What we heard: CCEYS Survey

Why we engaged

The City of Kingston plays a primary role in child care and early years services in Kingston and Frontenac County. In accordance with the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014, the City must develop a 5-Year Service Plan for licensed child care and early years programs and services for children 0-12 years and their families.

Building off previous engagement including focus groups, discovery interviews, data analysis and community sessions, the 2025-2029 Service Plan aims to reflect the community’s identified needs and provide a system-wide response to established priorities.

The goal of this engagement was to validate and prioritize the recommendations outlined in the Draft Early Years and Child Care System Framework for Kingston-Frontenac.

How we engaged

The survey was open from Sept. 8 until Sept. 30, 2025 on Get Involved Kingston. Respondents had the option to take the survey in English or in French. To streamline the reporting, results from both surveys were combined in the ‘What we Heard’ summary below.

It was shared with the community via:

  • Social media promotion across the City of Kingston’s Facebook, Instagram, X and LinkedIn channels
  • Inclusion in Get Involved Kingston newsletter
  • Digital screens on City and library networks
  • Links on City of Kingston website
  • Mention in Inside Kingston weekly news segment
  • Paid social media ads on Facebook and Instagram
  • Posters provided to child care providers, libraries and recreation facilities
  • Direct contact with stakeholders including four local school boards and community planning tables such as the ACES and Resilience Coalition, Francophone Working Group, and the Sharbot Lake and Rural Frontenac Interagency group.

Who we heard from

  • 278 participants completed the Child Care & Early Years System Plan survey
    • 275 users completed the English survey
    • 3 users completed the French survey
  • 1,890 participants visited the project page to learn more about the Child Care & Early Years System Plan
  • 81 participants engaged with the City for the first time on Get Involved Kingston

Locations of respondents (Question 1)

  • 28% Southwest Kingston (K7M)
  • 25% Central-East Kingston (K7K)
  • 15% Northwest Kingston (K7P)
  • 6% Central-South Kingston (K7L)
  • 5% Rural Kingston and Frontenac County (K0H)
  • 2% Other (K7N, K7R)
  • 19% chose to skip this question

Role in system (Question 2)

  • 210 self-identified as Parents/Guardians
  • 29 as Licensed Child Care or EarlyON Program Staff
  • 13 as Licensed Child Care or EarlyON Operators
  • 2 as Leader/Senior Staff of Local School Board
  • 10 as Community Partners
  • 33 Other
    • Includes retired/former staff members, former board members, future parents, grandparents and other relatives, teachers, private babysitters, RECE students, employers of parents who need child care and general community members

What we heard

Familiarity with system (Question 3)

Most respondents stated that they were very familiar (53%) or somewhat familiar (43%) with child care and early years services in Kingston-Frontenac.

Vision (Question 4)

Participants were asked to review the proposed vision for the CCEYS plan and share how well the vision reflected their expectation of a child care system. 53% strongly agreed with the vision, 31% agreed, 9% were neutral, 6% disagreed and 1% strongly disagreed.

Figure A: Responses to Question 4: How well does this vision reflect your expectations of a child care system?

Figure A: Responses to Question 4

Plan Priorities (Question 5 and 6)

Respondents were provided with summaries of the five proposed priorities. In question 5, they were asked to rate the importance of each priority. The priorities were ranked as follows:

  1. System Access & Equity: 84% selected “important” (71% “very important”)
  2. Operator Support & Capacity: 84% selected “important” (64% “very important”)
  3. Workforce Strategy & Professional Development: 83% selected “important” (56% “very important”)
  4. Data Monitoring, Reporting & Accountability: 77% selected “important” (41% “very important”)
  5. Strategic Partnerships & Advocacy: 76% selected “important” (36% “very important”)

Figure B: Responses to Question 5: Please rate the importance of each priority.

Figure B: Responses to Question 5

Question 6 asked respondents if they had any feedback on how they ranked the priorities. 80 participants provided comments . Themes identified in their responses are as follows:

  • Access and Capacity: There is widespread concern about the lack of child care spaces, especially for infants, toddlers and before/after school care. Long waitlists and inconsistent waitlist systems were mentioned often, with many families waiting for years and some never receiving a spot.
  • Workforce Support and Compensation: There was strong emphasis on the need to support ECEs through better wages, training and professional development. Staff retention and recruitment were identified as critical to system sustainability. Concerns include burnout, low pay and lack of recognition for ECEs.
  • Equity & Inclusion: Several comments addressed inequities in access, especially for low-income families, single parents and French-speaking children. Suggestions include prioritizing vulnerable groups on waitlists and ensuring fair, transparent processes.
  • System Design: There are calls for better system planning, oversight and accountability, with a desire for data-informed decision-making, although there is sentiment that data should not supersede lived experiences of staff and families in the system. Some expressed frustration with the OneList registry and its lack of transparency and consistency.
  • Affordability: Many respondents stressed the need for affordable child care, especially for families with lower incomes. Some expressed willingness to compromise quality for the sake of availability and affordability.
  • Quality and Safety: While access was prioritized, quality care and safe environments were also seen as essential. Comments emphasized the importance of consistent standards, nutritious food, and nurturing environments.
  • Policy and Governance: Some respondents criticized perceived ‘bureaucratic inefficiencies’ and called for more private sector involvement or streamlined public systems. There were suggestions for clearer vision statements, measurable goals and better funding strategies.

Additional Comments (Question 7)

Respondents were asked if they had any additional feedback on the CCEYS and 146 participants provided responses. Comment themes were similar to those identified above in the priority feedback:

  • Access & Capacity: This is the most prominent theme across all comments. Participants highlight the overwhelming shortage of licensed child care spaces and years-long waitlists as areas of major concern. The centralized waitlist system is perceived by some as being opaque and inefficient and there are concerns about fairness and equity amongst applicants.
  • Workforce Support: Many comments highlight the ECE staffing crisis, noting that many educators are going to other sectors for better pay and conditions. There are calls for better wages, benefits and professional development to retain and attract qualified staff, with strong sentiment that quality care depends on thriving educators.
  • Equity & Inclusion: Some comments express concern that families from low-income, single-parent, rural and Francophone backgrounds face disproportionate barriers. Others note a lack of inclusive programming for children with special needs and extended hours for children of shift workers. Some comments emphasized the need for non-profit prioritization and support for licensed home daycares.
  • System Design & Oversight: The centralized registry is seen by some respondents as flawed, lacking transparency and accountability. Many parents want clearer information on waitlist status and timelines. There’s a call for better governance, with suggestions for advisory committees, oversight of third-party providers and data-driven planning.
  • Affordability: While the $10/day program is appreciated, many commenters stated that they still find child care unaffordable, especially outside of Canada-Wide Early Learning and Child Care (CWELCC) -supported centres. Some note that they are forced to choose unlicensed care or leave the workforce due to cost and lack of availability.
  • Program Quality: Some commenters had concerns about the quality of before/after school programs, with some desiring standardization across centres and more engaging programming. Others praised EarlyON programs but questioned their cost-effectiveness and staffing levels.
  • Advocacy and Policy: There are strong calls for urgent action from the City and the Province to expand capacity and improve oversight. Suggestions include capital funding, collaboration with colleges and policy reform to support both families and providers.

Next Steps

Feedback from this survey has been shared with the project team. Results will be used internally to validate the draft Child Care and Early Years System plan and inform the City’s own implementation plan.

A presentation on the final draft CCEYS plan, including a summary of engagement, will be delivered to the Arts, Recreation and Culture Policies Committee, followed by the final plan being brought to Council for approval in early 2026.