People can have a really strong bias against in-home childcare.

Not because they inherently distrust it, but because they’re not informed of what it really looks like in action.

I’ve even had some ask me “isn’t in-home childcare for poor people?”

I’m not shocked so much because of the content of the statement, but because people may be viewing childcare at home as something we only utilize when there’s a lack of access, versus using in-home childcare for all the benefits it offers over a center.

People are undervaluing the transition between when a child is 1 or 2, I’m talking really young, and when they start formal education, surrounded by 20 other kids.

It’s a transitional period that, if we start to look at in a new light, we can understand the importance of.

Research indicates that smaller group size and staff ratios allow for improved verbal interactions and guidance while encouraging independent self-initiated play.

In-home childcare centers typically have between 6 and 12 students. Kids get personalized care, while still learning how to socialize with peers.

These programs don’t exist because people lack funds. They exist because the paradigm of early education is shifting.