ECD 2.0

What is ECD 2.0?

A framework for action based on advances in the science of adversity, adaptation, and resilience that offers expanded foundational knowledge to guide current early childhood investments (which are informed largely by ECD 1.0) toward new strategies that can achieve significantly larger benefits for young children and the adults who care for them.

ECD 2.0: A Framework for Action

The rapidly increasing scientific understanding of how early experiences affect child development and human potential has led to what we are now calling ECD 2.0— a promising framework for rethinking how we can generate larger returns on investments in supporting the early foundations of child well-being. This new mindset calls for: (1) considering the broad impact of early experiences on the foundations of healthy development, the building blocks of educational achievement, and the origins of lifelong physical and mental health; (2) including and going beyond direct services alone to address a range of place-based influences on well-being; and (3) designing for, measuring, and responding to variation in the effects of all policies and programs.

In 2022, the Center on the Developing Child posted a call to action to “re-envision early childhood policy and practice in a world of striking inequality and uncertainty.” Building on more than two decades of raising public understanding about early brain development in an environment of relationships (unofficially the science of ECD 1.0), this call to action proposed an expanded science framework that focuses on connecting the brain to the rest of the body in a broader ecological context (which we are calling ECD 2.0). The recognition that ECD 2.0 builds on the enduring features of ECD 1.0 is reflected in the following themes:

Educational Achievement and Lifelong Health

Effective investment in the early childhood period is still about enriching developing minds (ECD 1.0) and it’s also about protecting developing brains and other biological systems from the disruptive effects of adversity on the foundations of both early learning and physical and mental well-being (ECD 2.0).

Responsive Relationships and Healthy Communities

It’s still about the importance of “serve and return” interactions (ECD 1.0) and it’s also about recognizing that the burdens of poverty, racism, and other structural inequities cannot be addressed solely by responsive relationships, and that all children and the adults who care for them deserve to live in communities that support thriving at all ages (ECD 2.0).

Universal Needs and Individual Variation

It’s still about investing in evidence-based programs (ECD 1.0) and it’s also about expecting variation in effectiveness, moving beyond one-size-fits-all thinking, and having the capacity for tailored implementation to achieve larger impacts for all children (ECD 2.0).

Barriers to Progress

While many factors continue to constrain our ability to achieve greater impacts at scale, three stand out:

Predominant focus on direct services for children and families

Challenge 1

Programs that address individual needs primarily within the context of responsive relationships do not have sufficient power to influence place-based factors that are essential for healthy development (e.g., affordable housing, well-paid jobs, safe neighborhoods, clean air and water, access to nutritious food, and opportunities for increasing economic mobility).

Insufficient capacity for flexible implementation

Challenge 2

Programs for children facing adversity need sufficient resources to recruit, support, and retain staff who are trained to address complex needs and can tailor the provision of evidence-based services to address individual variation in their effectiveness.

Not starting early enough

Challenge 3

Returns on investment would be substantially larger by more balanced attention to the prenatal and early childhood foundations of physical and mental health as well as school readiness and K-12 academic achievement.

Guided by the concepts of ECD 2.0, we can overcome these barriers. We can better align our investments with the science that tells us that the foundations of whole child development and lifelong health are inextricably intertwined. We can better support programs and care providers of all kinds to be able to identify and address the inevitable differences in how children respond to interventions. We can measure the impact of programs in a way that allows us to better understand not just what works, but what works for whom, in what context, and why—which can then inform more flexible implementation that produces better outcomes for all children. We can increase investment in health and well-being during pregnancy and the first 2-3 years after birth, knowing how sensitive these periods are to both positive and negative influences. And we can better understand that investing in a community’s infrastructure, reducing threats to adult well-being, and increasing access to opportunity for all its residents are all wise investments in the future of the community’s youngest children.