MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Planning for Universal Child Care: An Evaluation of BC Municipal Child Care Plans

2025· article· en· W4413612629 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Andrew Binet, Arunima Saha, Dalia Al Houseini, Isabelle Espanol, Erin Roberts

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Planning and Policy / Aménagement et politique au Canada · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealthcare innovation and challenges
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChild careNursingMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2018, responding to pressure from local governments and advocacy groups, British Columbia launched a provincial effort to build a universal $10/day child care system. As part of this effort, grants were issued to municipalities to support the development of municipal child care plans. In this paper, we conduct a plan evaluation analysis of 48 child care plans created by B.C. municipalities to characterize this emerging form of planning and understand initial strengths and areas for improvement. Our findings highlight common strategies for child care expansion, as well as areas for improvement in identifying and addressing current inequities. We conclude with lessons for other jurisdictions across Canada where local-level planning will be involved in facilitating child care expansion.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.827
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.343 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Planning and Policy / Aménagement et politique au CanadaSame topicHealthcare innovation and challengesFrench-language works237,207