By Jessica Norton, PhD | May 2026
Baby Bonds programs are gaining momentum nationwide, with nearly a dozen states passing legislation or building evidence through accelerated pilot programs. Although the who, what, when, and where are clearly defined, the efforts vary in design, including eligibility, capital uses, disbursement age, and capital amounts. Despite these differences, they share a common ‘why’ – to close the wealth gap among children born in disadvantaged circumstances – and a common ‘what’ – by providing them with invested capital to jumpstart their futures. Yet, much of our focus has remained on the capital itself, with little discussion of ‘how’ these funds will create change for youth.
As someone who would have benefited from such a policy, I see Baby Bonds as a powerful opportunity for youth to become first-time family wealth builders. Yet, as an implementation scientist, I recognize that capital alone will not achieve the policy’s goals, and I also inherently distinguish Baby Bonds as a program from its programming. For me, the ‘what’ and ‘why’ are equally as important as the ‘how’ – the process through which these funds will lead to meaningful change in a young person’s future. We’ve all heard the saying, “Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.” And yes, if we feed a man who is hungry, we’ve achieved something great, but we should not miss the opportunity to give him the tools to sustain himself and his family in a meaningful way.
Without effective programming, are we teaching youth ‘how’ to navigate and sustain the impact of Baby Bonds capital?
The truth is, generational wealth involves more than just passing down money and assets; it is the transfer of knowledge, skills, and wealth-building strategies. We are introducing youth to complex financial systems and spaces that require particular acumen in real estate investment, educational attainment, and business. They need guidance and tools to chart this new path. Without proper guidance, there is much room for error in both choosing and using their Baby Bond capital.
Comprehensive programming is foundational to Baby Bonds’ success. Beyond capital, we must clearly articulate ‘how’ Baby Bonds will effectively close the wealth gap. While securing capital is the greatest implementation barrier, wraparound support and programming are critical for successful outcomes. Some Baby Bonds programs offer financial advising or resource navigation, but we should prioritize programming that also improves their strategic decision-making. Without this support, we risk youth making uninformed decisions and programs falling short of their intended outcomes.
Are we preparing youth to make wise investments, find equity-building homes, secure reliable business funding, or to pursue majors and careers that foster long-term wealth building?
I believe comprehensive programming is the heart of Baby Bond’s Promise. Comprehensive programming will connect the dots between capital and youth wealth-building outcomes. As we continue to advocate for Baby Bonds programs, we should elevate evidence-based programming as a key component to ensure that youth can use their capital wisely as they start their wealth-building journey. Programming should embed specific supports that will build decision-making skills around homeownership, education, entrepreneurship, and other wealth-building pathways.
As states design their pilots, they can create customized Baby Bonds programming or adapt existing, evidence-based models, such as SCORE Business Mentoring, Upward Bound, and Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America (NACA), to help participants build practical decision-making skills in key wealth-building areas. States can also enhance existing school- and community-based programs for eligible youth.
For first-generation wealth builders, there is much to learn. As Baby Bonds initiatives expand, we must increase our efforts to implement comprehensive programming that develops evidence for the who, what, where, when, and, especially, the ‘how’ of the policy. Let’s secure and guarantee the promise of Baby Bonds by treating the program and its programming as two distinct concepts working together to define the ‘what’ and ‘how’ of Baby Bonds as an effective policy that improves the lives of youth and their families for generations to come.
Jessica Norton is an interdisciplinary social scientist with 10+ years of experience designing and leading evaluations across government, academic, and community systems. Specializing in youth development, justice-involved populations, and family systems with expertise in mixed-methods evaluation, policy analysis, and evidence-based program design.