社区黑料

Join our zero2eight Substack community for more discussion about the latest news in early care and education.

When Head Start turned 60 in May, it wasn鈥檛 just a milestone 鈥� it was a reminder of what鈥檚 possible with federal investment in families and communities. 

Since , has helped more than 38 million children build a foundation for learning, health and stability. It pioneered a now widely lauded 鈥渢wo-generation鈥� approach that fosters learning and development for young children by supporting their parents. Yet despite its innovative design and proven track record, Head Start has faced many attacks over the years due to political and economic turmoil: it was singled out for elimination in Project 2025 鈥� and for a few weeks in April, Head Start .

Amid uncertainty about Head Start鈥檚 future, the question to ask is whether the government will do what鈥檚 needed to help the program 鈥� and our youngest generation 鈥� thrive.

The immediate threat seems to have passed, but deep challenges to the program remain: chronic underfunding, political headwinds and a national conversation that too often excludes the early educators doing the work. These challenges have been even more acute since COVID-19. With the expiration of supplemental pandemic-era funding, many programs to retain staff, maintain enrollment, or even keep their doors open. In some communities, waitlists for Head Start programs stretched for months. Some programs were forced to cut back services and reduce classroom capacity because of persistent staffing shortages. In 2023, of Head Start classrooms were closed, many due to a scarcity of qualified staff.

Head Start is the closest thing the U.S. has to a national preschool program, yet it reaches of eligible children and families due to capacity challenges and income eligibility requirements. The narrow availability of free, accessible early learning programs makes the U.S. an outlier among peer nations, when it comes to the number of children who receive formal education before kindergarten. In 2022, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) found that for enrollment of 3- and 4-year olds in early learning programs.

To serve more children and families with important early learning opportunities, states and localities supplement Head Start funding with other investments in early education, building a patchwork system that is delicately woven together from multiple, insufficient revenue sources. This interconnected web of funding leaves local early education systems at risk when any one source is threatened. 

Even in this constrained environment, local programs continue to deliver results. That鈥檚 why it鈥檚 essential to center the voices of the people who are closest to the work. A has been meeting monthly for the past year to navigate the challenges of implementing programs on the ground and to support each other in scaling high-quality early learning experiences for young children and their families. 

These leaders have shared about how they鈥檙e streamlining intake processes to , to support early learning programs, and rooted in their communities. Despite limited resources, they鈥檙e building programs that are equitable, culturally responsive and designed around what families actually need, in designing their programs. They’re reaching urban and rural families and children living in poverty everywhere, supporting children with disabilities, and acknowledging linguistic diversity 鈥� all while coping with persistent administrative burdens and workforce gaps. 

Head Start has been a for them. As Becky Mercatoris, director of the Department of Children Initiatives in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania described in one of the meetings, “When Head Start leaves, that impacts our childcare programs鈥� if we suddenly pull that piece of the Jenga puzzle out, there’s a lot of unintended consequences.” 

Although the immediate budget threat has eased, Head Start is far from safe, and there have been proposed cuts to that support families with young children. The suggests eliminating the Preschool Development Grants that enable states to build stronger systems and the , which supports student parents through campus-based child care programs. Critical social safety net programs that help families meet basic needs, like the and Medicaid are also threatened in Congress. Parents are already overwhelmed by the cost of , and . Many want to have more children . Why undercut programs that help them?

These threats to early childhood funding aren鈥檛 just policy decisions. They鈥檙e reflections of national priorities. When budget pressures hit, programs for children and families are often the first to go. That鈥檚 not fiscal discipline 鈥� it’s shortsightedness. Investments in young children yield some of the highest public returns: better health, and reduced need for later in life.

Head Start remains one of the most rigorously studied, community-rooted, and bipartisan-supported programs in the nation. Its success is evident. The path forward is clear. The federal government should increase investment so Head Start can expand access, especially for infants and toddlers; stabilize and strengthen the childcare workforce with better compensation and career development; and continue to listen to local providers, who are closest to families on the ground and understand what they actually need.

Underinvesting in America鈥檚 youngest children weakens families, constrains the workforce and stunts the country’s long-term economic growth. Head Start鈥檚 first 60 years proved what鈥檚 possible when the U.S. invests early and listens to the people doing the work. The next 60 will depend on whether our country鈥檚 leaders are willing to follow the evidence and deliver for America鈥檚 children.

Did you use this article in your work?

We鈥檇 love to hear how 社区黑料鈥檚 reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers.