�鶹������ý

When it comes to both child care and home care for older adults, we find a serious disconnect between reality and public perception. Most people fundamentally don’t understand how people find and manage care, what care for children and adults costs, what goes on inside care settings, or what proposals like “universal child care” actually mean. Half of Americans think the United States spends as much or more on child care as other wealthy democracies, when in reality, the United States spends among the least. A majority expressed little confidence in their estimates of the cost of care, suggesting a significant knowledge gap.

That gap not only can lead to false or misinformed views about care, but has also shaped policy and public investment decisions that have profoundly impacted the lives of people and families with care responsibilities.

A majority of U.S. children ages 0 to 5 live in families where all available parents work, meaning require some kind of child care. At the same time, the United States is becoming older than it has ever been, with of those over 65 projected to need some caregiving help, and most would prefer to have that help in their own homes rather than have to move to a nursing home or assisted living facility. Because the United States invests so little in care from the moment of birth through to the end of life, and that support is targeted primarily to those living on low wages, most American families are left to shoulder the bulk of the cost of care alone. And those costs are quickly rising: Both and have outpaced inflation in recent years.

The lack of understanding about care in the United States uncovered in this survey contributes to both strain on families and a lack of action to alleviate it. Families are stretched to the breaking point paying for care. Child care costs are second only to housing in most family budgets, and home care costs can impoverish families. Millions of people for those over age 65 covers the cost of long-term care. It doesn’t. Only Medicaid does for those on low-incomes. Many middle-income families pay for expensive private care until their money runs out, “spending down” all their assets until they’re poor enough to qualify for Medicaid to get the help they need.

And because families can’t pay more than they already do for care, most care providers can’t—or in the case of many private home care companies, don’t—pay care workers living wages, leading to high turnover rates, which impact stability and the ability to deliver consistent quality care.

Beyond finances, the survey reveals that many Americans have little understanding of care or quality care. For instance, few people think child care programs are high quality. Thirty-eight percent think children regularly watch screens, though in reality, screen watching is relatively rare. When asked what has shaped their views, a 60–percent majority say they have no direct knowledge of child care or child care quality. In open-ended questions, many explained their views were uninformed: “No idea” or “Just a guess. No information,” were common responses. “Shooting in the dark,” wrote one. “Just what I hear,” wrote another. Says a third: “Vibes.”

This lack of understanding leads to low political action around care as a policy issue. It is hard to expect people to make demands to improve and better support the way people find and manage care when there’s so little understanding of the current complex and disjointed way people are forced to cobble together expensive care for their families, how much it costs, who bears the burden of the cost, and what child care should look like. Although polls show that voters are keenly concerned about , that has yet to coalesce into shaping voter behavior or expectations of candidate policy platforms around care.

For both child care and home care for older adults, more than 8 in 10 respondents say a candidate’s position never influenced their vote, and fewer than 1 in 10 have contacted an elected official about the issue. This does not mean the topics are not important—among parents of young children and those caring regularly for an elder, the salience is significantly higher. Twenty-one percent of parents with children under age five say a candidate’s position on child care influenced their vote, compared to an overall average of 15 percent. And 20 percent of those who regularly care for older adults say a candidate’s position on home care influenced their vote, compared to the overall average of 12 percent. 

Indeed, survey responses seem to indicate a general realization that families can’t bear the burden of care on their own. A slight majority of 52 percent believes that everyone has an interest in strong child care systems, and for home care systems that rises to 56 percent, including respondents who aren’t directly involved in caregiving. There is uncertainty, however, about whether care should be considered a right.

Perhaps most importantly, an overwhelming majority think that the government should have some role in paying for care: 81 percent for child care and for home care, 86 percent. This includes a majority of conservative respondents—76 percent for child care, 82 percent for home care—and at least half of very conservative respondents, 50 percent for child care and 64 percent for home care. Similarly, a majority of all respondents believe that businesses should play some role in care, at least part of which should include paying taxes into systems that benefit everyone, 78 percent for child care and 59 percent for home care. 

These beliefs point to the potential for greater political engagement with care issues across groups, particularly as the reality of care challenges comes into sharper focus. For instance, compared to those with no care responsibilities or experience, respondents who cared for children or older loved ones were more likely to say that a candidate’s position on care influenced their vote. Active caregivers were also more likely to report contacting an elected official about care.

Robust majorities believe that care work is both skilled (81 percent for child care and 85 percent for home care workers) and underpaid work (63 percent for child care and 58 percent for home care workers), with the recognition that most care workers don’t earn enough to support themselves or their families. Still, about one in five respondents say they are unsure whether care wages are sufficient, suggesting that the true cost of care work is still invisible to much of the general public.

These survey findings reveal shifting public opinion on care, as the COVID-19 pandemic and the country’s aging demographics have brought the challenges for families around finding and affording high quality care into sharper relief. For most of U.S. history, the view has persisted that care is a private duty that families, primarily women, are expected to carry alone. Even as mothers entered the workforce en masse in the 1970s—as both the women’s movement opened up more opportunity and stagnating wages drove more mothers into the workforce to keep their families financially afloat—the view that caregiving should be a private “labor of love” performed by women was intentionally reinforced by a coalition of and religious conservatives who viewed . That outdated narrative of care as a private family matter has fostered a broken system where many families are strapped, trapped, and feeling isolated and alone. 

A fuller understanding of the modern reality for families navigating work and care, and more robust support for care as a public good benefitting everyone that should be backed by taxpayer dollars—like public schools, libraries, and parks—could spark ideas and action for solutions that would lead to thriving children and families, communities, businesses, and state and national economies.

The survey is based on YouGov interview data from a politically balanced, representative sample of 1,000 U.S. adults 18 years and older, based on 2023 American Community Survey data. It was fielded from March 19–27, 2026. The margin of error is +/-3.5. The dataset is matched and weighted to be representative across age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, region, and home ownership status, with additional post-stratification on 2024 presidential vote choice, age, gender, race, and education. Analyses involved comparing across differences in caregiving experience, party affiliation, and ideology.

Respondents were asked to select their own political viewpoint from among six choices: very liberal, liberal, moderate, conservative, very conservative, not sure. In this report, we use the same labels to be clear and transparent, so “conservative” respondents represent one distinct group and “very conservative” respondents another. We did not combine both groups, so the “conservative” label does not represent all self-identified conservative respondents, only those that did not choose to describe themselves as “very conservative.”

Most Americans have little understanding of how much care costs, especially over time—often underestimating the costs while overestimating how much care workers are paid and how much the government spends on child care.

Respondents tend to underestimate how much child care costs families.

Perception: Nearly half (47 percent) of respondents think full-time child care for a toddler costs less than $10,000 a year, with 27 percent thinking it costs less than $5,000.

Reality: The cost varies widely by state, but as of 2022, the median price for all but the smallest counties ranged from .

Perception: Nearly three-quarters (71 percent) of respondents think home care for older and disabled adults costs less than $10,000 a month, and 47 percent think it costs less than $5,000 a month.

Reality:

• The cost varies by state, but based on the 2025 national average of $35 an hour, 44 hours of home care a week costs families about or about $80,000 a year. In six states, annual costs run more than $100,000, or $8,333 a month (Maine, Minnesota, South Dakota, Vermont, Washington, and Wyoming).
• For 24-hour care, costs can reach , or $305,760 a year.

Perception: Fully 76 percent think caregivers lost less than $300,000 over their lifetimes as a result of caring for an older adult, with 57 percent thinking family caregivers lost less than $200,000. 

Reality: One found that, over their lifetimes, women who care for adult family members lose $324,044 in wages, Social Security benefits, and retirement savings. In 2026, according to the , that figure would total nearly $470,000. And that doesn’t include lost earnings from unpaid child care.

Perception:

• Child care: Among all respondents, 58 percent think child care workers make more than $15 an hour, with 31 percent thinking they make at least $19 an hour. However, 63 percent say that isn’t enough to live on, 16 percent say it is, and 20 percent aren’t sure.
• Home care: Over half (61 percent) of respondents think home care workers make more than $15 an hour, with 39 percent thinking they make at least $19 an hour. A 58 percent–majority say that isn’t enough to live on. Just 18 percent think it is sufficient, and 23 percent aren’t sure.

Reality:

• Child care: Child care workers earn, as of 2024, a median wage of , less than 97 percent of all other occupations, and 43 percent of these workers .
• Home care: Home care workers earn a median wage of with like Medicaid or food and nutrition support.

Perception: Half of respondents think the United States spends the same or more on child care: 31 percent think it spends more, and 20 percent think it spends about the same amount.

Reality: The United States spends far less on early care and education for 0 to 5 year olds than most peer countries, about 0.3 percent of GDP, with most of that going to kindergarten, compared to the . compared to the United States’ $500 per young child.

Child care: Most respondents (64 percent) say they are “not very confident” (45 percent) or “not at all confident” (20 percent) in their cost estimates.

Home care: Just over half (54 percent) of respondents say they are “not very confident” (37 percent) or “not at all confident” (17 percent). Only 9 percent say they are “very confident.”

A majority of Americans think the government should help families pay for care, but don’t understand what “universal child care” means.

A plurality also says the government should help all families, not just those with low incomes as is currently the case.

Child care: Most respondents (81 percent) agree the government should play some role in helping families pay for child care, including 76 percent of conservative and 50 percent of very conservative respondents.

Home care: A large majority (86 percent) agree the government should play some role in helping families pay for home care, including 82 percent of conservative and 64 percent of very conservative respondents.

The most popular option among respondents was government support for all families, not just low-income families. Yet few support a government-only model to pay for care. 

Child care: The plurality choice is a combination of family and government support for all families, with 35 percent choosing that option. Only 19 percent say the family alone should bear the burden. However, there is a stark divide on this issue based on political ideology. Only 4 percent of very liberal respondents prefer a family-only approach to paying for child care, compared to 24 percent of conservative respondents and 50 percent of very conservative respondents.

Home care: Among all ages, races, income and education levels, and political ideology, the most popular choice, supported by a plurality of respondents at 37 percent, is a combination of family and government support for all families. Just 16 percent support a combination of family and government support only for those with low incomes, as is the case currently with Medicaid. (Medicare generally does not cover home care, except in limited cases.) More than one-third of all conservative-leaning respondents—37 percent of conservative respondents and 34 percent of very conservative respondents—also choose the option of combined family and government support for all families. Older respondents over age 65 are more likely to choose this option, at 46 percent, as were women, at 42 percent compared to 33 percent of men. Of conservative respondents, 18 percent prefer a family-only approach to paying for the cost of home care, and this number rises to 36 percent for very conservative respondents.

However, with regards to child care, there is weaker support among respondents for paying parents, kin, or friends who provide care for children under the age of five.

Child care: The picture is mixed when it comes to Americans’ view of the government paying “stay-at-home” parents or “family, friend, and neighbor” caregivers for child care: Overall, more respondents are in favor of paying caregivers of adult kin (parents, grandparents, etc.)—with 40 percent agreeing versus 30 percent disagreeing. In contrast, respondents are slightly less likely to be in favor of the government paying stay-at-home parents, with 32 percent agreeing and 39 percent disagreeing. However, nearly a third of participants (31 and 30 percent respectively) respond “neither agree nor disagree” to both questions, suggesting a high degree of ambivalence. The questions on paying kin and stay-at-home parents also reveal significant subgroup differences. Younger Americans (18–44) are vastly more likely to support both ideas than older Americans, with 42 percent agreeing stay-at-home parents should be paid while only 18 percent of those aged 65 and older agree. On paying caregivers for adult kin in particular, Black respondents are much more likely than white Americans to support the concept; 52 percent of Black respondents back the idea versus only 37 percent of white respondents.

Home care: Nearly two-thirds of respondents, 64 percent, say that the government should compensate all family caregivers, versus 36 percent who say compensation should only go to low-income family caregivers as is currently the case. More women than men think the government should support all family caregivers, 68 percent to 59 percent. More white and Hispanic respondents—67 percent and 64 percent respectively—agree compared with Black respondents, at 56 percent. (The sample size for Asian Americans was not large enough to make statements about that population.) And caregivers who frequently care for older adults are more likely to agree, 70 percent, compared to those who’d never cared for an older adult, 61 percent.

Most respondents support either the government covering all costs or the government and families splitting child care and home care costs.

Eighty-one percent of those respondents chose one of those options for child care and 85 percent for home care. A majority of the respondents who say the costs should be split believe the government should pay for at least half.

Child care: Most respondents (68 percent) who agree that the government should pay a share say that the government should pick up at least half the cost of child care, with only 18 percent saying parents should bear 70 percent or more of the cost.

Home care: An even larger majority (73 percent) of respondents who agree that the government should pay a share say the government should pay at least half the cost of home care, with 33 percent saying the government should pay for at least 70 percent of it. Just 15 percent say families should pay for 70 percent or more of the cost. On average, Hispanic respondents say the government should pick up 67 percent of the cost of home care and families should pay for 33 percent, compared to white respondents, who favor a 53-47 government/family split. Black respondents favor a 59-41 government/ family split. Democrats favor a 60-40 split, Independents a 56-44 split, and Republicans a 48-52 split.

Americans are confused by the term “universal child care.”

• The most chosen definitions are “The government pays the full cost of child care for all families” (31 percent) and “The government helps ensure all families can afford child care, but families may still pay part of the cost” (30 percent). Other options chosen less frequently are that “State or local governments directly run public child care programs, like how they run public K-12 schools” (15 percent) and “All children will be required to go to licensed child care centers” (3 percent). Nearly a quarter (22 percent) of respondents say that they are unsure and that the phrase is “unclear” to them.
• This uncertainty may reflect the fact there is no one established definition of universal child care among politicians or the child care field. Some use it to indicate a fully free-to-families system, as in , while others use it to indicate a system where everyone benefits but there is a sliding scale of parent co-pays, as in from Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D.-N.Y.). There is also no consensus about whether families should be eligible when all available parents are not working outside the home or in school.

A majority of Americans think business should play a role in supporting care, but don’t agree about what that role should be.

Child care: Over three quarters of Americans, 78 percent, say businesses should play some role in child care. Of those who think businesses should play a role, a majority—68 percent—think that such a role includes paying taxes to improve child care provision for all families.

Home care: More than half of respondents, 59 percent, say business should have some role in helping families pay for long-term care for adults, either through paying taxes (15 percent), offering home care benefits to their employees (15 percent), or both (29 percent), with 20 percent unsure. Democrats showed the strongest support for a business role, at 73 percent, followed by 57 percent of Independents and 47 percent of Republicans. Those who provide care to older adults on a daily or near daily basis were also much more likely to support a business role, at 72 percent, than those who haven’t cared for an older person in the last year in the past year, at 53 percent.

A majority of Americans see value in care, though care is still invisible for many and opinions vary significantly by demographic group, caregiving experience, and type of care.

Child care:

• While a slight majority of Americans (52 percent) agree that even those without children have an interest in a strong child care system, that only goes so far. When asked if K-12 public education should be a free, taxpayer-funded right, 60 percent of respondents agree (40 percent strongly agree and 20 percent agree, with another 25 percent neutral, 8 percent somewhat disagreeing, and 7 percent strongly disagreeing). But only 38 percent say the same of child care (17 percent strongly agree and 21 percent agree, with 31 percent neutral, 15 percent somewhat disagreeing, and 17 percent strongly disagreeing).

• There are differences by political ideology and age, with liberals, Democrats, and young people much more likely to think child care should be a right than conservatives, Republicans, and older people. However, support for child care as a right is significantly weaker on both sides of the political spectrum than is support for free K-12 education as a right. Whereas 81 percent of those who identify as very liberal strongly agree K-12 public education should be a right, only 48 percent strongly agree child care should be a right. On the other end of the ideological spectrum, 48 percent of very conservative individuals agree or strongly agree that K-12 education should be a right, while only 20 percent agree or strongly agree that child care should be a right.

• Some of these opinions may be driven by a poor understanding of what goes on in child care settings: Only 18 percent of all respondents think math and science activities happen most days, and about a third, 36 percent, think literacy activities happen most days in infant/toddler classrooms (though half think read-alouds are common). In reality these basic educational activities occur often. With the exception of read-alouds, a similar number of people, 38 percent, think watching screens is happening regularly. In reality, research shows that over 90 percent of center-based toddler programs , and many child care programs have no TV usage at all, with one study reporting an average of 12 minutes a day across licensed centers. 
• When asked to rank the quality of child care programs in the United States on a scale ranging from 1 (very low quality) to 10 (very high quality), just over half of respondents (56 percent) rate the quality of U.S. child care programs between 6 and 10, with the average rating being 5.7, or just above the midpoint of the scale. A majority of ratings (56 percent) range from 4 to 6, showing a rather lukewarm public view of child care.
• That said, the public doesn’t think child care is a low-skill job. On a scale of skill required to be a child care teacher, with 1 being the least and 10 being the most, the average rating is 7.3 (in comparison, respondents on average say it requires a 8.2 level of skill to be a K-12 teacher).

Home care:

• Slightly more than half of respondents, 56 percent, agree or strongly agree that everyone has an interest in a strong home care system that enables people to age with dignity.
• Though 31 percent say they neither agree nor disagree, younger people show the most ambivalence, with 41 percent of those 18 to 29 years old neither agreeing nor disagreeing. In contrast, among the oldest respondents (65 years and older), 61 percent agree or strongly agree that a strong care system for older adults is in the best interest of everyone.
• More women, 33 percent, strongly agree than men, 25 percent.

• For a majority of Americans, home care is not a low-skill job. Respondents were asked to rate the skill required to provide home care to adults on a scale from 1 (the least skill) to 10 (the most skill).
  • In contrast with the low pay it typically receives, only 5 percent of respondents rate home care work as a low-skill job, with a rating of 4 or less. Forty-three percent rate it a middle-skills job (5-7 on the 10-point scale) and 52 percent rate it at 8-10, equivalent to a high-skill job.
  • Those giving home care the highest skill rating, 10, include more women than men, 21 percent to 14 percent respectively, and more Black respondents at 29 percent, compared to 13 percent of white, respondents and 20 percent of Hispanic respondents. Income shapes views as well, with 26 percent of workers earning less than $30,000 rating home care work as 10, highly skilled work, compared to 10 percent of those earning more than $100,000.
• Most Americans agree that it is difficult to find home care workers, with 43 percent rating it either moderately difficult (5 to 7 on a scale from 1 to 10) and 43 percent rating it very difficult (8-10 on the scale).

Right now, care does not drive political action.

Child care:

• Most respondents (85 percent) say that a candidate’s child care position has never influenced their vote, and only 5 percent have contacted an elected official regarding child care. Parents are more likely than others to say that child care has influenced their vote (21 percent for parents of children under five and 19 percent for parents of older children, compared to 11 percent for non-parents). Nevertheless, nearly 8 in 10 parents—the population most affected by child care policy—are not influenced by candidates’ positions on this issue.
• More parents of children ages five and under have contacted elected officials about child care (8 percent) than parents of older children (5 percent) and those without children (4 percent). Among parents of these young children who have not contacted an official about this issue, 41 percent give no reason, 19 percent say they didn’t know how to contact officials, and 23 percent say they didn’t feel comfortable doing so, with the remaining 17 percent giving a different reason.
• Open-ended comments provide texture to these numbers. Some common themes are typified by the responses, “I felt ignored when I did contact someone about my concerns,” “they don’t listen,” and “never thought about it.”

Home care:

• Only 4 percent of those surveyed say they have ever contacted an elected official about adult home care. Among the 96 percent who have never done so, 42 percent give no reason and 29 percent say the issue of home care doesn’t affect them personally. Even among those who provide care for older adults on a regular basis, just 10 percent say they’ve ever reached out to a policymaker.
• In open-ended written comments, some respondents explain that they’d never contacted policymakers because they feel their views don’t matter to policymakers. Some say the idea never occurred to them, while others that they have other pressing issues demanding their attention. Some signal resignation that the effort would not make a difference and that this is just the way things are. And some say they are too busy juggling care to make time for it.
  • “I just did what needed [to be] done [for] my family. I guess I didn’t put much thought [into] the fact that the system could be [different].”
  • “No time. Was providing home care for disabled older adult!”
  • Two express conservative views that women should provide care, including: “If we can make it so a family can survive on one income, then the mother can provide care to elderly parents … exactly like we have done for a thousand years. Government just makes everything more expensive and lowers the quality of everything it touches.”
• For 88 percent of respondents, a candidate’s position on home care does not impact their voting choice. Those with a high school or less education are less likely to be swayed by home care, at 7 percent, compared to those with four-year college degrees or higher, at 15 percent. Similarly, Republicans and Independents are less likely to be moved by a candidate’s position on home care, 9 percent in each group, compared to Democrats at 20 percent. One in five respondents who have ever provided home care for older adults (20 percent of those who do at least monthly and 22 percent of those who do so less often) say a candidate’s position on home care influences their vote, compared to 7 percent who’ve never provided older age care.

The American child care system is marked by high costs, low access, and uneven quality due to a low-wage workforce that turns over at rates in some states.

The economics of child care are what former U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has referred to as a “broken market,” meaning that . Instead, the for a toddler varies between $7,500 and $13,500 in 2022 dollars depending on setting and geography, with high cost-of-living areas having median costs that exceed $20,000 per year. As a percentage of median household income, average costs can range from 10 percent to 15 percent, with single parents often facing burdens of more than 30 percent. Infants are more expensive still. In recent years, prices have been rising at .

However, these high parent fees do not generally cover the true cost of care, meaning what child care providers need to bring in as revenue in order to operate a sustainable program and pay staff well. Labor costs due to the need for low child-to-adult ratios. As a result, programs have little choice but to offer low wages (with the 2024 ) and few, if any, benefits to employees. Turnover in the field can be as high as (with wide variations by program type and state), leading both to programmatic disruptions and damaging the stability of caregiver-child relationships .

The fragile finances of child care programs also contributes to supply scarcity. Many child care programs operate on razor-thin margins, , and closures are increasingly common. According to the Center for American Progress, nearly half of America’s young children live in a “,” a term for census tracts where there are three or more children per every licensed slot. Licensed family child care programs (those where a provider serves a small number of children in their home) have seen : Between 2005 and 2017, the United States went from having nearly 200,000 individual small family child care homes to around 100,000, and evidence suggests the decline has continued since at a slower pace.

A great deal of child care is provided by “family, friends, and neighbor” caregivers, which as the name implies can include grandparents, aunts, uncles, family friends, or neighbors. These caregivers, however, are more often than not . When they are paid as part of public systems the compensation can be as low as $15 or $20 a day. Families with stay-at-home parents, meanwhile, are categorically ineligible for almost all public child care assistance despite the fact that in order to attend doctor’s appointments, care for ill or aged loved ones, and maintain their own mental health.

All told, America’s lack of affordable child care causes families to make decisions about care, work, and family life that may be at odds with their preferences. Between December 2023 and August 2025, mothers with children under the age of five of over 2 percent for mothers with bachelor’s degrees or higher and over 1 percent for mothers without bachelor’s degrees; both rates of declines were higher than for all other women and for all categories of men. this trendline is continuing. Without adequate public funding, the child care system is continuing to cause parents, children, and child care educators to struggle.

The United States is aging and becoming older than it’s ever been. The number of Americans aged 65 and older is projected to increase 42 percent, from 58 million in 2022 to 82 million, by 2050. Older Americans will make up of the population by mid-century. 

Americans are also living longer, with more chronic illnesses that require more intensive care. Nearly to need caregiving help, some for five years or more. And because most people would rather than live out their final years in an , home care work to help people manage the tasks of daily living, like dressing, bathing, toileting, meal prep, and the like, is projected to become the fastest-growing occupation in the economy over the next decade. The home care workforce grew rapidly from 2008 to 2018, expanding from 898,000 to more than 2.2 million. Surging demand will add .

A by AARP and the National Alliance for Caregiving finds that 63 million Americans, one in four adults, are caring for older adults or those with serious illness or disabilities on a regular basis, an increase of 20 million caregivers in the last decade. A 61 percent–majority of family caregivers are women, though the number of family caregivers has increased across all genders, education levels, and ages and nearly all races and ethnicities.

That care is expensive. And, as our survey shows, many Americans underestimate just how expensive, especially for 24-hour care. While a majority of survey respondents see some role for the government in helping families pay for home care, right now, most families have to find a way to pay for it on their own.

Since Medicare, the public health insurance program for those over age 65, , most American families will have to find a way to cover the cost of long-term home care out of pocket, which on average runs more than $80,000 a year for 44 hours of home care a week. More intensive, 24-hour care could run a family well over $300,000 a year.

The Department of Health and Human Services estimates that the average American turning 65 today with families paying more than one-third of that out of pocket.

Although families pay, on average, $35 an hour for home care, home care workers earn $16 an hour. The rest goes to home care agency administrative costs, insurance, marketing, and about a . Home care workers’ low pay, often with no benefits, contributes to a . That constant churn, in turn, impacts the continuity and quality of home care.

Medicaid, the public means-tested health insurance program for those living on low incomes, does cover home care, known as Home and Community-Based Services. Currently, about who are disabled or older and live on limited incomes use home care, and another 600,000 sit on waiting lists. The Trump administration’s cuts to Medicaid of nearly $1 trillion over 10 years are likely to significantly

For families who don’t qualify for Medicaid and can’t afford private home care or long-term insurance, family members, a majority of them women, are often forced to reduce work hours or drop out of the workforce entirely to provide the needed care. That has a steep cost, too—especially for the many “sandwich generation” caregivers who simultaneously care for children and aging parents.

At the Better Life Lab, we produce and support high-quality research and journalism,  expand the field of care journalism and storytelling capacity, and work to strengthen the network of those dedicated to care innovations and solutions by uplifting the excellent work of partner organizations, researchers, journalists, and storytellers. Here are just three such sources that can help provide deeper context to journalists and inform and drive storytelling. Subscribe to the Better Life Lab newsletter for more resources.

Matthew Nestler, (KPMG Economics, 2026).

• Nestler is a senior economist at KPMG US who leads their research on the care economy—child care, elder care and paid leave—and on how the care crisis affects workers, families, employers, and the U.S. economy. He publishes a biweekly newsletter, on LinkedIn.

Curran McSwigan, (Third Way, 2026) and (Third Way, 2025).

• McSwigan is deputy director of the economic program at Third Way, a centrist think tank. These reader-friendly, graphics-heavy reports serve as excellent primers on how the child care system is a broken market.

National Alliance for Caregiving, AARP, (2025).����

• Drawing from their extensive membership networks, these two organizations’ ongoing research provides the clearest big-picture view of the rapidly increasing need for older age care in the United States and the toll it’s taking on caregivers and families.