For Head Start, A Marathon Run

In the Tillicum Head Start program in Tillicum, Washington, four-year-old Jesse Erickson practices using scissors. This pioneering federal program, which focuses on the educational, social, and nutritional needs of disadvantaged children, is up for reauthorization. In a Head Start classroom at Valencia Elementary School, east of Los Angeles, associate teacher Michele Gonzalez encourages a child named Hector to try eating a pear slice. Meanwhile, other children engage in various activities, such as playing in the housekeeping area and setting up farm sets with plastic animals. In a separate area, parents gather for a monthly meeting after dropping off their children.

The comprehensive services provided by the Head Start program have always been its flagship feature for disadvantaged individuals, according to Channel Wilkins, the director of the Office of Head Start. However, as the federal debate over reauthorization continues for the fourth year, Head Start faces challenges that its founders may not have predicted. Some Head Start programs have had to promote their services in order to compete with state-funded programs, which have become increasingly popular and could potentially draw children away. Additionally, Head Start supporters have had to contend with flat funding in recent years, despite the program’s growing needs.

One example of Head Start’s adaptability is showcased at the Valencia site, which is operated by Options, a private nonprofit organization. The site also includes two classrooms called Child Start, which receive both federal Head Start funding and state child-care funding. This partnership allows low-income working parents to access full-day, year-round care for their preschoolers. Collaborations like this, involving national programs and local initiatives, demonstrate how Head Start can maintain its identity while still meeting the needs of parents and the evolving landscape of early childhood education.

The National Head Start Association, which represents Head Start employees and families, has felt the need to defend the program in recent years. Supporters claim that the Bush administration attempted to dismantle the program by transferring it from the Department of Health and Human Services to the Department of Education and funding it through block grants on a pilot basis. This led to misconceptions about mismanagement being widespread, although Sarah Greene, the president of the National Head Start Association, acknowledges that there are always a few individuals who may not perform their jobs properly. There was some backlash from the Head Start community towards President Bush’s administration, as they felt that their proposals were not well received by those involved in the program.

Overall, Head Start is a comprehensive program that serves the needs of disadvantaged children and their families, although it faces challenges in terms of funding and competition from other programs. Despite these obstacles, Head Start continues to adapt and make a positive impact on the lives of children in communities across the United States.

Introduced in 1965, the Head Start initiative primarily focuses on aiding underprivileged families and their children. It offers a comprehensive range of services including education, healthcare, nutrition, and social support.

In terms of enrollment, there were 561,000 children enrolled in the summer program in 1965, while in 2005, the number of enrollees had reached 906,993. Since its inception, Head Start has served a total of 23 million children.

The Head Start program is supported by 1,604 grantee agencies. It has a staff of 213,000 paid members and relies on the assistance of 1,360,000 volunteers. These figures reflect the dedication and wide-scale involvement of individuals and organizations in the program.

As the reauthorization process progresses, Mr. Bancroft expresses optimism about the bipartisan cooperation between the Senate and House versions of the bills. They both include a provision to eliminate the National Reporting System (NRS), a controversial set of tests administered bi-annually to children aged 4 and 5. Mr. Bancroft finds the NRS to be a distraction and believes it provides no value to the program.

However, Mr. Wilkins believes that the NRS has been beneficial for determining the design of technical assistance. By analyzing the test results, the program was able to identify areas in need of improvement, such as early math skills. Critics and the Head Start administration recommended including measures of social and emotional growth, which were incorporated into the test last fall. Mr. Wilkins stresses the importance of being well-informed and fears that eliminating the test will hinder their ability to gather valuable insights.

Danielle Ewen, director of child-care and early-education policy at the Center on Law and Social Policy (CLASP), highlights the concerns faced by Head Start staff members. They worry about how their NRS results will be utilized and whether their funds are being allocated appropriately. This has created an environment of fear in many programs.

Head Start has also felt the impact of funding limitations, which the NHSA claims have left some programs in dire situations. Restricted funding has led to a loss of transportation services, reduced meal portions, and the elimination of some comprehensive services. Administrators have had to make sacrifices, including increased caseloads for family-support workers and cutbacks in training and employment programs for parents. Teacher salaries in Head Start programs remain lower compared to kindergarten teachers and school-based prekindergarten programs, and increases have been frozen.

Mr. Wilkins acknowledges the financial constraints experienced by Head Start agencies and suggests that this has prompted them to reassess their spending decisions. He also mentions that there were some years with significant increases in funding for program improvements. However, Mr. Barnett from NIEER suggests that inflation has negatively impacted the purchasing power of Head Start programs, even more so than what is commonly believed. He speculates that the Bush administration may be subtly shifting responsibility to the states by keeping the Head Start budget low, following the failure of their plan to make the program a block grant.

Collaborating with the Community

Head Start programs are currently facing the challenge of fitting into a wider range of publicly funded school readiness programs. Some Head Start programs have successfully integrated children served by state preschool programs, while others have been resistant and continue to operate as usual. The original vision of Head Start was to work with the community, and this has led to partnerships and collaborations with state programs through collaboration offices. These partnerships have resulted in joint teacher training workshops and cross-agency committees.

When programs work together, they can serve more children. Even before the increase in state preschool programs, Head Start centers in the 1990s partnered with federally subsidized child care centers to provide extended hours to children whose mothers were working to meet the requirements of new welfare laws.

However, working with public prekindergarten programs, which allow Head Start providers to receive pre-K funding, brings up different concerns. Head Start providers are worried that other important services such as health, nutrition, and family support might be sidelined. They believe that comprehensive care is a crucial part of the program, and they fear that the children who need it the most might be overlooked. A potential conflict over children can arise if a state’s pre-K program serves children at the same income level as Head Start.

A decline in Head Start enrollment in Arkansas was attributed by many providers to the increase in funding for the state’s pre-K program. This, coupled with the federal government’s requirement for monthly enrollment counts, affected Head Start agencies. Furthermore, demographic shifts in areas historically served by Head Start have also impacted the program. Gentrification in urban neighborhoods has caused eligible families to move elsewhere, leaving some Head Start classrooms underenrolled and potentially unprepared to reach out to new immigrant groups.

Some Head Start programs may need to find new ways to attract families. Preliminary results from a study conducted by CLASP indicate that while Head Start programs may adequately serve Spanish-speaking families, they may not be providing meaningful access to non-English-speaking families from other immigrant groups like Cambodians or Vietnamese.

Finding the Right Balance

There are concerns about segregating poor children in Head Start programs, while state preschool programs increasingly serve middle-class children. It is believed that mixing Head Start and pre-K programs could be beneficial, as there is a willingness to invest in a program that caters to both poor and middle-class children. However, combining Head Start, pre-K, and childcare children in the same classroom or center can lead to conflicts over standards such as class size, square footage, nutrition, and other services. It has taken time to align practices between pre-K teachers and Head Start, with differences in areas such as brushing children’s teeth and conducting home visits.

"I aim to remind individuals that, unless the federal government takes actions to undermine your progress, Head Start offers families unique opportunities that are not provided by the other two programs," she expressed. "As long as Head Start remains a presence, everything will be alright. These are merely challenges we must navigate on our journey towards success."