By Emis Akbari, University of Toronto and Kerry McCuaig, University of Toronto, The Conversation
Ontario’s agreement under the Canada-Wide Early Learning and Child Care (CWELCC) program is set to expire in March 2026, and troubling signs suggest the province is far from meeting its commitments.
Despite receiving $13.2 billion — almost half of the total $27.2 billion federal investment — Ontario has fallen short on critical benchmarks.
Unlike most families across Canada, Ontario parents have yet to see significant growth in available spaces or $10-a-day child care.
This provincial inaction is particularly troubling in a federal election year. While federal maintenance funding is to continue post-2026, without the benefits of the child care plan widely realized and apparent to voters, future governments could easily scale back any gains.
Our recent study, conducted in collaboration with regional governments tasked with implementing Ontario’s early learning and child-care agreement, shows how staffing shortages have created long wait-lists for care. Children are ageing out of child care before a space becomes available. The unmet demand, regional officials told us, is eroding public confidence in the program as parents become frustrated in their search for affordable care.
While other provinces have enacted comprehensive compensation reforms — including pensions, benefits and wage increases of up to 50 per cent — to attract and retain qualified educators, Ontario’s support for trained early childhood educators tops out at $24.86 per hour, well below the federal poverty line for a family of four.
Low wages, staffing shortfalls
Low wages deter new graduates from entering the child-care field and drive away those already employed. Of the 4,200 early childhood educators that Ontario colleges graduate annually, fewer than 60 per cent enter licensed child care, and only 40 per cent remain after five years.
Small wonder for the exodus. One in five child-care staff responding to our survey told us they hold a second job to make ends meet. Over 55 per cent of couple families, and 83 per cent of lone parent families, are concerned about their housing.
The province acknowledges a shortfall of 8,500 educators needed to meet its expansion goal of 86,000 new spaces. Yet the issue runs deeper. Staff shortages mean existing child-care rooms are empty. A single absence can force centre directors to abruptly close rooms, leaving parents scrambling for alternatives.
The human costs
The consequences extend beyond empty classrooms. Staff shortages compromise the quality and inclusivity of early childhood programs. Our report found that children with disabilities are often sent home or denied admission altogether due to insufficient staffing.
This is despite Jordan’s Principle, which the federal government says ensures all First Nations children access the products, services and supports they need, when they need them.
Ontario’s requirement for qualified staff is among the lowest in Canada, mandating that only half of a centre’s staff hold a college diploma in early education. The use of ministry “approvals,” a stop-gap measure allowing untrained staff to fill roles until qualified educators are found, has become standard practice.
Our research found entire programs, particularly those in northern regions and those serving francophone and Indigenous families, operating without a single qualified early childhood educator.
Educator shortages not only exclude children from child care, but degrade the quality of care. While less than one per cent of the province’s almost 28,000 early childhood educators working in licensed child care are reported to authorities, incidents involving the improper handling of children have seen an uptick.
This may partly reflect the COVID-19 pandemic’s aftermath, but it also may signal staff burnout and the prevalence of untrained workers.
Equally alarming, 14 per cent of respondents in our study indicated they would be reluctant to recommend their own centre to a family member or friend seeking child care.
Quality and staffing challenges vary significantly across Ontario’s child-care network of over 5,700 centres. Publicly operated centres and established community providers, where wages and benefits are higher, report fewer staffing shortages or quality problems.
In contrast, for-profit centres, where wages are significantly lower, experience the highest staff turnover and lowest levels of job dissatisfaction.
These disparities are particularly concerning given Ontario’s pressure on regional governments to divest their public centres, and its push to lift the cap on the percentage of new for-profit spaces allowed under its agreement with Ottawa.
A blueprint for change
Ontario’s challenges are not insurmountable. Other provinces and territories are showing that fair compensation tied to qualifications and responsibilities can help to stabilize the child-care workforce.
Publicly funded pensions, benefits, and additional incentives for educators in remote, Indigenous and francophone communities have proven effective in attracting and retaining staff.
Ontario must urgently follow suit. The CWELCC program isn’t just about child care; it’s a highly effective economic strategy. The province’s Financial Accountability Office estimates that the national plan could enable 98,000 more Ontario mothers to join the workforce.
However, this potential can only be realized if sufficient child-care spaces are created. Without early childhood educators new spaces are wasted infrastructure. This represents squandered economic development, children denied quality early education and families left to struggle financially.
The time to act is now. Ontario must seize the promise of CWELCC before it becomes another missed opportunity.
Emis Akbari, Adjunct Professor, Department of Applied Psychology and Human Development at Ontario Institute for the Study of Education (OISE) and Senior Policy Fellow at the Atkinson Centre, University of Toronto and Kerry McCuaig, Fellow in Early Childhood Policy, Atkinson Centre, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
