Can early childhood education lift people out of poverty and close the gap between the poorest and richest Americans?  That question is getting more attention after a column published in the New York Times said expanding early childhood education is “the single step that would do the most to reduce income inequality.”

In his column titled “Occupy the Classroom,” Nicholas Kristof cited an impressive body of research documenting the economic and societal benefits of investing in children from birth to age 5.

Economist Tim Bartik with the W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, offers more evidence to bolster Kristof’s claim.  Bartik estimates that “even a preschool program that lasts only for one school year at age 4, and is a half-day program, can, if it is a high-quality program, raise the future income from earnings of the lowest income quintile by over 6% of their expected future income.”

Bartik says more intensive programs can do more – increasing by 35% the future income of the poorest children.  (Click on the link to read more of Bartik’s research).

A few weeks before the column appeared in the New York Times, the Detroit Free Press published an editorial that called for fully funding the Great Start Readiness Program (GSRP) to fight childhood poverty.  GSRP is a state-funded preschool program that serves more than 47,000 at-risk 4 year olds – and the results are impressive.  As stated in the editorial, graduates of GSRP “are 85% more likely to finish high school on time.  They are also less likely to go to prison where they would cost taxpayers $35,000 a year each.”

Even with such compelling outcomes, Michigan only provides funding for about half of eligible children to attend GSRP.  In Kent County, more than one-quarter of low income 4 year olds – more than 1,000 children every year – do not have a spot in GSRP or the federally funded Head Start.  That leaves most without any preschool at all.  And that figure doesn’t include children who are eligible for public preschool due to risk factors beyond economics – like not speaking English in the home or limited education of their parents.

As Kristof concludes in his column, “… the question isn’t whether we can afford early childhood education, but whether we can afford not to provide it.  We can pay for prisons or we can pay, less, for early childhood education to help build a fairer and more equitable nation.”

Submitted November 2011