< Back to Current Version

Head Start: Overview and Current Issues

Changes from October 23, 2018 to December 5, 2019

This page shows textual changes in the document between the two versions indicated in the dates above. Textual matter removed in the later version is indicated with red strikethrough and textual matter added in the later version is indicated with blue.


October 23, 2018Updated December 5, 2019 Head Start: Overview and Current Issues Introduction Table 1. Funding and Enrollment, FY2012-FY2019 The Head Start program has provided comprehensive early childhood education and development services to lowincome children since 1965. The program seeks to promote school readiness through the provision of educational, health, nutritional, social, and other services. Most Head Start participants are three or four years old, but since 1995 a growing number of infants, toddlers, and pregnant women have been served in Early Head Start (EHS) programs. Administration The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) administers the Head Start program. HHS awards funds directly to local grantees. Programs are run by about 1,600 public and private nonprofit and for-profit agencies. The agenciesgrantees. The grantees must comply with detailed federal performance standards. Programs operate in all 50 states (plus the District of Columbia), five territories, and Palau. Funds also go to American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) and Migrant and Seasonal Head Start (MSHS) programs. Eligibility In general, regulations specify that children must be ages 02 in order to be eligible for EHS (pregnant women are also eligible). For Head Start, regulations specify that children must be at least three years old, but may not be older than minimum minimum compulsory school age (which varies by state). Children Children and pregnant women are eligible if their family income income does not exceed the federal poverty level, if their family is receiving public assistance, or if a child is homeless or in foster care. In addition, up to 35% of children served by each grantee may have income between 100% and 130% of the poverty line, provided these children are not prioritized over those who are homeless or living living below the poverty line or who meet other categorical eligibility criteria. Up to 10% of . Up to 10% of children served by each grantee may exceed the income limits altogether. Authorization and Appropriations The Head Start Act was last reauthorized in December 2007 by P.L. 110-134. This law authorized appropriations for each of FY2008-FY2012. Though this authorization has lapsed, funding has been provided in each year since (see Table 1). In addition to annual appropriations, the program occasionally receives supplemental funding, including $95 million (post-sequester) in FY2013 for needs arising from Hurricane Sandy, as well as $650 million in FY2018 for needs arising from hurricanes Maria, Irma, and Harvey, and $55 million in FY2019 for needs arising from various disasters. Funded Enrollment In FY2017FY2018, there were funded enrollment slots for 899,374887,125 children and pregnant women. About 81% of the slots were for Head Start and 19% were for EHS (see Table 1). The term funded enrollment refers to the total number of slots that were funded, not the total number of children served during the year (which would be higher due to turnover). Table 1. Funding and Enrollment, FY2012-FY2020 Fiscal Year Funding ($ billions) Head Start Enrollment EHS Enrollment FY2012 7.969 842,931 113,566 FY2013 7.573 + 0.095 796,953 106,726 FY2014 8.598 810,581 116,694 FY2015 8.598 791,886 152,695 FY2016 9.162 758,127 157,476 FY2017 9.225 731,325 168,049 FY2018 9.863 + 0.650 839 + 0.650 717,947 169,178 FY2019 10.063 + 0.055 not avail. not avail. FY2019 10.063FY2020 not avail. not avail. not avail. Sources: Congressional budgetBudget justifications and the FY2015 Head Start Program Fact Sheet. Funding levels reflect(nominal $) reflects rescissions, transfers, and and sequestration, where applicable. FY2013, FY2018, and FY2019 and FY2018 show annual and supplemental funds. EHS enrollment includes estimates of children in EHS-Child EHS-Child Care Partnerships starting in FY2015. Final FY2019 enrollment is not yet available. Full-year funding for FY2020 has not yet been enacted. Allocation of Funds Under law, Head Start and EHS grantees (including AIAN and MSHS grantees) generally receive the same base grant (total amount of funding) each year, if total appropriations are sufficient. Typically, grantees must contribute a 20% non-federal match (cash or in-kind) to receive thetheir full grant award. The law also generally reserves the same dollar amount or share of funds each year for state collaboration grants and program set-asides (e.g., training and technical training/technical assistance, research and /evaluation, and costs associated associated with program monitoring and corrective actions). If total appropriations decrease from the prior year, the law generally calls for all grantees to receive proportionate reductions. If total appropriations increase, the law lays out several steps to determine how the new funds should be allocated. Depending on the size of the increase, new funds may go toward cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs), program expansions, and/or quality improvement activities. In recent years, however, annual appropriations acts have tended to target funding increases toward specific activities, rather than distributing new funds via the statutory formula. Most often, these acts have prioritized COLAs for existing grantees and new slots for EHS programs (via conversions of existing Head Start slots into new EHS slots and by dedicating funds to new partnerships between EHS programs andEHS expansions and EHS partnerships with local child care providers). These priorities have have https://crsreports.congress.gov Head Start: Overview and Current Issues affected the relative distribution of funded enrollment slots slots (see Table 1): slots in EHS programs have generally been been increasing (+4849% since FY2012), while slots in Head Start Start programs have been declining (-13% since FY2012). https://crsreports.congress.gov Head Start: Overview and Current Issues Program Options EHS-Child Care Partnerships Federal regulations identify three main program options for grantees: (1) center-based, (2) home-based, and (3) family child care15% since FY2012). Program Options Federal regulations identify three main program options for grantees. In the center-based option, education and child development services are primarily delivered in classroom settings. In the home-based option, services are primarily provided in weekly home visits with the child’s family, paired with group activities or field trips. (While some EHS programs operate primarily through the home-based option, federal regulations specify that this may not be the primary method of service delivery for Head Start programs serving preschool-aged preschoolaged children.) In the family child care option, services are primarily delivered in the home of a family child care provider or other home-like setting. Federal rules include include detailed requirements for each program option. In addition addition to the three main program options, grantees may request request approval to use a locally designed program option. This This option may be used to meet unique community needs or test alternative approaches for providing services. Since FY2014, Head Start appropriations have reserved funding for EHS-Child Care Partnerships (EHS-CCPs) and conversions of Head Start slots to EHS slots. These setasides initially totaled about $500 million in FY2014 and FY2015, $635 million in FY2016, $640 million in FY2017, $755 million in FY2018, and $805 million in FY2019. The EHS-CCP initiative seeks to increase the supply of highquality, full-day, full-year child care for infants and toddlers in low-income working families. EHS grantees partner with child care providers who agree to meet EHS performance standards (e.g., class sizes and teacher-to-child ratios) and offer comprehensive services to eligible children. alternative approaches for providing services. Service Duration (Minimum Hours) A final rule issued in September 2016 made significant revisions many revisions to Head Start performance standards. Among other changes, the rule Of note, the final rule increased the minimum number of service hours required for center-based programs. The intent of this change is intent was to ensure that, over time, nearly all center-based programs are servingserve children for at least a full school day and over a full school year. Under the new rule,The final rule required center-based EHS programs mustgrantees to offer at least 1,380 annual class hours to all enrolled children. This requirement became effective on August 1, 2018. Most (but not all) center-based EHS programs were meeting this standard even before the final rule was published and HHS is responsible for oversight to ensure compliance. The new, effective August 2018. According to HHS, about 6% of these grantees were not meeting this standard as of May 2019. HHS was working with them to ensure compliance. The final rule generally requires center-based Head Start programsgrantees to offer at least 1,020 annual class hours over at least eight months—but this requirement is to be phased in over time. As an interim step, the rule calls for programs to grantees were required to meet this standard for at least 50% of enrolled children by August 1, August 2019. As a final step, programs must grantees must meet this standard for all enrolled children by August 1, 2021. The final rule authorized HHS to reduce these standards beforerule authorizes HHS to lower the duration requirements for Head Start programs in advance of the interim and final deadlines if there is not sufficient funding for programs to expand service deadlines if adequate funding was not available to expand hours without substantially reducing reducing enrollment. In January 2018, HHS used this authority to effectively waive the August 2019 deadline for the interim (50%) requirement for center-based Head Start programs. HHS stated that without new funding for extended hours, implementing this requirement would lead to the loss of roughly 41,000 slots (about 5% of all Head Start slots). Head Start appropriations in FY2016 and FY2018 provided some funding to expand the hours of program operations. These funds, once awarded to a Head Start or EHS agency, become part of the agency’s base grant in future years and have been sustained in subsequent appropriations. HHS has estimated that the funding provided thus far should be sufficient to cover roughly 87% of the costs of meeting the combined EHS and interim (50%) Head Start requirements. Program Monitoring The law requires grantees to go through a monitoring process at least every three years. HHS uses data from onsite and offsite monitoring reviews to assess compliance with program standards and requirements. Grantees deemed to have a deficiency or an area of noncompliance receive follow-up visits. The current monitoring system also requires center-based Head Start (not EHS) programs to participate in an observational assessment of teacher-child interactions using the Pre-K Classroom Assessment Scoring interim (50%) deadline, estimating that about 41,000 slots (or 5% of all Head Start slots) would be lost if grantees had meet this deadline without additional funding. According to HHS, roughly 60% of applicable grantees were meeting the interim (50%) standard as of May 2019. In March 2019, HHS issued a proposed rule that would eliminate the full school day/year standard for center-based Head Start programs. Instead, these programs would be required to operate at least 3.5 hours per day for at least 128 or 160 days per year (depending on how many days they operate each week). Comments were due in May 2019. Meanwhile, FY2016 and FY2018 appropriations provided some funding to expand service hours. These funds, once awarded, become part of an agency’s base grant and have been sustained in each year. In May 2019, HHS estimated it would cost an additional $806 million for all center-based grantees to meet the full school day/year standard. EHS-Child Care Partnerships Since FY2014, Head Start appropriations have reserved funds for EHS-Child Care Partnerships (EHS-CCPs), EHS expansions, and/or conversions of Head Start slots to EHS slots. These set-asides initially totaled about $500 million in FY2014-FY2015, $635 million in FY2016, $640 million in FY2017, $755 million in FY2018, and $805 million in FY2019. The EHS-CCP initiative seeks to grow the supply of high-quality, full-day, full-year child care for infants and toddlers in low-income working families. EHS grantees partner with child care providers who agree to meet EHS program standards (e.g., class sizes, teacher-to-child ratios) and offer comprehensive services to eligible children. Program Monitoring The law requires grantees to undergo a monitoring process at least every three years. HHS uses data from onsite and offsite monitoring reviews to assess compliance with program standards. Grantees deemed to have a deficiency or an area of noncompliance receive follow-up visits. The current monitoring system also requires center-based Head Start (not EHS) programs to participate in an observational assessment of teacher-child interactions using the Pre-K Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS: Pre-K). Designation Renewal System The 2007 Head Start reauthorization law instituted a new five-year designation period for Head Start grantees. (Previously, grantees had been givenreceived grant awards for indefinite periods.) Under the law, at indefinite periods.) At the end of its five-year designation period a grantee must demonstrate that it is delivering “high-quality and comprehensive services,” or else the grant is to be opened for re-competition. The law refers to the process of identifying granteesGrantees are selected for recompetition asvia the Designation Renewal System (DRS). In 2011, HHS published a final rule on the DRS. The rule established seven conditions to identify grantees for recompetition. that trigger re-competition. The conditions address various aspects of program quality, licensing and operations, and fiscal and internal controls. A 2016 report by HHS states that roughly 450 grantees (about one-third of all grantees) were required to re-compete under the DRS between 2011 and 2016. Generally, these grantees met one of the seven conditions that trigger a requirement to re-compete—re-competition; most often they had received a deficiency on their monitoring review (64%) or a low score on the CLASS: Pre-K (31%). A small share (4%) triggered re-competition on more than one condition. In February 2018, HHS solicited public comment on potential changes to the DRS, expressing special interest in changes to the CLASS: comment on possible DRS changes. HHS expressed particular interest in the CLASS: Pre-K condition due to concerns raised by grantees and the results of a study on the early implementation of the DRS. The study suggests the DRS is a study on early DRS implementation. The study found the DRS is generally meeting its goal of spurring quality improvement, but found but noted that DRS conditions may vary in their ability to differentiate between higher- and lower-quality programs (with particular concerns raised about the CLASS: Pre-K). Karen E. Lynch, Specialist in Social Policylowerquality programs (raising concerns with the CLASS: Pre-K https://crsreports.congress.gov IF11008 Head Start: Overview and Current Issues specifically). In August 2019, HHS issued a proposed rule that would revise DRS conditions using the CLASS: Pre-K and fiscal audits. Comments were due in September 2019. Karen E. Lynch, Specialist in Social Policy IF11008 Disclaimer This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material. https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF11008 · VERSION 2 · NEW3 · UPDATED