Murray Says Proposed Head Start Overhaul Could Weaken Standards For 15,000 Washington Children

U.S. Sen. Patty Murray is warning that a sweeping Trump administration proposal to rewrite Head Start regulations could weaken federal health, safety and educational standards for roughly 15,000 children served by Head Start programs across Washington state.

The proposal from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, announced Aug. 6, would reduce or eliminate federal requirements governing class sizes, child-staff ratios, program duration, transportation, background checks, medical screenings and other areas while shifting greater authority to states and local programs.

“Your child’s safety should not depend on their zip code,” Murray said during a virtual press conference last week. “That has been the entire point of Head Start since 1965. If they wanted to serve more kids, they could ask Congress for more funding. I’d write that bill this afternoon. Instead, they’re saying they might be able to serve more children by promising each child less.”

HHS says the proposed rule, titled “Reducing Federal Burden for Head Start Programs,” would reduce administrative costs, give local programs greater flexibility and potentially preserve or expand as many as 236,000 Head Start slots nationwide. The department estimates the changes could save $2.2 billion.

“Head Start began as a bold commitment to the health, dignity, and potential of every child. My uncle, Sarge Shriver, founded the program on a simple conviction: strong families, wholesome nutrition, and healthy childhood development can change the course of a child’s life,” HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said. “Today, we are returning Head Start to those roots. We are removing unnecessary bureaucracy, strengthening nutrition and physical health, trusting parents and local communities, and opening Head Start to hundreds of thousands more children. That’s how we renew the promise of Head Start for the next generation.”

Much of the disagreement centers on whether Head Start should maintain uniform federal standards or give states and local programs greater discretion. The administration says federal requirements can increase costs and restrict providers. Murray and other critics say replacing them with varying state standards could leave children with different protections depending on where they live.

Murray, a former preschool teacher and longtime advocate for early childhood education, argues that many of the regulations the administration considers burdensome are intended to protect children and maintain program quality.

“It’s class sizes, because there’s a reason Head Start tells providers how many toddlers one adult can supervise,” Murray said. “It’s the medical screenings, for countless families, Head Start is the first place anyone will ever check their child’s hearing, or vision, or teeth.”

The proposal would eliminate federal numerical requirements for staff-to-child ratios and group sizes, allowing programs to follow applicable state and local standards.

Steven Barnett, founder and senior director of the National Institute for Early Education Research at Rutgers University, said the change could lead to significantly higher child-to-teacher ratios in some programs.

“Among the most important targets of the proposed deregulations are the elimination of child-staff ratios, which could lead to higher child to teacher ratios, double or even triple for infants and toddlers in some Head Start programs,” Barnett said.

Barnett said reducing some federal micromanagement could benefit Head Start but argued that programs should be aligned with strong state-funded pre-K standards rather than minimum child care licensing requirements.

The proposal would also require educational services to be conducted in English in most nontribal Head Start classrooms. American Indian and Alaska Native programs using tribal languages to further tribal heritage would be exempt, and other programs could seek waivers.

HHS estimates 18,767 classrooms nationwide could be affected by the language change, with nearly $47 million in one-time costs associated with replacing curricula, books and other instructional materials.

“There are American children who have different language needs,” Murray said. “Denying children instruction in their first language, that’s backwards, and it doesn’t help anyone.”

Barnett also criticized the provision.

“Limiting instruction to English has no advantage for learning English and increases loss of home language, while dual language fluency has cognitive, social, and economic advantages,” Barnett said.

Other proposed changes could affect eligibility and transportation. HHS would eliminate family self-attestation as a way of documenting eligibility and estimates about 8% of children could potentially lose eligibility if their families cannot provide alternative documentation.

The proposal would also eliminate the federal requirement for at least one bus monitor while children are being transported, although programs could continue using monitors voluntarily and would remain subject to state and local requirements.

Another provision would require programs to provide educational materials and instruction presenting “healthy marriage as a positive good,” while continuing an emphasis on father engagement.

At the same time, HHS proposes new requirements for nutrition and physical activity, including nutrient-dense whole foods consistent with federal dietary guidelines and minimum physical activity standards.

“The Biden Administration oversaw the largest decline in Head Start slots in American history. Today’s action reverses that decline,” said Alex J. Adams, assistant secretary for the Administration for Children and Families. “Head Start’s greatest strength is the people who make the program work, and we seek to empower them to work directly with parents to best meet the needs of their local communities.”

Head Start serves more than 750,000 children nationwide and has served more than 40 million children and families since its creation in 1965. The federally funded program provides early childhood education along with health, nutrition and family support services, primarily for children from low-income families.

In Washington, the proposed overhaul comes after other changes to the federal infrastructure supporting Head Start. Murray said the Trump administration has cut staffing at the Office of Head Start and Office of Child Care and closed five of 10 regional offices, including the Seattle office that supported programs throughout Washington.

“One of those offices was in Seattle. It served every Head Start program in Washington state, 15,000 kids,” Murray said. “In the Yakima Valley, a provider waiting on funding that never showed up had to lay off 72 employees and shutter a dozen classrooms, that served 400 kids. Now eventually that money came, but only after the layoffs. In Walla Walla, a program that has served kids for decades is warning it may not survive.”

The administration has also faced disputes over funding delays, proposed workforce compensation changes and an effort to reinterpret Head Start as a federal public benefit subject to immigration restrictions. The immigration policy has been challenged in court and its enforcement stalled.

Sen. Ben Ray Luján of New Mexico, who attended Head Start as a child, joined Murray in opposing the proposal.

“I know the value of Head Start, it got me to the U.S. Senate,” Luján said. “Since President Trump took office, he and his administration have made it harder and harder for young children to get an early education. Now, he is moving forward with a proposed rule to gut Head Start and strip basic education, health, and safety standards our kids rely on. That is why I joined Senator Murray and advocates today and will continue to fight to protect Head Start.”

The proposal has a 60-day public comment period, giving parents, educators, providers and other members of the public an opportunity to weigh in before the department determines whether to finalize the changes.

“This rule is not final. There is a public comment period. I want parents to weigh in. I want teachers to weigh in. Because I have seen what happens when enough ordinary people refuse to let something get ripped away from them,” Murray said. “And on my end: I will press administration officials when they come before Congress. I will sound the alarm as loudly as I possibly can. I will carry this fight into every negotiation I walk into.”