The clarity of the recently launched ‘Early Childhood Road Map’ (Thompson, et al., 2021) was welcomed with open arms by a sector that has been plagued by confusion around the complex multiplicity and appropriateness of qualifications designed to provide the best possible outcomes for children in Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC). The visual acuity of the road map provides setting managers and school leaders with a focussed beam of light to pierce through the fog of confusion left by successive governments and policy changes designed to protect and enhance the lives of children and families across the country. The palimpsest created by the multi-layered de- and re-regulation is a necessary evil in a sector that must adapt rapidly to societal changes and research findings, as well as new legislation and expectations designed to keep young children thriving. The confusion and resultant frustration in the ECEC sector is felt more acutely, perhaps, than in other sectors, because of the weight of accountability pressing on practitioners, managers, teachers, and all school staff to safeguard children and maintain exceptionally high standards of pedagogy for children in their formative years. Introspection into the sector's interpretation of what should be included in these qualifications, as well as perceived requirements for future generations of practitioners, has been rendered even more urgent given the turbulent context endured in recent years. Thankfully, we now have a highly progressive and meaningful set of QAA (Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education) benchmark statements for Early Childhood Studies (ECS) degrees to support our collective adaptation to future challenges (QAA, 2022), as well as growing numbers of universities who offer placements implementing a new set of Early Childhood Graduate Practitioner Competencies (ECGPCs) designed to promote consistent vocational quality between degrees (ECSDN, 2019).