questions or to engage in the comment process.