Trump Officials Say They're Strengthening Head Start With Proposed Rule. Critics Say They'll Gut It

The Trump administration unveiled Thursday sweeping and controversial proposed changes to the Head Start program, which provides early education and health services to hundreds of thousands of low-income children.
Administration officials contend that the proposed rule would eliminate many of the program's federal regulations in favor of state standards, which officials say would strengthen the program by giving providers more flexibility, could create up to 236,000 more slots and could save $2.2 billion annually that would be reinvested into Head Start.
But critics caution that the effort could hurt the program in multiple ways, particularly because state standards for early childhood education and health and safety requirements are often less stringent.
The rule aims to give providers more flexibility and control by having them align with state standards governing class sizes, staffing ratios, education requirements and background checks, among other practices, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.
"We built this rule around trusting local leaders to make the decisions that are best for their local communities," Alex Adams, who leads HHS' Administration for Children and Families, told reporters. "Federal mandates can certainly hinder local decision-making, drive up costs and limit the program's reach."
It would add new nutrition and physical activity requirements, in keeping with HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s priorities. Notably, it would also tighten the cap on administrative expenses to 5%, down from 15%.
However, the proposed rule would maintain all the requirements in the Head Start Act, including the law's framework for comprehensive services, eligibility, parental participation and civil rights protections, Adams said.
But critics warn that many states have less rigorous early childhood standards, which would harm the program's effectiveness. For instance, several states have staffing ratios that are much higher than Head Start's mandate, which could mean that children get less individualized attention, Aaron Loewenberg, a senior policy analyst at the left-leaning New America, wrote in a report last month. Also, most states don't have the same requirements for health screenings, vision and hearing assessments and family support.
"This forthcoming proposed rule seems designed to hollow out the program from within, leaving the Head Start name intact while gutting the federal standards that have long defined its quality and scope," he wrote.