In his role as Senior Vice President and Director of Research at the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis (Minneapolis Fed), Art Rolnick and his colleague, Rob Grunewald, had written "Early Childhood Development: Economic Development with a High Public Return." The thesis was fairly straightforward; early childhood development (ECD) had the highest returns so states and local governments should invest in it. But the idea of investing in ECD for economic development was new and had never been tested on a large scale, particularly in the way that Rolnick and Grunewald recommended in a later paper - using market forces to drive demand for high-quality ECD programs. The Minnesota Early Learning Foundation (MELF), formed in 2005, invested in two projects designed to test the economists' recommendations. The St. Paul Early Childhood Scholarship Program (SPECSP) provided up to $13,000 a year per child for parents in two St. Paul neighborhoods to select a high-quality ECD program of their choice. MELF had also invested in Five Hundred Under 5 (FHU5), a Minneapolis program formed to improve the capacity and quality of providers. Comparing SPECSP to FHU5 would offer insights on the potential impact of supply-side versus demand-side ECD initiatives. Rolnick reflected on the two MELF experiments. Which would be more effective? Would parents in St. Paul really drive up the quality of providers through the choices they made or was it better to work with providers directly to improve quality?