Item No. 11a_supp
Meeting Date: May 26, 2026

Seattle-T acoma International Airport Child Care
Facility Feasibility Study

Agenda
• Approach to Evaluating Child Care Feasibility at SEA
• What Peer Airports Show is Possible
• What We Heard from SEA Employees and Employers
• Ongoing Affordability Model and Funding Approach
• Real Estate Site Options
• Next Steps

2

A Child Care Center at SEA is Feasible
- With Significant Investment
Child Care Challenges Affect SEA Workforce and Operations
• Airport employees face limited access to reliable, affordable child care, especially for nonstandard hours
• Gaps reduce workforce reliability and impact operations across SEA (retention, recruitment, attendance, productivity)

Opportunity to Address Gaps With Child Care Center
• A dedicated center can align care with airport workforce needs (hours, location, affordability)
• This coordinated approach can support employees while strengthening airport operations
• Peer airports have successfully implemented similar models and offer proven lessons on what works

What Makes a Child Care Center Feasible
• Sustained airport investment combined with a diverse mix of funding sources can help ensure long-term sustainability
• Potential partnerships also offer opportunities to strengthen the center's financial viability

3

Work to Date Has Yielded Actionable
Insights to Inform SEA's Path Forward
 Assessed the child care landscape around SEA, including provider capacity and affordability gaps
 Launched and analyzed an employee survey to identify workforce child care needs
 Benchmarked peer airport models (LAWA, PIT, PHX, SFO), including site visits to SFO and PIT
 Designed a test fit for STOC - a Port-owned office building across the street from SEA - as a potential
site and started exploring additional locations for review
 Developed enrollment and sizing scenarios to inform financial and operational planning
 Engaged stakeholders across the ecosystem to validate needs and operating considerations
Together, these efforts are shaping key decisions on the feasibility and design of a
child care center at SEA.
4

Agenda
• Approach to Evaluating Child Care Feasibility at SEA
• What Peer Airports Show is Possible
• What We Heard from SEA Employees and Employers
• Ongoing Affordability Model and Funding Approach
• Real Estate Site Options
• Next Steps

5

Peer Airport Benchmarks Share Common
Themes Around Enrollment and Funding
Airport

Capacity

# Badged
Employees

Los Angeles (LAX)
Since 1998

90

50K

Phoenix (PHX)
Est. 2026/27

~100 (estimated) 47K

San Francisco (SFO)
Since 1993

161

Pittsburgh (PIT)
Since 2023

Population Served

Capital Funding

Operational Funding

Tuition

•

LAWA and LAX
employees (~30%)
Community

•

Owned land and
constructed center
(~$4.3M)

•

Free rent

•
•
•

LAWA: 20% discount
LAX: 10% discount
Hoping to provide ~$400
subsidy per employee

•
•

Badged employees
Community if spots
remain

•

~$3M for shell
(airport revenue)
~$3M for improvements
(AARP funding)

•

Rent starts in year 6 at
~$10-11/sq. ft.
Operator manages
finances

•

10% discount

•

•

SFO acquired facility and
donated to SMC via
eminent domain

•

$7M over five years for
subsidies, tuition
offsets, meals, and
extended hours

•

•

Airport-based employees
(~30%)
San Mateo County (SMC)
employees
Community

Employees qualifying for
public subsidies: Operator
covers difference
Employees not qualifying:
Receive 10%+ discount
depending on income

•

All badged employees

•

Owned land and
Constructed center

•
•

Free rent
~$175K annual
management fee

•
•

•

45K

•

54

7K

•

•

•

20% below market rate
Accepts PA subsidy

6

Similarities

Differences

SFO and PIT Visits Illustrated Different
Approaches to Child Care Center Model
SFO (Co-investment Model)

PIT (Airport-led Operator Model)

Structure

Tri-party model between SFO, San Mateo County,
and Palcare

Direct contract between PIT and La Petite Academy

Airport Investment

~$1.4M annual investment

~$175K annual management fee + free rent

Employee Cost Model

State subsidy + airport-funded sliding-scale
subsidies and discounts

State subsidy + 20% below market rate tuition

Both use airport revenue to invest in child care operations (PIT uses primarily non-aero revenue, SFO uses aero revenue).
Both enroll (or are planning to enroll) community families to fill remaining enrollment beyond their airport workforce.
Both prioritize affordability of care to airport workforce via state and federal subsidies and airport-funded discounts.

7

Agenda
• Approach to Evaluating Child Care Feasibility at SEA
• What Peer Airports Show is Possible
• What We Heard from SEA Employees and Employers
• Ongoing Affordability Model and Funding Approach
• Real Estate Site Options
• Next Steps

8

Employee Survey Highlighted Child
Care Demand and Needs

Due to limited sample size, findings should be
interpreted directionally.

Survey Participation

Of 740 survey respondents, 104 respondents (14%) reported having children under 5 or
anticipating a child care need over the next year.

Demand and Interest

Of the 104 respondents with a child care need, 53 respondents (51%) shared additional details on
their child care needs and indicated interest in enrolling 75 children overall.

Affordability Needs

Nearly 40% of the 53 respondents report household incomes under $61K, and survey
responses across income levels indicate limited willingness to pay above ~$1,500 per month for
full-time care.

Hours and Commute

Employees strongly prefer extended-hour care and are sensitive to adding more than 10 minutes
to their commute.

Impact to Workforce

110 (15%) of the 740 respondents reported having stress related to child care cost and/or access.

Source: 2026 SEA Employee Survey (N=740)

9

SEA Employees Report Job Changes
Due to Child Care Needs
Employees report changing or decreasing work hours
and leaving their jobs due to child care issues

Employees describe having to quit due to the
accessibility and affordability burden of child care

Percent of respondents who made changes to their employment due to child care
challenges
80%
60%

"Not having child care has put me in a position a lot of times to decide if I
should quit my job. I've been in this airport for 20 years and this place has
become my second home. I do not want to work anywhere else, and I hope
that one day the PoS would invest in child care here at the airport."

70%
60%
40%

40%

31%

20%
0%

8%
Working
Reduced work Changed job to Quit work to
alternating
hours
have more
provide child
hours with a
flexible hours
care
partner or
family member

"In the past my wife and I have quit jobs due to the fact that we
were paying so much in child care that it did not make sense for
both of us to work anymore."

None of the
above

Source: Port of Seattle 2023 Employee Survey (N=457)

10

SEA Employers Believe Child Care
Would Have a Positive Business Impact
At least half of employers believe that removing child care barriers
would have a major or moderate positive impact across all dimensions

Employers convey the positive effect child
care at SEA would have on their business
Retention & Attendance
"If Port of Seattle runs a successful child care
center, more people wouldn't call out or quit their job."

Recruitment & Productivity
"Providing child care to current and prospective employees
would be a HUGE benefit. This would attract more
employees and uplift the overall mood of our staff.

Source: Port of Seattle 2024 Employer Survey (N=64)

Impact is strongest for retention and hiring, with positive effects across all areas -
at least 64% of employers report a minor, moderate, or major positive impact.
11

Agenda
• Approach to Evaluating Child Care Feasibility at SEA
• What Peer Airports Show is Possible
• What We Heard from SEA Employees and Employers
• Ongoing Affordability Model and Funding Approach
• Real Estate Site Options
• Next Steps

12

Three Models Show Potential to Meet
SEA Child Care Goals
Port-Led Child Care Center
(e.g., PIT)

Co-Investment Model
(e.g., SFO)

Center-Based Partnership

Approach

• Develop a child center and contract
directly with an operator to deliver
services to SEA employees

• Partner with other public entities to
jointly develop and support a shared
child care center

• Provide targeted financial support to
an existing center in return for
affordable and accessible care for
employees

Key Benefits

• Provides greater control over location,
design, access, and alignment with
airport workforce needs
• Ensures dedicated capacity for SEA
employees

• Distributes cost and risk across
partners while expanding access to
multiple workforces

• Expands access with lower upfront
investment and reduced financial
exposure

Considerations

• Requires significant upfront
investment and ongoing financial risk

• Requires coordination across partners,
which can slow decision-making
• Limits control over location, design,
operations, and access

• Requires similar ongoing investment
to a Port-led center
• Limits control over location, design,
operations, access, and long-term
performance
• Does not add new child care supply to
the community
13

Working Model for Analysis of PortLed Child Care Center
General Operating Model

Program & Governance Structure

• Capacity & Size: ~100-120 FTE children,
~8-15K sq. ft.

• Day-to-day operations: Partnering with an
operator to run the center, potentially in
collaboration with a municipality

• Ages Served: 6 weeks to 5 years (infants,
toddlers, and preschoolers)
• Hours: M-F from ~6:00am to ~9:00pm, with
potential weekend and flexible hours based
on demonstrated need
• Location: ~5-10-minute drive from North
Employee Parking Lot (NEPL), prioritizing a
site south of the airport and/or near a light
rail station

• Income-Based Tuition: Optimize for
affordability through public subsidies and
income-based discounts on tuition
• Access: Full-time and part-time care, with the
potential for limited drop-in/backup care
• Equity priorities: Provide multilingual,
culturally-responsive care for families and
include meals to reduce participation barriers

• Population served: Airport employees and
nearby community members

14

Affordable Tuition Would Not Cover Full
Cost for a Port-Led Child Care Center
Annual Cost per Child Market Rate Tuition
(community families not
to Provide Care
receiving public subsidies)

Affordable Tuition
(airport employees with
85-105% SMI*)

Infant
(6 wk-11 mo)

$47,500

$26,500

$17,000

Toddler
(12-29 mo)

$32,500

$24,000

$15,500

Preschool
(30 mo-5 yrs)

$29,000

$20,500

$13,000

(*) SMI = State Median Income
Notes: Table reflects full market rate for community families. Financial model assumes ~50/50 enrollment split between airport and community families. The center will also accept WCCC- and
BSK-eligible community families whose tuition will vary by subsidy type and income band.

15

Diverse Funding Sources Can Help
Sustain a Port-Led Child Care Center
Ongoing Operating Investments

Capital Funding Sources

• Federal food subsidies (CACFP)

• State and federal earmarked funding

• Airport operating support and/or rent relief

• Department of Child, Youth, and Families
(DCYF) grants

Recurring contributions

• Philanthropic operating support (e.g., reserves,
endowment contributions)
• Operating contributions from potential
partners (e.g., operating support, rent relief)

These sources are intended to close the gap
between tuition revenue and the true cost of care.

One-time, upfront investments

• Philanthropic start-up grants and donations
• Airport capital investment (e.g., for real estate
or tenant improvement (TI))
• Capital contributions from potential partners
(e.g., for real estate or TI)

16

Year 5/Ongoing Profit and Loss Estimate for Port-Led Child Care Center
Revenue
Enrollment-based revenue (private pay)
Enrollment-based revenue (subsidies)

Notes
Tuition similar to others in area (~$20,500-$26,500) and projected enrollment
$1,243,000
includes vacancy of 5-15%.
Assumes ~50% of children are subsidy-qualified and ~20% of kids attend 30+
$1,241,000 nonstandard business hours/month. Includes annual average family copay of
~$1,500/child.
$73,000 Food assistance based on number of toddlers and preschoolers receiving meals.

CACFP funding (meals)
Additional investment for affordability and
priority registration for airport families
Total Revenue
Expenses
Staffing
Rent
Facility Costs (excl. rent)
Food
Supplies and Equipment

$822,000*

Necessary operational investment to ensure long-term sustainability could be
addressed through different funding strategies, including through the operator.

$3,379,000
$2,471,000 Based on licensing needs and market rate wages and benefits.
$360,000 Assumes an 11,000 sq. ft. facility at market rent.
$142,000 Includes utilities, insurance, maintenance and repairs, etc.
$222,000 Cost of food for toddlers and preschoolers.
$50,000 Includes classroom supplies & equipment, office supplies, etc.

Includes insurance, administrative infrastructure, background checks, staff PD,
$134,000
community events, etc.

Business Costs
Total Expenses
Net Profit

$3,379,000
$0 Breakeven due to additional investment line item.

*$462K in direct cash outlay if rent provided in-kind
17

Agenda
• Approach to Evaluating Child Care Feasibility at SEA
• What Peer Airports Show is Possible
• What We Heard from SEA Employees and Employers
• Ongoing Affordability Model and Funding Approach
• Real Estate Site Options
• Next Steps

18

STOC Is the Closest but Potentially the
Most Expensive Siting Option
Build-out cost per model is ~$15M
Siting Option 1: North Bar
Siting Option 2: Relite

Additional, likely less expensive site options will be
evaluated at non-Port owned facilities.

19

Agenda
• Approach to Evaluating Child Care Feasibility at SEA
• What Peer Airports Show is Possible
• What We Heard from SEA Employees and Employers
• Ongoing Affordability Model and Funding Approach
• Real Estate Site Options
• Next Steps

20

SEA Visit Will Advance Feasibility
Planning, Design, and Next Steps
On May 26 and 27 we will present to the Commission, conduct focus groups, and evaluate additional
site opportunities.

Commission Meeting

Focus Groups

Additional Site Visits

Align on the strategic
path forward for ongoing
feasibility analysis

Refine the working model
based on employee voice and
demand

Identify viable site options that
balance feasibility and
accessibility

• Share initial feasibility
findings and next steps

• Engage SEA employees to
validate survey findings
and center assumptions

• Assess sites that may
reduce development
complexity and capital
investment

• Gather commissioner
feedback on priorities and
direction

• Understand employee
priorities related to
affordability, hours,
location, and enrollment

• Evaluate how sites
support employee access
and enrollment demand

21

Questions?

22