In March 2025, the District of Columbia Office of the State Superintendent of Education (OSSE) engaged the Urban Institute to comprehensively review Capital Quality—DC’s Quality Rating and Improvement System (QRIS) for child care and early learning programs. The goal of this review was to assess the strengths and challenges of the current system, explore how evidence and best practices in the QRIS design and implementation have evolved since its launch in 2016, and offer actionable recommendations for updating and improving the QRIS framework and implementation.

This report summarizes insights gathered through interviews and focus groups with key stakeholders, including system leaders, program leaders, and families. Their perspectives shed light on their experiences with the system and offered insights that helped inform the recommendations to strengthen DC’s QRIS.

Why This Matters

Capital Quality is both a system of services and a set of implementation processes that together influence how families, providers, and administrators experience quality improvement in DC. Understanding how stakeholders perceive and interact with the system is critical for identifying which components are working as intended and which may need to evolve. Insights from this report and accompanying recommendations brief can help OSSE strengthen program supports, improve communication and transparency, and ensure that the system continues to advance access to quality care for young children and their families.

What We Found

Stakeholders shared a range of perspectives about Capital Quality, revealing both strong components and opportunities for improvement. Their feedback surfaced seven key findings:

1. Capital Quality as a system strategy for improving child care quality: Stakeholders expressed varying levels of understanding about Capital Quality. Many stakeholders associated the system with specific activities, especially interactions with quality facilitators, while others viewed it primarily as a compliance mechanism.
2. Capital Quality as a strategy for improving awareness about child care quality: Stakeholders agreed that families have limited awareness of Capital Quality. Although most participating parents had children enrolled in Capital Quality programs, few knew about the system or used it when choosing care.
3. Program leaders’ reflections on Capital Quality features: Program leaders valued one-on-one technical assistance from quality facilitators but expressed dissatisfaction with other features, such as the continuous quality improvement plan.
4. Benefits and drawbacks of participation: Some leaders found Capital Quality supports helpful, while others described participation as burdensome. Experiences varied by program type, size, and philosophy.
5. Program leaders’ suggestions for improving Capital Quality: Suggestions included aligning training with program needs, improving communication and transparency, and separating subsidy payment rates from quality ratings.
6. Reasons for not participating: Nonparticipants cited involvement in other OSSE initiatives, incompatible assessment tools, and difficulty accessing materials.
7. Recommendations to encourage participation: Nonparticipating program leaders emphasized clearer explanations of Capital Quality’s purpose and benefits, as well as more targeted teacher-level supports.

How We Did It

Between May and July 2025, the Urban Institute gathered stakeholder perspectives on Capital Quality through interviews and focus groups with key informants and program leaders and computer-assisted telephone interviews with parents and guardians. In total, 14 key informants, 36 program leaders, and 75 parents and guardians participated. The analysis applied an implementation science lens to understand how design, communication, and feedback processes influence participation, perceptions, and the overall success of Capital Quality.