Your donation will help us produce journalism like this. Please give today.

Starting this week, California’s after-school programs will be required to provide more parent notification and consent — flowing from federal executive orders — another top-down mandate for programs already navigating considerable bureaucracy and funding uncertainty.

While robust two-way communication between after-school providers and parents is vital, the notion that regulatory checklists and heightened administrative oversight will resolve California’s most pressing after-school challenges is both short sighted and unrealistic.

What the sector needs is a sustained commitment to measuring whether families’ needs for high quality programs are being met, and to uprooting barriers to equitable participation. A deep, granular look inside a single city in Los Angeles County — Lynwood — reveals the state’s true challenge: moving from “more seats” to genuine equity and relevance. Local data show that simply providing seats rarely guarantees access, satisfaction, or real opportunity for all children and families.

As a state, California provides unprecedented investments in expanded learning programs: billions spent to provide academic support, socialization and safe, enriching environments after the school bell rings.

In Lynwood, over half of surveyed families (57%) enroll their children in after-school programs, with participation averaging four days per week and most seats filled by free, school-based providers. Parents see these programs as vital for keeping kids safe, supporting employment and offering critical socialization and enrichment.

Yet, the survey results challenge the myth that logistical barriers such as cost, hours or transportation are always the main obstacles to participation. In Lynwood, only 4% of parents cited cost, 7% mentioned transportation, and a mere 5% referenced lack of available seats as reasons for not enrolling their child in out-of-school programming.

The overwhelming factor? Family and child choice: Nearly half of non-participating parents (44%) simply prefer their children to be at home after school. By comparison, citywide data from Los Angeles in 2020 showed 50% citing cost and 59% citing transportation — reinforcing that commonly cited barriers don’t always mirror local realities.

Despite California’s strong investments, Lynwood’s ecosystem demonstrates “supply” does not guarantee “access” to the programs that families want the most. Many offerings outside the school district don’t meet every day and often require parent transport and/or added cost. Yet parents reported wanting better access to STEM and fine arts, and more athletic options, ideally within school-based options with minimal cost and transportation challenges.

This imbalance makes communication with parents essential. While most school-based programs excel at reaching families through direct channels, parents are not always aware of the full range of activities offered, including STEM, fine arts, and athletics. Also, other providers lack these direct communication channels and struggle to publicize their offerings. Many families simply aren’t aware of the full range of choices available.

[inline_story url=”https://www.the74million.org/article/post-pandemic-survey-shows-parents-want-greater-control-of-kids-education/”]

Parents also request better, more transparent communication about what children do in these programs, especially regarding academic and social growth. Better communication could lead to  greater program satisfaction and trust and encourage enrollment among families who currently prefer to keep their children at home.

Outcomes in Lynwood show that high program quality, strong staff training and rich curricular diversity matter more to parents than seat count alone. Parents value programs that not only keep children safe but build curiosity, confidence and skills especially in underrepresented enrichment fields.

Lynwood’s experience underscores the risk of judging success by supply alone. Equity in after school is less about universal enrollment and more about closing the gap between what families want and what is offered. Achieving this means:

• Focusing on specialization: Schools and other providers should invest in a broader and deeper array of enrichment opportunities especially after-school STEM, arts, and athletics, often in short supply outside core, school-based programs.
• Supporting cross-sector partnerships: Schools, cities and community organizations must collaborate. Most providers beyond the school district have unused capacity; the right subsidies, transportation support and outreach to parents could address unmet demand.
• Bolstering communication: Families need proactive, clear information about the full menu of program options to make informed, empowered choices.
• Prioritizing ongoing, transparent data collection: Robust reporting on attendance, satisfaction and family preferences across all providers is essential for continual system improvement.

California’s proud legacy of expanded learning stands at a turning point. Success is measured not by the dollars spent or the seats filled, but rather by the precision with which programs meet family needs and aspirations. Every community regardless of neighborhood, providers or economic status deserves diverse, high-quality, out-of-school opportunities uniquely tailored to its students. The path ahead requires listening, adapting, and investing in specific local needs based on what families truly value.