Written by Sly James
COMMITMENT TO DATA-DRIVEN DECISION-MAKING
When I became Mayor, I committed to making decisions based on facts and data, not politics or special interests. My staff bought into that commitment, as did our Chief Innovation Officer and the City Manager. Together, we created KCSTAT, a data-driven initiative designed to collect data, analyze facts, and create a predictive data platform.
We gathered data from multiple sources, including our Citizen Satisfaction Survey and our Business Satisfaction Survey (collected over many years), the 911 emergency call system, the 311 complaint system, internal data regarding taxes, infrastructure needs, and more — covering the entire city and businesses within it.
When we first started KCSTAT, our focus was primarily on the internal data generated by individual departments. That approach caused some understandable anxiety among department heads and managers, who worried that poor data might reflect badly on their performance or even lead to negative job actions against them or their staff — although that was never our intention. We understood how that perception could take hold. More importantly, we realized that while analyzing departmental data gave us useful insights, it didn’t help us solve problems in a truly systemic or efficient way.
We then shifted KCSTAT’s focus to align with City Council committees — finance, neighborhoods, infrastructure, etc. — and looked at problems through a cross-departmental and systems lens. For example, on a neighborhood issue, we would bring together codes enforcement, fire, police, health, public works, trash removal, and others, all in one televised session. Using data, we developed collaborative solutions that drew on resources across multiple departments. This approach worked remarkably well. Bloomberg Associates recognized KCSTAT as exemplary and even helped export it to other cities. Other municipalities tuned in to watch what we were doing, confirming that our model had relevance far beyond Kansas City.
DISCOVERING SYSTEMS THINKING
The KCSTAT experience led me to see the city as an interconnected system — every decision and every department affected others. This realization sparked my interest in systems thinking, both as a discipline and as a skill.
I became so engaged that I pursued certification as a Systems Thinking Associate. I’ll admit that some parts of the process challenged me — particularly the technology. There was a digital whiteboard tool that younger participants navigated effortlessly, while I, at 73, struggled to master even basic tasks. It was humbling and reminded me how much there is always left to learn. I’m far from an expert, but the experience deepened my appreciation for how systems connect — and how awareness of those connections can drive better outcomes.
Systems thinking reminds us that early childhood education does not exist in isolation — it is one part of a larger, interconnected web that includes families, neighborhoods, health care, housing, and the economy. The true power of systems thinking lies in recognizing how these parts relate to one another and how their interactions shape outcomes. Once we understand those relationships, we can identify the leverage points — the places where small, focused adjustments can lead to meaningful, lasting improvements. In the context of early childhood, understanding how this stage influences the rest of life is essential. The experiences and support children receive in their earliest years ripple outward, affecting everything from future learning and productivity to health, stability, and even criminal behavior in adulthood.
Imagine contracting with a builder to construct a new home. It takes nine months to build, but instead of starting with the foundation, the builder begins with the roof and works downward. When the house is finished, they simply pick it up and place it somewhere — not necessarily where you would choose — on whatever land they can find.
Sometimes, the home lands on solid ground, and the people who live there enjoy stability and comfort. Other times, it ends up on rocky, uneven ground, leaving the home full of cracks and sagging floors. Yet neither home was built on a true foundation. If each had been built on a solid foundation, both would have provided a better, safer, more reliable place to live. In short, no one would hire a contractor who built a home without laying a foundation first.
Yet that is exactly what we do with many of our children. We wait until they are five years old — after four or five formative years have passed — and then expect them to start school ready to learn, without the cracks, gaps, and instability that come from not having a strong developmental foundation.
EDUCATION REFORM: STARTING EARLY
One of the biggest challenges in education reform is that we often try to fix problems too late. By the time a child is struggling with reading in third or fourth grade, it’s very likely that the struggle will continue. The real leverage point is at the beginning — from birth to age five.
When Geoffrey Canada created the Harlem Children’s Zone, he started with expectant parents, teaching them about nutrition, early brain development, and even music. While not every family participated, those who did saw remarkable benefits, and the results became a national model.
If we invested as much in zero-to-five early childhood support as we do in foster care, child abuse interventions, and prosecutions, we would drastically improve third- and fourth-grade outcomes.
CASE STUDIES: CITY-LEVEL SOLUTIONS FOR EARLY CHILDHOOD
SAN ANTONIO: PRE-K 4 SA – COMMUNITY-FUNDED PRE-K
San Antonio didn’t wait for someone else to fix early childhood—they voted to do it. In 2012, residents approved a fractional city sales tax to fund Pre-K 4 SA, a full-day, high-quality pre-K program. The tax provides roughly 80% of the program’s revenue (now $50M+ per year), with the rest from state/federal sources. Voters renewed it in 2020 with about 73% support. Independent evaluators found positive returns for taxpayers—about $1.56 in benefits for every $1 invested.
DENVER: DENVER PRESCHOOL PROGRAM (DPP) – TUITION CREDITS THAT FOLLOW THE CHILD
Denver took a different route. In 2006, voters approved a sales-and-use tax dedicated to the Denver Preschool Program (DPP)—initially 0.12%, increased to 0.15% in 2014 and re-authorized permanently in 2023. Instead of running classrooms, DPP gives tuition credits directly to families on a sliding scale. Evaluations show strong kindergarten readiness and gains into third grade, with lasting benefits for underserved groups.
PRE-K AND LONG-TERM OUTCOMES
Studies show that quality pre-K has benefits that last into adulthood. Children who attend high-quality pre-K are more likely to graduate high school, attend college, and earn higher wages later in life. They are also less likely to be arrested or need public assistance.
Long-term studies, including the Perry Preschool Project and Abecedarian Project, found that every $1 invested in quality early education returns between $4 and $7 to society through higher earnings, lower crime, and reduced social spending. Economists like James Heckman estimate annual public returns of about 7–10%. In Boston, newer research confirms similar benefits—better graduation rates, fewer juvenile offenses, and higher college attendance.
These results show that early learning is both a moral and financial investment. It builds stronger communities, lowers crime rates, and strengthens the future workforce. Quality and consistency matter most—programs with trained teachers and family involvement produce the best outcomes.
If we are serious about building a stronger workforce and a more equitable economy and community, then we must start where growth begins — with our youngest citizens. Every data point, every study, and every lived experience tells us the same thing: children who begin with a strong foundation build stronger lives. Investing early is not charity; it is strategy. It is the smartest, most cost-effective form of economic development any city or state can pursue. So the real question isn’t whether we can afford to do it — it’s whether we can afford not to. The future workforce is already here, sitting in high chairs, cribs, and daycare centers. The time to prepare them is now.
