Proceedings of a Workshop—in Brief

Convened May 19, 2025

Public–Private Partnerships to Advance Child and Youth Flourishing
Proceedings of a Workshop—in Brief

INTRODUCTION

As communities work to improve outcomes for children and families, there is a growing call for stronger partnerships between public systems and private-sector leaders and investors. In response to this, the Forum for Children’s Well-Being of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened a workshop, The Business of Flourishing: Innovative Investments in Children and Youth, on May 19, 2025.¹ This convening brought together leaders from philanthropy, finance, business, health care, government, research, and community organizations to explore how new forms of collaboration can support children’s well-being. The workshop is part of a broader series developed in follow-up to the Launching Lifelong Health report, designed to explore in greater depth key areas of innovation and need identified in that report—this session focused on financing prevention with particular attention to collaboration between public and private partners.

The convening was designed not only to share ideas but also to build shared understanding, surface points of alignment, and catalyze collective action. The event featured two expert panels, small group dialogues, and interactive report-outs designed to surface possible actionable insights and cross-sector strategies. Youth leaders participated fully throughout the day, contributing as active discussants and featured speakers. Through interactive sessions, real-world case studies, and facilitated dialogue, participants had the opportunity to test assumptions, learn from one another, and explore practical strategies for collaboration. By focusing on foundational concepts—such as flourishing, return on investment (ROI), and systems alignment—while also highlighting local innovation and lived experience, the event helped lay the groundwork for continued cross-sector partnership to support children, families, and communities.

In her opening remarks, Leslie Walker, Co-Chair of the Forum, underscored the Forum for Children’s Well-Being’s mission: bringing together national leaders across sectors to spark evidence-based action for children’s mental, emotional, and whole-health development. She described the Forum as a neutral space where evidence is elevated, new partnerships are cultivated, and cross-sector collaboration supports real-world systems change. Walker emphasized that engaging youth and families as partners and experts is central to the Forum’s approach—shaping priorities, informing convening design, and grounding the work in lived experience. Youth leaders were not only present throughout the day’s

__________________

events, but also played active roles as participants and speakers, reinforcing the Forum’s commitment to inclusion and shared leadership. Speakers from across sectors and disciplines introduced several specialized terms throughout the day, which are defined below (see Box 1).

CROSS-SECTOR DIALOGUE: THE BUSINESS CASE FOR FLOURISHING

Defining Flourishing from the Ground Up

The first panel of the day, The Business Case for Flourishing: Foundations and Alignment, focused on how to define flourishing, build a strategic and economic rationale for investing in children and youth, and create the conditions for effective cross-sector partnerships. The session was co-moderated by Trace Terrell, a student at Johns Hopkins University and youth advisor to several mental health initiatives, and April Joy Damian, Vice President and Director at the Weitzman Institute and Scholar in Residence at AcademyHealth.

Panelists included the following:

• Debra Y. Brooks, Executive Director, Mayor’s Office of Children and Family Success (Baltimore)
• Erika Chavarria, Executive Director, Columbia Community Care
• Lynn Karoly, Senior Economist, RAND Corporation
• Becky Payne, Chief Executive Officer, Rippel Foundation
• Alison Rein, Managing Director, Health and Human Services, Quantified Ventures
• Josh Scott, Head of Product, TRAILS

To open the conversation, panelists were invited to share how they define a flourishing child or young person. Brooks suggested that a flourishing young person is “whole and complete mentally and physically and feels that they are in a safe and vibrant space.” Several panelists underscored that flourishing is shaped by tangible community conditions—including access to basic needs, strong relationships, and consistent support across systems. Flourishing young people, they explained, are produced by flourishing communities. A summary of shared takeaway messages from this and the rest of the day’s conversations can be found in Box 2.

Building the Case for Upstream Investment

The discussion then shifted to the strategic case for upstream investment. Karoly, drawing on decades of research, noted that well-designed interventions for children and youth often yield returns that exceed their costs and generate benefits across both public and private sectors (Karoly, 2005, 2016, 2017). These benefits extend beyond program participants to families, communities, and institutions such as in health care, education, and justice systems. Reflecting on her work in early childhood, Karoly shared that some of the most vocal early champions came from the criminal justice sector—underscoring the importance of identifying and engaging natural allies in unexpected places.

Private-Sector Incentives and Investment Logic

Scott explained that from the private sector perspective, current workforce productivity and future workforce readiness are top concerns and suggested that youth mental health, in particular, had a significant impact on both issues. Scott cited a study finding that that one in three working parents report changing or quitting their job in the last two years because of their child’s mental health, and that over half of parents have missed work at least once per month to deal with their children’s mental health (The Kids Mental Health Foundation, 2022). He noted that, while a growing number of private sector employers recognize this significant economic impact and are prepared to invest in solutions, they face a fundamental access challenge since these employers cannot directly reach youth populations themselves. Since youth are primarily located in schools, he indicated that employers should find ways to invest in school-based mental health support to effectively address both current workforce productivity challenges and prepare tomorrow’s workforce to contribute successfully to society.

Rein framed the investment challenge in financial terms, arguing that strategies to support child and youth well-being must appeal to investors’ expectations around return. She outlined three ways that return can be demonstrated: through avoided costs, comparative savings, and the creation of new revenue. She also emphasized the importance of identifying which entities benefit from improved outcomes—and how that benefit can be monetized.

Local Innovation and Community-Driven Approaches

Those panelists working in government and community service roles provided concrete examples of upstream investment. Chavarria described how the Maryland Howard County’s Youth Empowerment Program grants supported holistic mentorship initiatives for middle and high school boys. These programs not only engage youth but provide services to their families, resulting in improved attendance, academic performance, reduced crime, and stronger community relationships. She contrasted this with a local decision to invest in a large surveillance camera system, arguing that investing in punitive, reactive infrastructure fails to address root causes or promote safety and flourishing.

Brooks shared multiple examples from Baltimore, Maryland, where the mayor’s administration has prioritized investment in youth well-being across age groups. This ranges from early literacy and early learning through out-of-school-time programs, job coaching, year-round employment initiatives, and a collaborative strategy to engage youth involved in street-level income generation (informal ways of earning small amounts of money in public spaces, such as washing windshields at intersections). These investments, she said, were directly informed by conversations with young people and their families to understand their needs from their perspective. As an example, she described “Safe Passage,” a partnership between city agencies and community organizations designed to address absenteeism and increase safety among students by addressing a core deterrent to attendance identified by students—ensuring that they feel safe traveling to and from school.

Vital Conditions, Belonging, and the Limits of Traditional Evidence

Payne emphasized the importance of investing in belonging and connection, situating these within a broader framework of “vital conditions” necessary for individual and community well-being. She noted that at the center of the vital conditions is a sense of belonging, and that data from her time at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) showed that investments in belonging are associated with long-term protective effects. She cited longitudinal studies conducted by the CDC just prior to the COVID-19 pandemic that demonstrated protective impacts of connectedness—which is akin to belonging—across both infectious and chronic conditions, with benefits lasting 20 to 30 years into adulthood (Steiner et al., 2021).

Payne also challenged the field to reconsider how evidence is defined and used to “be courageous and push the boundaries of our evidence base.” While acknowledging the value of evidence-based practice, she cautioned against relying solely on evidence generated through transactional programs that may not address structural inequities. Payne argued that many existing data systems and programs have excluded entire populations and may be inadequate for guiding transformational systems change. Payne encouraged participants to embrace models that invest simultaneously across multiple vital conditions—such as housing, education, employment, and mental health—and shared modeling work from Rippel Foundation that demonstrated measurable gains in thriving and life expectancy when investments were coordinated across sectors (Milstein et al., 2025).

Overcoming Barriers to Cross-Sector Investment

In the second half of the session, other panelists explored barriers to private investment and ways to build momentum. Scott emphasized that private-sector leaders often struggle to see how youth well-being connects to business priorities like daily operations and workforce retention. He stressed the importance of aligning public health messaging with the metrics and outcomes that matter to business leaders and private investors.

Rein noted that many organizations benefit from investments in children and youth, even if they are not the ones funding them. She underscored the difficulty of making the case for investments aimed at preventing negative outcomes, such as avoided costs or harms that may never materialize—a common challenge in PFS and alternative payment models. While cost savings remain relevant, Rein encouraged focusing on where investments are flourishing—areas like workforce, health, and well-being—which can generate revenue or measurable performance gains. She emphasized the importance of showing private-sector stakeholders that such investments can improve their bottom line by driving positive outcomes, not just avoiding negative ones, both in the short and long term.

Karoly pointed to the challenge of long-term horizons, noting that the impacts of childhood prevention investments may not be seen within the political cycle or time horizon of many business leaders. She argued to identify short-term outcomes to emphasize for cross-sector leaders, offering the example of spillover benefits of childhood prevention programs for parents. She emphasized that while evidence is not the only consideration, it plays an important role—particularly when investors must choose between competing funding priorities. In such cases, strong evidence can strengthen the case for investing in children.

When asked how to better demonstrate long-term ROI, Karoly encouraged the use of longitudinal data and analytic methods that connect early outcomes to later benefits. She also noted the potential of administrative data and integrated systems to support faster, more meaningful evaluation. Brooks described Baltimore’s efforts to use cross-agency data-sharing agreements to support continuous improvement. Payne urged attendees not to let the absence of perfect evidence delay timely action and advocated for designing systems with ROI tracking in mind from the beginning.

Reflections on Paths Forward

The session closed with each panelist offering a reflection on how to move the work forward. Suggestions included expanding partnerships, scaling prevention-focused programs, facilitating cross-sector dialogue, building practical support for experimentation, and addressing structural frictions that limit collaboration. Several panelists emphasized that the current system is not producing the desired outcomes, and that bold action—which should

be grounded in both evidence and local knowledge—is urgently needed.

Co-moderator Trace Terrell concluded the session by highlighting the many disadvantages young people face in shaping the systems that affect them. He described investment in youth as an act of allyship and noted that fostering agency and autonomy in childhood lays the groundwork for a healthier, more engaged society.

SMALL GROUP DIALOGUE: THE BUSINESS CASE FOR FLOURISHING

Following the morning panel, participants engaged in small group discussions to reflect on key themes, surface tensions, and explore possible next steps. Guided by a shared discussion protocol and note-taking tool, these conversations culminated in a live report-out session featuring both adult and youth voices.

Rethinking Systems and Investment Strategies

Across groups, many participants emphasized the urgency of rethinking current systems and investment strategies. Many described the moment as a call to pursue bold, coordinated action, noting that while numerous programs aim to support children and families, few achieve the coherence or scale necessary for community-level impact. Report-outs highlighted the benefit of cross-sector solutions to long-standing challenges such as siloed systems and misaligned funding streams.

Reframing Evidence and ROI

A recurring theme was the advantage to redefine how evidence and ROI are conceptualized and used. Citing insights from Becky Payne and Alison Rein during the panel, several participants noted that traditional measures of success can limit innovation. A few groups encouraged embracing approaches that prioritize long-term flourishing over short-term cost savings and emphasized the importance of acting even without perfect evidence. Some reflected on the difficulty of advocating for transformative investments using limited data, with one participant describing the challenge as “making the case for a flood with only drops of evidence.”

Centering Youth and Community Voice

The role of youth was central to both the discussions and report-outs. A few participants stressed the importance of creating space for all young people—not only those in formal leadership roles—to see themselves as advocates and decision-makers. At the same time, some noted the risk of placing too much responsibility on youth to address systemic problems and emphasized the importance of meeting young people where they are—socially, physically, and culturally. Young people, parents, and communities were seen as essential sources of insight into both the root causes of challenges and the identification of solutions.

Redistributing Power and Shaping Participation

Themes of power and participation were woven throughout the dialogue, where many participants called for redesigned decision-making structures that center youth, families, and historically excluded communities. Suggestions included funding co-design efforts, shifting control over resources, and equipping adults and institutions to engage in shared decision-making. Several participants emphasized that changing power dynamics involves not only who is at the table, but how ideas are valued and resourced.

From Intention to Action: Strategies for Change

Groups also explored strategies for moving from intention to impact. Ideas ranged from new funding models—such as family resource centers and school-community hubs—to shifts in language, narrative strategy, and public engagement. Some noted that broader cultural and political dynamics, including growing mistrust in science, present real challenges and pointed to the importance of rebuilding credibility and relationships across sectors.

Starting Local, Scaling Strategically

Local action emerged as a practical entry point. Multiple participants observed that engaging local leaders, such as school board members or city councilors, is often more feasible than driving policy change at higher levels. However, some participants also acknowledged that many necessary structural changes would require broader policy shifts, stronger public-private alignment, and tools to manage complexity at scale.

Engaging the Private Sector: Speaking Their Language

Across groups, a number of participants discussed the importance of aligning messaging with private-sector values. Misaligned language and incentives were seen as major barriers to cross-sector investment. The framing of child investment in terms of workforce benefits—particularly through the lens of supporting working parents—resonated with many groups. Several participants emphasized that moral appeals alone are often insuffi-

cient; private-sector leaders and policymakers are more likely to act when clear, measurable incentives or returns are part of the case. Some groups also explored how for-profit actors—particularly those driven by ROI—could be engaged as problem-solvers. These participants suggested that such actors may be uniquely positioned to attract untapped capital and bring entrepreneurial energy to the development of new solutions. Some participants also pointed to a range of value propositions for investment, including moral imperatives, economic productivity, and workforce and military readiness. The value of credible, relevant evidence was a common theme.

What Counts: Measuring What Matters

Finally, the range of participants reflected on the tension between what can be monetized and what matters most. While ROI was viewed as a useful tool for engaging private-sector partners, many emphasized that key aspects of flourishing—such as emotional well-being, belonging, and opportunity—should not be overlooked simply because they are harder to quantify.

CASE STUDIES: INNOVATIVE MODELS FOR PUBLIC-PRIVATE INVESTMENT IN CHILDREN AND YOUTH

The second and final panel of the day highlighted innovative, cross-sector approaches to advancing child and community well-being. Presenters shared strategies for building sustainable partnerships, aligning incentives, and designing financing mechanisms that connect public health, business, and investment in upstream solutions. The panel featured presentations from the de Beaumont Foundation and the Investing in Flourishing Initiative.

de Beaumont Foundation: Public/Private Partnerships for Public Health

Sarah Bounse, Program Officer at the de Beaumont Foundation, and Brittany Giles-Cantrell, Program Director, shared six key lessons drawn from the foundation’s decade of work building partnerships between public health and the private sector. They emphasized that philanthropy could serve as a catalyst for multisector collaboration and that good health is good business. Businesses, they argued, must be activated as core partners in the public health system, not just supporters from the sidelines.

Giles-Cantrell emphasized that public-private partnerships work best when they are rooted in local context and guided by shared goals that cut across sectors. Philanthropy, she argued, has a unique role to play in seeding innovative models and shaping national narratives. Giles-Cantrell described the Foundation’s Practical Playbook series, developed in collaboration with a range of partners, offers concrete strategies for building these partnerships around issues such as maternal and child health, multisector integration, and health equity (Castrucci et al., 2024; Michener et al., 2015, 2019). She also highlighted the Build Health Challenge which has supported 68 communities in 27 states, demonstrating how sustained investment and relationship-building can drive upstream health solutions at the local level (Build Health Challenge, n.d.).

Giles-Cantrell also described the Foundation’s research and communication initiatives, including their 2019 report Good Health Is Good Business (Bipartisan Policy Center & de Beaumont Foundation, 2019) and their Seven Ways Business Can Align with Public Health framework (Goetzel et al., 2021). These resources help translate public health outcomes into business value, especially for leaders focused on workforce stability, operational continuity, and long-term economic resilience. One key message from their work, Giles-Cantrell explained, is that the next frontier in employee wellness is community health, recognizing that employee wellbeing is directly influenced by conditions outside the workplace.

To illustrate how these principles play out locally, Bounse shared case studies from Cerro Gordo County, Iowa, and the Wellness Council of Indiana. In Iowa, the local health department partnered with chambers of commerce and other stakeholders to implement a wage supplement program and launch a certificate pipeline for high school students interested in childcare careers. She noted that these efforts directly addressed workforce shortages while promoting community wellbeing. In Indiana, the state chamber’s Wellness Council created an initiative to coordinate multisector partners—businesses, local government, health institutions, and universities—to foster a culture of health as part of regional economic development strategies.²

__________________

Giles-Cantrell stressed that selecting the right convener is essential. In some contexts, a public health agency may lead; in others, a chamber of commerce or backbone nonprofit may be better positioned to bridge sectors and sustain engagement. Regardless of structure, Giles-Cantrell emphasized the need to speak the language of business. She highlighted the Public Health Reaching Across Sectors (PHRASES) initiative which helps public health leaders craft messages that resonate with private-sector audiences—focusing on shared values, economic co-benefits, and the role of businesses as trusted messengers (L’Hôte et al., 2019; Moyer et al., 2019).

As part of the Foundation’s work, Bounse explained, they have also identified common gaps in understanding between public health and business that can hinder collaboration. These include perceptions that health is purely medical, that partnerships are transactional, or that health outcomes are primarily driven by individual behavior. These disconnects can limit trust, collaboration, and investment unless intentionally addressed in partnership-building efforts, Bounse noted. (See Figure 1 for a summary of these communication challenges, drawn from de Beaumont’s research with private-sector audiences.)

Giles-Cantrell also spoke to the Foundation’s Health Action Alliance, launched during the COVID-19 pandemic, now serves as a national network of over 10,000 employees working at the intersection of business and public health (Health Action Alliance, n.d.). It provides toolkits, messaging support, and data insights that enable employers to act as health leaders and partners. It also helps these employers to understand how issues like climate resilience, chronic disease, or infectious disease outbreaks affect their operations—and why they have a stake in advancing health equity.

As a call to action, Bounse encouraged participants to identify the local “hook” that resonates with business stakeholders—whether workforce shortages, economic productivity, or reputational risk—and build from there. She and Giles-Cantrell also underscored the importance of investing in trusted conveners, strengthening communication infrastructure, and supporting long-term relationship-building across sectors. By doing so, communities can move beyond transactional partnerships toward durable collaborations that promote health, equity, and shared prosperity.

Investing in Flourishing (IIF) Initiative

The IIF initiative is a growing, multi-sector effort to increase access to capital markets to invest in helping children flourish. At the summit, the IIF model was presented by Carley Riley, Associate Professor of Pediatrics at the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine and Attending Physician in the Division of Critical Care Medicine at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center; Tyler Norris, Visiting Scholar at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and Co-Founder and Director of the CEO Alliance for Mental Health; and Antony Bugg-Levine, Managing Director of Bugg-Levine, Inc.

The mission of IIF, Carley Riley explained, is to transform child, family, and community flourishing through locally grounded leadership, multi-sector collaboration, and sustainable financing strategies that invest in upstream solutions and are repaid through downstream savings across sectors. The initiative envisions a future in which public and private partners invest not only in preventing harm, but in proactively building the community conditions—such as mental health services, safe housing, childcare, and early education—that support long-term well-being. The model is designed to improve outcomes while also generating measurable returns for public and private stakeholders.

Riley noted that IIF is being developed in response to the limits of traditional grantmaking and fragmented systems, which often fail to achieve population-level change despite decades of effort. Drawing on insights from Ohio, Cincinnati and Columbus, Riley described how even

well-coordinated initiatives often struggle to achieve sustained, meaningful impact without formal governance structures, shared metrics, and reliable long-term funding. In Hamilton County, Ohio, for example, only half of adult’s report “thriving,” despite years of cross-sector collaboration—highlighting the importance of structural, not just programmatic, solutions (Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center and Gallup, Inc., 2025).

Next Tyler Norris described the IIF model. To drive systems-level transformation, he explained, the IIF model proposes the creation of Flourishing Councils—locally governed, cross-sector collaboratives that raise and coordinate investment, align around shared metrics, and guide decisions in service of community well-being. Norris noted that these councils would not deliver services directly but would work across public and private sectors to identify and fund upstream interventions at the scale, intensity, and duration (e.g., dose) shown to improve child and family outcomes. These councils would include representatives from the people served, healthcare, education, philanthropy, government, business, and community-based organizations. Councils would negotiate and sign shared savings contracts with the full range of public and private downstream beneficiaries. (See Figure 2 for PFS rates tied to common health outcomes.)

Finally, Bugg-Levine spoke to the financial elements of the IFF model. What makes the financing sustainable, he explained, is its use of outcomes-based contracts, such as PFS models. These contracts allow private or philanthropic investors to provide upfront capital to launch or expand programs, often those with strong evidence of effectiveness. Public entities agree to repay these investors only if specific, measurable outcomes are achieved, tying reimbursement to real-world impact rather than activities alone. He noted that this approach lowers financial risk for governments and unlocks access to new capital. Bugg-Levine suggested that while many public actors benefit from improved outcomes, they are often unwilling or unable to pay until that value has been demonstrated—highlighting the importance of bridging funding from private or philanthropic sources. In Spartanburg, South Carolina, for example, the Hello Family initiative blends Medicaid funds, philanthropic support, and PFS financing to support prenatal-to-five services. Bugg-Levine explained that investors are repaid when outcomes such as reduced Neonatal Intensive Care Unit stays, or improved birth weights are achieved.

Bugg-Levine emphasized that while IIF draws on the logic of capital markets, the model is intentionally designed to center community control, local benefit, and accountability. Investors assume the financial risk of underperformance—not service providers or the communities they serve. Moreover, he explained, the model shifts investment logic from short-term cost-avoidance toward long-term value creation, aiming to relieve pressure on overstretched public systems while building the case for more robust public investment over time. Each Flourishing Council would be supported by a fiscal partner—an organization with expertise in financial management and capital structuring—responsible for

identifying funders, designing PFS agreements, managing capital flows, and aggregating investments in ways that support scale while minimizing risk.

To help scale this approach, Bugg-Levine noted that the initiative is developing a national backbone infrastructure to support local implementation. This includes common tools such as outcome metrics aligned with community priorities, governance templates for Flourishing Councils, and contracting models that span multiple sectors, including behavioral health, housing, education, and workforce development. He noted that IIF is also producing technical assistance resources so that communities can adapt to their context which removes barriers to entry and enables replication without requiring every locality to start from scratch.

Bugg-Levine emphasized that this is not about privatizing services but about using financing innovation to unlock and sustain public investment in what works. Communities interested in piloting or adapting the model are encouraged to follow progress in demonstration sites like Cincinnati and Columbus and contribute to a growing learning network grounded in shared goals and collective action. Takeaways for public health and community leaders who are interested in private sector partnerships are summarized based on shared messages across sessions in Box 2 below.

GROUP DIALOGUE: NEXT STEPS FOR INNOVATIVE INVESTMENT

Following the second panel, participants took part in small group discussions to reflect on how innovative investment models—such as those presented by the de

Beaumont Foundation and the Investing in Flourishing Initiative—might be adapted in their own communities. Conversations focused on what makes these models work, what challenges require attention, and what steps different sectors can take to move from concept to implementation.

Local Adaptation and Conditions for Success

Across groups, multiple participants emphasized that successful investment strategies must start with local relevance. Models that showed measurable benefits for communities—such as improved school readiness, reduced emergency service use, or stronger workforce retention—were seen as more likely to attract interest from business and civic leaders. Numerous participants agreed that clearly defining what “success” looks like, and using metrics aligned with that definition, is critical for evaluating impact and motivating stakeholders. However, they noted that traditional social impact bonds may be too narrow or rigid to succeed on their own. Many groups stressed the importance of diversifying funding

sources and designing models that align incentives across sectors—even when government funding is limited or unavailable.

Several participants also raised the issue of undervalued community members—such as artists or youth leaders—whose contributions are difficult to measure with standard ROI tools. This sparked discussion about broadening what counts as value, particularly when tracking community flourishing over time. Several groups supported the IIF model’s idea of developing a localized “flourishing plan” that includes both vital conditions and emergency services, to guide long-term investment strategies that reduce reliance on reactive spending.

Governance, Risk, and Accountability

Across groups, several participants acknowledged the complexity of establishing effective governance structures for public-private investment models. Many questions emerged: Who leads a Flourishing Council? Who decides how the money is allocated? How can trust be built across sectors with different goals, timelines, and risk tolerance?

Other participants pointed to the utility of consistent frameworks or templates to guide implementation, especially in smaller or under-resourced communities, but also the value of structures that remain adaptable to local needs. Some participants discussed the role of investors in taking on financial risk and called for more blended capital stacks that combine philanthropic, private, and public dollars. Others noted that while monetizing outcomes is essential for engaging private-sector partners, not all forms of flourishing are easily—or appropriately—reduced to a dollar figure. Several participants expressed concern that financial logic could take precedence over community priorities or human dignity.

Communicating Across Sectors

A recurring theme across discussion groups was the importance of shifting how nonprofits and public agencies communicate with business and investment leaders. A number of participants noted that language often needs to be reframed to emphasize operational relevance, economic returns, and workforce implications. Local economic alignment—such as showing how childcare investments improve employee retention—was highlighted by participants as a critical starting point.

Several participants also emphasized that convening the right partners requires trust and strategy. Trusted messengers, such as chambers of commerce or community leaders with cross-sector credibility, were seen as essential. Others pointed out that private-sector commitments must be institutionalized, rather than dependent on individual champions, to withstand leadership turnover and changing priorities.

Partnering with Youth

Youth engagement emerged as a powerful but underdeveloped opportunity. Across several groups, several participants noted that young people must play active roles as co-designers, evaluators, and advocates in shaping investment strategies—but that this involvement is most impactful when substantive and compensated. There was strong support for building intergenerational collaboration skills on both sides: preparing youth for governance and civic engagement and preparing adults to share power and listen deeply. For more information on international partnerships for youth health and well-being see The Science of Engaging Youth Lived Experience in Health Research, Practice, and Policy: Proceedings of a Workshop—in Brief (The National Academies Press, 2024).

Some groups reflected on the value of engaging youth beyond the high-achieving leaders who typically show up in these spaces. Other participants suggested training young people in financial and investment literacy to help them meaningfully contribute to innovative financing strategies. Across groups, multiple participants called for embedding youth voice into governance structures and ensuring it influences decisions, not just discussion.

Conclusion: From Possibility to Practice

While multiple participants acknowledged the complexity of designing sustainable investment models for child and community flourishing—including challenges related to scale, sustainability, and unintended consequences—they also expressed shared enthusiasm for continuing to test, refine, and expand these approaches. Many emphasized the urgency of moving beyond business-as-usual and the leaning in to building systems that, while still experimental, offer real potential.

There was strong support from a range of participants for creating a national learning infrastructure—including shared tools, ROI libraries, and common data frameworks—to help communities build capacity, reduce barriers to entry, and avoid having to reinvent the wheel. At the same time, other participants stressed that models are most effective when they remain locally rooted, equity-driven, and collaborative, adapting to the priorities and contexts of individual communities.

As participants from several groups noted, the risks of inaction now outweigh the risks of experimentation. Continuing to invest in systems that produce inequitable or stagnant outcomes carries real and rising costs—for children, families, communities, and the economy. As one participant put it: “We don’t need to agree on everything to get started—we just need to agree that where we are isn’t good enough.”

REFERENCES

Bipartisan Policy Center & de Beaumont Foundation. (2019). Good health Is good business. https://debeaumont.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Good-Health-Is-Good-Business

BUILD Health Challenge. (n.d.). Home. https://buildhealthchallenge.org/

Castrucci, B. C., Thomas, C. W., & Corcoran, E. (Eds.). (2024). The practical playbook III: Working together to improve maternal health. Oxford University Press.

Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center and Gallup, Inc. Together We Thrive: Collective Well-being of the Cincinnati Region. Fall 2024 & Winter 2025.

Goetzel, R. Z., Roemer, E. C., Kent, K. B., Myburgh, I., Castrucci, B. C., Yu, E., & Johnson, A. (2021). Seven ways businesses can align with public health for bold action and innovation. The Institute for Health and Productivity Studies at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and the de Beaumont Foundation. https://debeaumont.org/resources/seven-ways-businesses-can-align-with-public-health/

Health Action Alliance. (n.d.). About. https://www.healthaction.org/about

Karoly, L. A. (2005). Early childhood interventions: Proven results, future promise (MG-341-PNC). RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG341.html

-------. (2016). The economic returns to early childhood education. The Future of Children, 26(2), 37–55. https://www.rand.org/pubs/external_publications/EP66744.html

-------. (2017). Investing early: Taking stock of outcomes and economic returns from early childhood programs (RR-1993-PNC). RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1993.html

The Kids Mental Health Foundation. (2022). The Great Collide: The impact of children’s mental health on the workforce. https://www.kidsmentalhealthfoundation.org/about/research/workplace

L’Hôte, E., Volmert, A., Davis, C., & Down, L. (2019). Public health reaching across sectors: Mapping the gaps between how public health experts and leaders in other sectors view public health and cross-sector collaborations. FrameWorks Institute. https://www.phrases.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Aspen-PHRASES-MTG-Report-2019.pdf

Michener, J. L., Castrucci, B. C., Bradley, D. W., Hunter, E. L., Thomas, C. W., Patterson, C., & Corcoran, E. (Eds.). (2019). The practical playbook II: Building multisector partnerships that work. Oxford University Press.

Michener, J. L., Koo, D., Castrucci, B. C., & Sprague, J. B. (Eds.). (2015). The practical playbook: Public health and primary care together. Oxford University Press.

Milstein, B., Homer, J., Payne, B., & Reed, P. (2025). How can the United States make a great stride toward multiracial well-being? PLoS One, 20(4), Article e0319320. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0319320

Moyer, J., L’Hôte, E., & Levay, K. (2019). Public health reaching across sectors: Strategies for communicating effectively about public health and cross-sector collaboration with professionals from other sectors. FrameWorks Institute. https://www.phrases.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/PHRASES-Strategic-Brief.pdf

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. The science of engaging youth lived

experience in health research, practice, and policy: Proceedings of a workshop—in brief. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/27529.

Steiner, R. J., Sheremenko, G., Lesesne, C. A., Dittus, P. J., Sieving, R. E., & Ethier, K. A. (2021). Adolescent connectedness and adult health outcomes. Pediatrics, 148(1), e2021050885. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2021-050885

Wellness Council of Indiana. (2023, August 8). Indiana Healthy Communities: An inside look. https://www.wellnessindiana.org/indiana-healthy-communities-a-wellness-council-program-an-inside-look/

DISCLAIMER This Proceedings of a Workshop—in Brief was prepared by Amanda Grigg as a factual summary of what occurred at the workshop. The statements made are those of the rapporteur or individual workshop participants and do not necessarily represent the views of all workshop participants; the planning committee; or the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

PLANNING COMMITTEE David Willis (Chair), Georgetown University Thrive Center for Children; Deana Around Him, Child Trends; April Joy Damian, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health; Tyler Norris, Federal Reserve Bank of New York; Leslie R. Walker, The University of Washington and Seattle Children’s Hospital. The National Academies’ planning committees are solely responsible for organizing the workshop, identifying topics, and choosing speakers. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the rapporteur and the National Academies.

REVIEWERS To ensure that it meets institutional standards for quality and objectivity, this Proceedings of a Workshop—in Brief was reviewed by Qamryn Askew, Policy Coordinator, Maryland State Senate, and Carley Riley, Critical Care Medicine, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center. We also thank staff member Nia D. Johnson for reading and providing helpful comments on this manuscript. Kirsten Sampson Snyder, National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, served as the review coordinator.

SPONSORS This workshop was supported by contracts between the National Academy of Sciences and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (75D30121D11240/75D30124F00044) and the Health Resources and Services Administration (75R60221D00002/75R60223F34007). Additional support came from the Alliance for a Healthier Generation, American Academy of Pediatrics, Children’s Hospital Association, Family Voices, Global Alliance for Behavioral Health and Social Justice, Society for Child and Family Policy and Practice, and the Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.

STAFF Amanda Grigg, Emma Moore, Emily Backes

SUGGESTED CITATION National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Public–Private Partnerships to Advance Child and Youth Flourishing: Proceedings of a Workshop—in Brief. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/29235.

For additional information regarding the workshop, visit https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/forum-for-childrens-well-being-promoting-cognitive-affective-and-behavioral-health-for-children-and-youth.

Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education Copyright 2025 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.