Students recommend expanded partnerships, a one‑stop guide and unpaid leave pilot to ease Lane County child care gaps

A University of Oregon student team presented a review of childcare gaps in Lane County on June 11, recommending a one‑stop resource for parents, expanded employer partnerships and a formal unpaid‑leave policy for county employees to reduce child care precarity.

The two‑quarter capstone team — Mason Bartholomew, Quinn Hout and Wyatt Bean — told the Board of County Commissioners they focused on infant and toddler care (the most expensive age group) and surveyed Lane County employees to test what would make child care more accessible. “Almost unilaterally, people would be happier if the child care was cheaper,” Quinn said. The students also cited a 2024 Oregon State University study that classifies some Lane County communities as “child care deserts” — areas with more than three children for every regulated child care slot.

Why it matters: students said cost, limited supply and fit (special‑needs accommodations, schedule and location) drive parents to rely on informal care (family, friends or no care), which can be inconsistent. The students reported typical infant center costs in the county ranging from about $1,200 to $2,000 per month and said cost and lack of slots limited take‑up of Lane County’s existing employer partnership with Tip Tap Grow. At the time the students began, the county’s partnership yielded 50 guaranteed slots but only three were in use; the presenters said that number had later increased to 11.

The student team’s three headline recommendations were: 1) create a centralized, easily accessible resource guide (with URLs and QR codes, and multilingual content) so employees and residents can find options quickly; 2) expand day‑care partnerships in areas with high concentrations of county employees to improve commute and schedule fit; and 3) pilot a formal unpaid‑leave program (12–24 months options) guaranteeing a parent’s job on return while arranging temporary coverage via secondment or short‑term contract to maintain county services.

The students acknowledged barriers and tradeoffs. Expanding guaranteed slots can reduce community access where supply is tight; unpaid long leaves could be unaffordable to some employees and strain understaffed departments; maintaining an up‑to‑date resource guide requires staff time and consistent engagement, they said. The students suggested short‑term steps over 6–12 months: review the current Tip Tap Grow partnership, investigate one to two additional center partnerships near staff concentrations, formalize unpaid‑leave policy language and update the resource guide; longer‑term steps (1–3 years) include advocacy for state licensing changes and rural grants to increase provider supply.

Commissioners commended the work. Commissioner Foy, who served on the Oregon Commission on Child Care, urged students to link recommendations with state processes and noted that policy change at the Oregon Commission on Child Care could scale local solutions. Commissioner Christian Buck, who described having a young child while serving as commissioner, called the problem an “infrastructure problem” that also requires federal and state policy alignment. Commissioner Teagueger asked about voucher or portable subsidy models; the students said vouchers present fiscal limits at scale and noted employer partnerships like Tip Tap Grow are a more targeted employer‑sponsored approach.

No formal county vote or new county policy was adopted during the presentation. The commissioners asked staff to consider follow‑up steps and voiced interest in seeing a county review of the Tip Tap Grow partnership and exploration of pilot leave language.