Tri-Share Child Care Pilot Act of 2025
- Sponsor
- Rep. Scholten, Hillary J. [D-MI-3]
- Committees
- Ways and Means Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Nov 25, 2025
Bottom line
This bill creates a federal pilot program to test a tripartite cost-sharing model for child care expenses, aiming to increase affordability and access for working families by involving employers and government in the funding.
What it actually does
This bill establishes the "Tri-Share Child Care Pilot Act of 2025," creating a three-year federal pilot program. It provides competitive grants to states to implement a child care cost-sharing model where eligible child care expenses are divided equally, with one-third paid by the parent, one-third by their participating employer, and one-third by the state lead agency using federal grant funds. The program targets families whose income is above the state's child care assistance threshold but not more than 300% of that threshold.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue this model makes child care significantly more affordable for families, particularly those in the 'missing middle' income bracket, encourages employer participation in supporting their workforce, and leverages federal funds to expand access to quality care. Proponents believe this can boost employment, improve employee retention, and strengthen local economies by reducing a major financial burden on working parents.
Opponents contend
Critics might contend that this program creates a new federal bureaucracy and a potentially complex administrative system for states and employers. Concerns could be raised that requiring employer contributions might disincentivize some businesses from participating or hiring parents, and that the funding mechanism might not be sustainable or equitable across states, potentially favoring certain employers or families over others.
The bill is concise and can be read and understood within a few minutes, allowing for a quick assessment of its core provisions.
Section 2(a) (adding SSA 418(e))
Federal Pilot Program for Tri-Share Child Care
This provision establishes a three-year pilot program where the federal government provides competitive grants to states to implement a child care cost-sharing model. In this model, eligible child care costs are divided equally, with one-third paid by the parent, one-third by their participating employer, and one-third by the state lead agency using federal grant funds. States apply for grants based on unmet demand, capacity, and plans for employer recruitment.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this structure directly addresses the high cost of child care, making it more accessible for working families, while also engaging employers as partners in supporting their workforce and local economies.
Critics contend
Critics might argue that requiring employer contributions could disincentivize some businesses from participating or hiring parents, and that the administrative burden on states and employers could be substantial.
Tradeoffs
This provision balances the goal of affordability with the need to distribute costs across multiple stakeholders, potentially creating new administrative complexities and varying levels of employer participation.
Section 2(a) (adding SSA 418(e)(11)(A))
Definition of Eligible Child and Family Income
An "eligible child" must be below kindergarten age, have a parent employed by a participating employer, and belong to a family with income not less than the state's threshold for child care assistance and not more than 300% of that threshold. A crucial exclusion is that the child cannot already be receiving financial assistance under the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) Act of 1990.
Section 2(a) (adding SSA 418(e)(10) and (9))
Appropriation and Program Evaluation
The bill appropriates $250,000,000 for each fiscal year during the three-year program period, drawn from the Treasury. Five percent of these funds are dedicated to a program evaluation conducted by the Administration for Children and Families, and another five percent for technical assistance to state lead agencies. The evaluation will assess the program's cost-effectiveness and its effects on hiring, employment, retention, affordability, and access to child care.
Any unobligated balances from the Tri-Share program at the end of each fiscal year shall be transferred to and merged with amounts made available for the Preschool Development Grants program for the following fiscal year.
Section 2(d)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for managing unspent funds, ensuring they are reallocated to a related educational program rather than lapsing. It's not necessarily evasive, but it's a significant detail for understanding the ultimate destination of federal funds.
Case for: Supporters would argue this ensures efficient use of taxpayer money, preventing funds from sitting idle if the pilot program doesn't fully utilize its appropriation, and instead directing them to another valuable early childhood education initiative.
Case against: Critics might argue that this transfer mechanism could create an incentive for the Tri-Share program to underspend, or that it implies a lack of full commitment to the Tri-Share model if funds are easily diverted, rather than being fully dedicated to its success.
Estimated impact: Potentially millions of dollars annually could be redirected to the Preschool Development Grants program if the Tri-Share pilot does not fully obligate its $250 million appropriation each year.
Eligibility for, and the amount of benefits received under, the Tri-Share pilot program shall not affect eligibility for, or the amount of benefits provided pursuant to, the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990 (CCDBG).
Section 2(a) (adding SSA 418(e)(7))
Why it matters:This is a crucial clarification to prevent "crowd-out" or unintended consequences where new benefits might reduce existing ones. It's standard practice to clarify interactions with other programs.
Case for: Proponents would highlight this as a safeguard, ensuring that the new pilot program supplements, rather than replaces or diminishes, existing child care assistance for families.
Case against: No specific opposition is typically raised against this clarification itself, but critics of the overall program might argue that creating a separate, non-integrated program adds complexity to the child care assistance landscape.
Estimated impact: Ensures that families eligible for both programs are not penalized, preserving existing benefits for those who need them.