Bill · H.R. 9224· House(119-HR-9224)
Child Care Modernization Act of 2026
- Introduced
- 6/9/2026
- Last activity
- 6/9/2026 — Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- Sponsored by
- Ryan Mackenzie
- Cosponsors
- - 3 - 6
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The Child Care Modernization Act of 2026 seeks to amend and reauthorize the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990. It aims to update the purposes of the Act to include greater state flexibility, parental choice, and support for a qualified child care workforce. The bill updates definitions for eligible activities and children to better reflect modern needs. It also introduces a new part of the Act focused on child care supply and facilities grants. These grants are intended to expand the capacity of providers and improve facilities. Finally, the bill includes technical updates and loan restrictions for the Department of Agriculture.
Yes· 3 of 27
Does this make child care cost less?+8
The legislation reauthorizes and updates child care block grants, establishes cost estimation models for payment rates, and provides grants for supply expansion.
Would children be better off under this?+7
The bill improves early learning and development standards and expands the supply of safe, high-quality child care facilities.
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?+6
The bill focuses heavily on low-income children and families, expanding access to affordable, subsidized child care options.
The opposite· 3 of 5
Would high-income households be better off under this?-3
The inclusion of a $1,000,000 family asset cap restricts certain families from receiving child care assistance regardless of immediate cash flow.
Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this?-3
Asset limitations for assistance eligibility negatively impact families holding significant assets above the threshold.
Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this?-3
Asset limits on child care assistance eligibility apply restrictions to higher-wealth brackets.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Parental Choice and Flexibility: The bill aims to allow states more flexibility in developing mixed delivery systems, which can help provide child care that best suits the specific needs of working parents in that state (Section 2(b)(1)).
-
Support for Working Parents: The updated definition of "eligible activity" includes job training, education, and health treatment, which can help parents achieve independence from public assistance (Section s 3(a)(4)).
-
Improved Workforce Quality: The Act aims to support the educational and professional development of child care staff, helping to recruit and retain a qualified workforce (Section 2(b)(6)).
-
Enhanced Facility Safety and Capacity: Through the new "Child Care Supply and Facilities" part, providers can receive subgrants to expand their operations or renovate buildings to ensure children are in healthy and safe environments (Section 12, Section 658T(a)).
-
Expanded Access for Specific Groups: The bill includes provisions to assist children experiencing homelessness, children in kinship care, and children in need of protective services (Section 3(a)(4)(5)(C)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Increased Financial Burdens on States: States are required to certify that payment rates will be sufficient to meet the full cost of providing services, including fixed and operational costs (Section 6, Section 658E(c)(4)(A)).
-
Potential Barriers via Copayments: While the bill requires a sliding fee scale that is not a barrier, the requirement for families to provide a copayment remains a factor in accessing services (Section 6, Section 658E(c)(5)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Children+7Good For Low Income Households+6Good For Rural Residents+5Good For Women+5Good For Business Owners+4Good For Middle Aged+4Good For People With Disabilities+4Good For Students+4Good For Young Adults+4Good For African Americans+3Good For Hispanic Americans+3Good For Middle Class Households+3Good For Native Americans+3Good For Urban Residents+3Good For Immigrants+2Good For Men+2Good For Seniors+2Good For Billionaires-3Good For High Income Households-3Good For High Net Worth Individuals-3Good For Ultra High Net Worth Individuals-3
- Social Issues And Justice
- Improves Childcare Affordability+8Improves Poverty Reduction+4Improves Disability Rights+3Improves Gender Equality+2
- Economy And Finance
- Increases Job Creation+5Improves Small Business Support+4Improves Economic Growth+3Reduces Government Spending-2
- Governance And Ideology
- Improves Government Transparency+3Increase States Rights+3
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Improves Rural Development+4
- 9/15/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 8/6/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/27/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/20/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/2/2026
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 6/9/2026
- Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Salud CarbajalDemocrat · California
Brian FitzpatrickRepublican · Pennsylvania
Josh HarderDemocrat · California
Ashley HinsonRepublican · Iowa
Zoe LofgrenDemocrat · California
Susie LeeDemocrat · Nevada
Joseph MorelleDemocrat · New York
Kristen McDonald RivetDemocrat · Michigan
Robert WittmanRepublican · Virginia