Policy Brief Mapping childcare gaps in Honduras May 2025 Photo: Flag of Honduras in Tegucigalpa by Manuel Chinchilla via canva.com KEY MESSAGES In Honduras, less than one-fourth of children under primary-school age attend formal childcare and preschool services. Among countries in Latin American and the Caribbean, Honduras has the second-highest gender gap in labor force participation (35.4 percentage points), exceeded only by Guatemala (40.4 percentage points). Most women outside the labor force cite household and care responsibilities as the reason for not looking for a job. Like in many countries in the region, there are gaps in the regulatory framework for the overseeing of early childhood services for the 0-3 age group, making it challenging to enhance the provision of high- quality childcare services. Given the simultaneous nature of women’s decisions to work and to use childcare, ensuring the appropriate support for meeting childcare needs is a necessary condition for the success of every other policy intended to improve women’s outcomes in the labor market. Enhancing institutional coordination around childcare, expanding the supply of quality childcare, securing financial support to vulnerable households to afford these services, and fostering norm-changing behavior for increased co-responsibility between parents, are key actions in this regard. CONTEXT Compelling evidence demonstrates that investing in early childhood development significantly impacts children’s cognitive and socioemotional development; in addition, it could potentially have long lasting benefits on outcomes in adult age. At the same time, affordable nonparental childcare options are critically linked to women’s economic participation and employment. Evidence from both developed and developing countries shows that access to childcare services can lead to increases in female labor force participation. As in many Latin American and Caribbean countries, women in Honduras have fewer opportunities to participate in the labor force and, at the same time, carry a heavier load of unpaid home and care work than men (World Bank 2020, Mateo and Rodriguez-Chamussy, 2016). Honduras is, in fact, the country with the second highest gender gap in labor force participation in the region (35.4 percentage points), exceeded only by Guatemala (40.4 percentage points).[1] As per official statistics, only 40 percent of working-age women in Honduras participate in the labor market, compared with 75 percent of men. Moreover, although the gender differential in participation has slightly decreased in 3 percentage points since 2019, labor market outcomes have not reached pre-pandemic levels for both sexes.[2] Honduras is heavily reliant on family remittances, making it one of the most remittance-dependent countries in Latin America; in 2023, family remittances represented 25,9 percent of the country’s GDP.[3] Literature suggests that remittances have a small yet negative impact on the supply of female labor by increasing the purchasing of time for home production, a task typically assigned to women in the household (Sousa and Garcia-Suaza, 2018).[4] Unequal intrahousehold arrangements, limited creation of quality jobs and the limited availability of childcare programs, prevent women from participating more in the labor market. In this regard, appropriate support for meeting childcare needs is critical for the success of policies intended to improve women’s outcomes in the labor market. At the same time, Honduras has the lowest share in the region of children ages 0–3 and 3–5 attending some sort of formal childcare or preschool program. Only 1.2 percent of children in the 0– 2 age-group attend a center of early stimulation, and 37.9 percent of children in the 3–5 age group attend a formal preschool program. (EPHPM, 2019)[5] This means that barely one-fourth of children ages under 6 participate in formal childcare or preschool services. Increased provision of quality early childhood development (ECD) services could lead to improvements in school readiness of Honduran children, which can translate into better school performance and greater human capital accumulation, vital for sustaining economic growth. Furthermore, in a regional context of persistent inequality, access to high quality ECD services could help establish equal opportunities early in life (Devercelli and Beaton- Day, 2020). Evidence shows that the availability of community-based daycare centers implemented in Mexico, Colombia and Peru helps women, especially in low-income households, join or remain in the workforce (Mateo and Rodriguez-Chamussy, 2016). Incentives can also be used to encourage non-state actors expand the availability of quality childcare. (Devercelli and Beaton-Day, 2020). [1] WDI data for 2023. Data refers to modeled ILO estimates for population age 15+. [2] Estimates from the Permanent Household Survey of Multiple Purposes Honduras EPHPM, 2019 and 2023. National Institute of Statistics. [3] Central Bank of Honduras. Data retrieved on 5/12/2025. [4]At the same time, remittances are associated with increased spending on education and nutrition (Scott and Soler 2018; Oliveri, Scott and Sousa 2018). [5] The age of entry into the formal education system in Honduras is 4 years. THE PROBLEM In Honduras, the demand for time devoted to informal and at-home care and other household responsibilities falls disproportionately on women. In a survey conducted in 2021, 49 percent of Honduran women identified their main activity as housework, compared to 2 percent of men.[6] Social norms on work, motherhood, and the role of women in caring for household members more generally play a role in shaping negative perceptions of reliance on childcare centers. For instance, results from the latest Latin American Public Opinion Project survey in Honduras (2018) show that 61 percent of Honduran women believe that children will suffer if the mother works outside the home. Moreover, the substantial rate of international migration in Honduras, particularly among men, has been linked to a high prevalence of female-headed households, placing additional caregiving burdens for lone female caretakers.[7] The absence of a consistent regulatory framework and registry of providers makes the mapping of the supply difficult, however, the study carried out in the main urban areas of the country, shows that there is an overall gap in service provision for young children ages under three that make it difficult for mothers to cover the period following maternity leave . Supply is mostly provided by the public sector although private providers are more likely to cover children three and younger. As of 2019, only 1.2 percent of children in the 0–2 age-group attended an ECD center, and 37.9 percent of children aged 3-5 attended childcare or a preschool program. In addition, there are important quality- and cost- related differences between public and private childcare centers. The unequal division of care responsibilities can exacerbate gender inequalities. Around 67 percent of the population of women ages 15+ not participating in the labor market cite household responsibilities (that is, looking after the family or the home) as the reason they do not look for a job. The corresponding share of men is barely 8 percent. This situation is more pronounced among women living with children ages under six, where the percentage is 77 percent among women, compared with only 10 percent among men (2019 EPHPM). The gap is most pronounced in the 15–44 age group, in which many women are starting families or are focused on caring for young children. Honduras was among the countries in the region where women’s employment was impacted the most. According to a World Bank phone survey, 27.6 percent of women had lost their jobs temporarily or permanently by round 3 of the survey, three months after the onset of the crisis.[8] Moreover, according to the Survey on Gender Equality at Home conducted in 2020, women in Honduras spent an average of 12.7 hours a day on care activities among household members relative to only 8.8 hours among men.[9] In addition to the projected medium and long run negative effects among students from childcare centers and school closures, closures limited women’s opportunities to rejoin the workforce after mobility restrictions were lifted. [6] Source: Honduras Childcare Demand Survey 2021 [7] Background paper for Honduras Poverty Assessment (2006). [8] The World Bank high-frequency phone surveys included modules on labor markets, changes in household incomes, access to services, behaviors, and knowledge around COVID-19, as well as demographic and household characteristics. Between May 2020 and August 2020, three waves of phone surveys were run in 13 countries to assess the impacts and transmission channels of the COVID-19 crisis in the Latin American and Caribbean region. The first round of the surveys was conducted in May 2020, two months after most countries in the region had declared lockdowns (in mid-March). The second wave was collected between June 2020 and July 2020, and the third between July 2020 and August 2020. On Honduras, see Olivieri, Lara Ibarra, and Cuesta (2020). [9] The survey was conducted during July 2020 by Facebook in collaboration with the World Bank, UN Women, Equal Measures 2030, and Ladysmith. The survey was limited to respondents who had Internet access, were active Facebook users during the fielding of the survey and opted to take a survey through the platform. The results are thus only relevant in terms of this online population in each country or region. See Survey on Gender Equality at Home (dashboard), Facebook, https://www.equalityathome.org/. The Honduran legal framework makes it challenging to change this situation. No institution is formally responsible to oversee services for children ages 0–3. Most childcare centers define their own standards. The Ministry of Education is only responsible for supervising institutions within the formal education system (covering ages 4+). Analysis shows that paid maternity leave in Honduras is only 84 days.[10] Therefore, mothers would need childcare support during the early months after birth if they went back to work. In the region, countries like Chile and Mexico serve as examples of well-structured institutional arrangements for ECD services, where the Junta Nacional de Jardines Infantiles (Chile) and the Estancias Infantiles program (Mexico) operate within centralized policy frameworks. These frameworks define eligibility criteria, quality standards, and monitoring systems, allowing for better integration of childcare into broader social protection and labor market strategies. STUDY DESCRIPTION This policy brief is based on the “Mapping childcare programs and gaps in provision in areas with employment opportunities for women in Honduras” report. The assessment examines the childcare needs of urban households with children ages under 6 in Honduras by investigating time use, care needs, perceptions, and preferences about care responsibilities, as well as supply- and demand-driven barriers to accessing formal childcare services. The aim is to inform relevant ECD policies to improve both development outcomes among children and enhance parents’ -particularly women’s- ability to engage in paid work and understand the specific barriers brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic. The study included three components, with the first two focusing on data collection activities. The first component focused on the supply side and consisted of computer-assisted telephone interviews with childcare providers. Prior to data collection, and in absence of a consolidated registry of childcare, ECD centers and preschools, a series of consultations were conducted with relevant government and nongovernmental stakeholders to gather information on existing providers. A random sample was drawn from the providers identified, ensuring an equal distribution of public and private institutions for each city. The survey took place during November and December 2020. Because of COVID-19, interviews were conducted by phone using the World Bank Survey Solutions software.[11] A total of 56 childcare centers were interviewed, with over 50 percent of the nonresponse rate being the result of incorrect contact information.[12]This data collection effort covered the three types of childcare providers in Honduras: 1. Preprimary education centers (ages 4–6) (public and private). These fall under monitoring by the Ministry of Education (Secretaría de Educación, SEDUC). 2. Municipal-based childcare centers (ages 0–6). 3. Private daycare (ages 0–3). Because these centers are outside the formal education system, they operate as private businesses and are not regulated by the Ministry of Education. The second component, which focused on the demand side, consisted of a Childcare Demand Survey. A rapid computer-assisted telephone interview survey, representative at the urban level, was conducted among households with children ages 0–6 who were not enrolled in primary school. Eligible respondents were any of the parents living in the household or any other household member responsible for providing care to the children in case parents were absent. [10] Article 135-138 of the Labor Code. [11] See Survey Solutions (Version 21.09) (dashboard), World Bank, Washington, DC, https://mysurvey.solutions/en/. [12] Some phone numbers provided by the Ministry of Education were no longer valid because someone else had the number, the informant no longer worked at the school, or the number had been disconnected. Some of the contact information for private providers obtained from social media was not up to date. In addition, at least 10 of the providers contacted indicated they could not respond to the survey because they had recently been affected by hurricanes Eta and Iota. The third component consisted on a comprehensive review of the institutional and regulatory setting. A review of the applicable policy and regulatory environment for childcare services in Honduras at the time, to identify strengths and weaknesses. It was carried out through a desk review and interviews with officials at relevant government agencies.[13] THE EVIDENCE Three main issues were identified: 1. Lack of proper regulation and funding of formal childcare services in Honduras. 2. Impact of social norms on intra-household division of childcare responsibilities. 3. Lack of information and awareness about formal childcare and/or the benefits of early stimulation. 1.Lack of proper regulation and funding of formal childcare services in Honduras Curricula and protocols (health and nutrition) are not standardized for childcare services provided to younger children. The National Commission for the Development of Nonformal Alternative Education in Honduras is the agency responsible for overseeing and evaluation early childhood education for children in the 0-3 age group, and the Ministry of Education only oversees institutions within the formal education system (ages 4+). However, there are no established curriculum and protocol guidelines for the early development services of children in the 0–3 age group.[14] Private centers often implement their own educational programs and curricula. For both private and public facilities, protocols for disease prevention and health and nutrition are predominantly set by the providers themselves, and municipalities (to a lesser degree). New regulatory frameworks and strategies are being developed and implemented. The regulatory framework for the care of children in Honduras (Política Pública para el Desarrollo Integral de la Primera Infancia) was approved in 2012 (Government of Honduras 2012). Additionally, in 2015, the government approved the strategy for comprehensive early childhood care, Raising with Love (Criando con Amor), which was implemented gradually (Government of Honduras 2015). The aim was to increase the access, coverage, and quality of services in health care, education, and nutrition for early childhood.[15] And, in 2014, the Directorate of Childhood, Adolescence, and Family (Dirección de Niñez, Adolescencia y Familia, DINAF, a decentralized institution associated with the Ministry of Development and Social Inclusion) was created as the decentralized institution responsible for developing and overseeing policies on childhood, adolescence, and family.[16]Later, in 2021 (after completion of this study) when Criando con Amor came to an end, the Government adopted the Plan Crecer Program (2022-2026) within Red Solidaria the country’s poverty reduction flagship program.[17] In 2024, the State Secretary on childhood, adolescence and family (Secretaría de Estado en los Despachos de Niñez, Adolescencia y Familia, SENAF) was established as an important step to articulate efforts toward delivery of services. [13] Stakeholders included the General Directorate of Preprimary Education, Ministry of Education; the Directorate of Childhood, Adolescence, and Family (Dirección de Niñez, Adolescencia y Familia, DINAF), Ministry of Development and Social Inclusion (Secretaría de Desarrollo e Inclusión Social); Criando con Amor; the United Nations Children’s Fund; the Municipality of Tegucigalpa; the Revenue Administration Service (Servicio de Administración de Rentas); and two private childcare providers (ages 0–6) in Tegucigalpa. [14] See “Guía Metodológica de Educación Inicial No Formal,” Article 9, National Commission for the Development of Nonformal Alternative Education, Tegucigalpa, Honduras. [15] See the Ministry of Development and Social Inclusion website at https://sedesol.gob.hn/. [16] DINAF is a decentralized institution associated with the Ministry of Development and Social Inclusion, with technical and administrative independence. [17]Plan Crecer prioritizes 16 essential components/services toward the integral development of children with early childhood and preschool one of those. In 2014, public investment in early childhood (ages 0–6) was equivalent to 1 percent of GDP. Between 2013 and 2014, the relative weight of early childhood in public childhood investment increased from 13.3 percent to 15.4 percent of public childhood investment. Nonetheless, this age group receives limited resources relative to adolescents (44 percent) and children ages 6–12 (40 percent). Some municipalities lack funding for daycare centers, which affects the quality of the services provided.[18] The mechanism for periodic measurement of annual public investment in early childhood is the study on public investment for childhood and adolescence (IPNA, for its acronym in Spanish). According to this study, between 2018 and 2019, investment in early childhood increased 7.58 percent. However, between 2019 and 2020, the amount fell 2.44 percent likely due to fiscal needs to respond to COVID-19.[19] International credit is the main source of funding for this agenda. The current employer-mandated provision of childcare limits the supply of childcare services available for working parents and reinforces the role of women as the primary caregiver. According to the Law of Equal Opportunities for Women, companies with more than 30 women workers must have a childcare center available to workers who have children ages under 7.[20] Similarly, the Honduran Labor Code indicates that businesses with more than 20 workers should have a space where mothers can feed their infants and leave them under supervised care during working hours.[21] In practice, however, few businesses provide these services because the service provision is at the discretion of employers.[22] A better approach is needed to simultaneously support both the demand and supply sides of childcare services. For example, Mexico’s Estancias Infantiles program operates as a dual model that combines demand-side subsidies (direct transfer or vouchers) with supply-side support (financial assistance and training to childcare providers), ensuring both access and quality provision. 2.Impact of social norms on intrahousehold division of childcare responsibilities Household and care responsibilities stand out as the main barrier to engaging in employment or resuming employment among those women respondents. Among those not working in June 2021, when the survey was administered, the reason for not working varied by sex. Most men (76 percent) were not working because they were unemployed (that is, actively seeking work). By contrast, the main reason among women (60 percent) was housework, followed by unemployment (32 percent). Additionally, among women who were employed and stopped working during the pandemic (Figure 1), over a third indicated that they lost their job, 21 percent had to ‘quit their job to take care of children’ (the share of men citing this reason is only 7 percent), and 16 percent stopped working because the ‘place of work closed’. [18] By law, DINAF should transfer the funds received from the Ministry of Finance for childcare centers to municipalities. In practice, these funds do not reach municipalities because the Ministry of Finance stopped transferring the resources to DINAF because they were not being used. Thus, municipalities were given childcare centers and no resources to support them. [19] Dialogo Interamericano, 2024. [20] Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para la Mujer, Article 59. [21] Honduran Labor Code, Article 142. [22] Providing such services is an additional cost for employers, one that few can undertake. Figure 1. Reason why stopped working during COVID-19 pandemic, among those who had a job before the pandemic hit, distribution (%) by sex. Source: Honduras Childcare Demand Survey (2021). Note: Other includes handicapped, unpaid family work, and others. Women also spend markedly more time caring for children ages under 6 compared to men, in part because they believe this is better for young children. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, nearly 90 percent of mothers reported that they were spending most of their time with their children; the corresponding share was only around half among fathers. Likewise, women household members (grandmothers, aunts, or sisters) are more likely than men members to spend time with young children in the household. A significant share of parents/primary caretakers in urban Honduras -more than 60 percent- believe that young children suffer negative consequences if mothers go to work. Moreover, women are more likely than men to agree (70 percent vs. 62 percent) that young children will likely suffer if the mother works (Figure 2). Figure 2. Percentage who agree or disagree with the statement “A young child is likely to suffer if his/her mother goes to work”, by sex (%). Source: Honduras Childcare Demand Survey (2021). Note: Values add up to a 100 percent. 3.Lack of information and awareness about formal childcare and/or the benefits of early stimulation Most Hondurans living in urban areas do not use formal or informal childcare services for young children, and the most prevalent arrangement both before and during COVID-19- is at-home care provided by parents or other household members. The reasons for the nonuse of childcare programs vary depending on whether the child is in the 0–2 and 3-5 age groups. However, in general, there seems to be a lack of knowledge about the benefits of early childhood education and/or formal services, as well as limited availability in the area (Figures 3 and 4). Among families of children in the 3-5 age group who do not use formal early childhood services, the main reasons for nonuse are that the child is too young to attend (92.6 percent) and not having a nearby center available (2.5 percent). Figure 3. Main reason for not using formal childcare services, children 0–2. Figure 4. Main reason for not enrolling at a formal early childhood center, children 3-5. Source: 2019 EPHPM. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS There are opportunities for Honduras to unlock the potential of its present and future human capital to strengthen inclusive growth. Significantly increasing the labor supply in coming years requires the incorporation of women 25–45 into the labor market. Most mothers of children younger than six are concentrated in this age group. Based on the results and analysis conducted, five main recommendations emerge from the study: 1. Institutional coordination for early childhood education in Honduras is important and should continue to be strengthened, particularly for providing and regulating services to children ages 0–3. It is recommended that high-level institutions/secretaries with authority at the policy and technical levels, lead the coordination and articulation of all sectors involved in the delivery of early childhood development services. 2. The current employer-mandated childcare provision could be reconsidered since it explicitly links to only women employees. This is problematic because it disregards the co-responsibility principle between parents in caregiving and reinforces gender-based inequalities. Enabling fathers to access and use childcare policies as actively as mothers can lead to significant benefits, including enhanced business outcomes through increased diversity (World Bank, 2017). 3. Neighborhood or family crèches—usually include training of “maternal assistants” who welcome children to their home (or dedicated space) and which have a limited capacity per unit. They may combine supply-side public subsidy as start-up grant to set up the appropriate conditions and training with a demand-side transfer for households with difficulties affording the services. This type of provision could be a viable option to enhance mothers’ opportunities to participate in paid jobs and access childcare located near their home. Critical elements for successful outcomes are the training of caregivers and the implementation of safety standards and protocols. 4. Although limited availability of affordable services underlies the relatively low use of formal childcare services mainly among the poorest households, limited job opportunities, social norms and parents’ preferences also keep families from using these services. Encouraging paternal and parental leave policies, together with norm change educational campaigns can help challenge traditional gender norms and promote a culture where caregiving is seen as a shared responsibility, rather than a burden placed solely on women. Formal childcare and early education programs are critical in creating viable income-generation opportunities for women and households in urban Honduras. REFERENCES Devercelli, A. E., F. Beaton-Day. 2020. Better Jobs and Brighter Futures : Investing in Childcare to Build Human Capital. World Bank, Washington, DC. DINAF and UNOPS 2018). La inversion Social en la Primera Infancia. Honduras Government of Honduras. 1959. “Código del Trabajo de Honduras” May 19, Tegucigalpa, Honduras. Government of Honduras. 2012. “Executive Decree PCM 031-2013.” September 7, Tegucigalpa, Honduras. Government of Honduras. 2014a. “Executive Decree PCM 27-2014.” June 6, Tegucigalpa, Honduras. Government of Honduras. 2014b. “Executive Decree PCM 26-2014.” June 6, Tegucigalpa, Honduras. Government of Honduras. 2015. “Executive Decree PCM-020-2015.” June 24, Tegucigalpa, Honduras. Government of Honduras. 2019. Plan Estratégico 2019-2027 de la Política Pública para el Desarrollo de la Primera Infancia en el marco de las instituciones del Sistema de Atención Integral para la Primera Infancia Criando con Amor. Tegucigalpa, Honduras. INAM (Instituto Nacional de la Mujer). 2015. Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para la Mujer. July 6, INAM, Tegucigalpa, Honduras. International Labour Organization. 2019 “Encuesta Permanente de Hogares de Propósitos Múltiples 2019 (EPHPM).” ILO. Mateo Díaz, Mercedes, and Lourdes Rodriguez-Chamussy. 2016. “Cashing in on Education: Women, Childcare, and Prosperity in Latin America and the Caribbean.” Latin American Development Forum Series. Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank and World Bank. World Bank. 2017. Tackling Childcare: The Business Case for Employer-Supported Childcare. Washington, D.C World Bank. 2019. “World Development Indicators.” World Bank Group. Washington, DC. World Bank. 2020. “Closing Gender Gaps in Latin America and the Caribbean.” Report 128525, World Bank Group, Washington, DC. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This note was prepared by Kavell Joseph. It received useful comments from Carlos Rodriguez Castelan, Marina Bassi, Pedro Rodriguez, Jacobus de Hoop, and Raquel Melgar Calderon. It summarizes findings of the work “Mapping childcare programs and gaps in provision in areas with employment opportunities for women in Honduras” by Lourdes Rodriguez-Chamussy, Paola Buitrago-Hernandez and Giselle Del Carmen. This research was led by the Gender Innovation Lab for Latin America and the Caribbean (LACGIL). The LACGIL provides policymakers and development practitioners with knowledge to effectively promote gender equality and drive change in the region. The objective of the LACGIL is to generate, disseminate, and help operationalize evidence-based scalable policy solutions to enhance gender equality in the Latin American and Caribbean region. To do this, the LACGIL supports rigorous impact evaluations and inferential research to identify interventions that are effective in narrowing gender gaps in women’s economic empowerment. The LACGIL receives its funding in part from the World Bank Group's Umbrella Facility for Gender Equality (UFGE), a multi-donor trust fund administered by the World Bank to advance gender equality and women's empowerment through experimentation and knowledge creation to help governments and the private sector focus policy and programs on scalable solutions with sustainable outcomes. The UFGE is supported by generous contributions from Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Latvia, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom, United States, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and the Wellspring Philanthropic Fund. Visit the LACGIL website for more information Email: lacgenderlab@worldbank.org 1818 H. St NW Washington, DC 204 This material should not be reproduced or distributed without the World Bank's prior consent.