|
When Head Start began in 1965 as part of the War on
Poverty, it was a six-week summer program for children of low-income
families. At that time there were few other formal early child development
settings providing services to these children. Since then, Head
Start has blossomed into a national effort with programs in every
state and nearly every county of the country, as well as in the
major territories. Most programs provide part-day services during
the regular school year; however, an increasing number of programs
are providing, either directly or in partnership with other providers,
full-day, full-year services. Just as Head Start has grown, so too
have other options for early childhood care and education. Children
are being cared for in a range of settings from relative care to
home-based child care, family child care, group care, and center-based
care. With changes in family structure and the necessity for many
parents to work outside the home, children are spending significant
amounts of time in care and often receive care from multiple programs
in a single day.
The Head Start Program
In 1998, there were 1,513 Head Start grantees with
15,872 centers and 48,004 classrooms, in which 822,316 children
were served (Administration on Children, Youth and Families, 1999).
It is estimated that 27 percent of 3-year-olds and 48 percent of
4-year-olds from families at or below the Federal poverty line are
enrolled in the program. Income is defined as the family's total
cash receipts before taxes. For example, a family of four with pretax
income of $16,700 or less would be eligible for Head Start (Administration
on Children, Youth and Families, 1999). More than 70 percent of
the families served by the program earn less than $12,000 per year
(Administration on Children, Youth and Families, 1998). Thirty-six
percent of the families served are African American; 32 percent
are White; 26 percent Hispanic; 3 percent American Indian; and 3
percent Asian (Administration on Children, Youth and Families, 1999)3.
English is the second language for approximately 22 percent of children
enrolled in Head Start. The federal cost of supporting the Head
Start program in fiscal year 1999 was $4.7 billion (Administration
on Children, Youth and Families, 1999).
Head Start has evolved in response to changes in family
structure, poverty, immigration and mobility patterns, and community
resources. For example, increasing numbers of Head Start programs
are providing directly or through referral full-day, full-year services;
support to new populations (immigrant and refugee) and migrant families
has increased; and services to pregnant women and families with
infants and toddlers were initially offered through the Child and
Family Resource Program and the Parent Child Centers, and are currently
being offered through Early Head Start programs. Even with these
changes, Head Start has maintained its initial philosophy, principles,
and goals.
-
Philosophy. The basic philosophy that undergirds
the Head Start program is that children benefit from quality
early childhood experiences and that effective intervention
can best be accomplished through high quality comprehensive
services to children, along with family and community involvement
that addresses the unique needs of children and their families.
-
Principles. Head Start programs are guided
by the following principles:
Comprehensive Services. To develop fully
and to achieve social competence, children and their families
need a comprehensive, interdisciplinary approach to services
including education, health, nutrition, social services, and
parent involvement.
Parent Involvement and Family Focus.
The Head Start program is family centered and is designed
to encourage and support the parent's role as the principal
influence on the child's development and as the child's primary
educator, nurturer, and advocate.
Community Partnerships and Community-Based
Services. Head Start programs are intended to be community-based,
with specific models of service provision flowing out of the
needs of diverse communities.
-
Goals.
Head Start embraces the comprehensive view of school readiness
recommended by the National Education Goals Panel (Kagan, Moore,
& Bredekamp, 1995). This view encompasses five developmental
domains key to school readiness: physical well-being and motor
development; social and emotional development; approaches to
learning; language development and emerging literacy; and cognition
and general knowledge. It takes into account the interrelatedness
of cognitive, emotional, and social development; physical and
mental health; and nutritional needs.
All Head Start programs must meet a set of Program
Performance Standards that define the core services that Head Start
programs are required to provide. The Performance Standards evolved
over time in order to provide operating guidelines and promote quality
in all programs. They were last updated in 1998 and are expected
to be updated periodically to reflect new knowledge about child
development and best practices.
A monitoring and technical assistance effort ensures
that programs are in compliance with the Performance Standards and
are engaged in efforts to continuously improve the quality of services
provided to children as new information and knowledge becomes available
about child development and best practices. The Department expects
all programs to be of high quality or have quality improvement plans
in place. In recent years, the Head Start Bureau has made a special
effort to assist grantees that are deficient in meeting the Program
Performance Standards to improve their service delivery, or if this
is not possible in an allotted time, to terminate their funding.
Since 1993, more than 100 grantees have been terminated or have
relinquished their funding. More than twice that number of grantees
have been provided intensive technical assistance and have achieved
compliance.
While recruitment strategies of individual Head Start
programs vary, all programs develop selection criteria to guide
decisions on which eligible children to enroll in the program and
how to rank remaining families on a waiting list. Selection criteria
such as family income, family size, employment status of parents,
special needs, or risk factors of the child determine who will be
enrolled in the program first. As slots become vacant during the
year, the selection criteria also help to determine which children
from the waiting list are offered an opportunity to enroll.
Based on the unique situation and resources of the
community and the needs of the children and families served, local
Head Start programs are free to vary their practices and approaches,
provided that at a minimum they carry out the philosophy, principles,
and goals of the Head Start program and meet the established Performance
Standards. For example, there is significant variation in the auspices
of Head Start programs (e.g., private nonprofits, for-profits, community
action agencies, public school systems, local governments); models
(e.g., center, home-based, combination, family child care homes
meeting Head Start Performance Standards); scope of service (e.g.,
part-day or full-day, care for 4-year-olds or 3- and 4-year-olds);
penetration (e.g., the proportion of eligible families programs
are serving); curriculum (e.g., Creative Curriculum, High/Scope,
local curricula developed by programs); and other aspects of Head
Start programs (e.g., direct provision of or referral to health,
mental health, and social services, and father involvement initiatives).
This flexibility to shape local programs to best address
the needs of children, their families, and communities is intended
to keep the program relevant in an ever-changing environment. For
example, programs serving new immigrant or refugee populations adapt
the services they provide and their curriculum so that they are
culturally relevant. Programs have implemented family child care
home options that provide Head Start services in a home setting,
with more flexible schedules for working parents. It is expected
that in the future, even more programs will provide full-day, full-year
services either on their own or through partnerships with other
child care providers in the community. When these partnerships occur,
the child care partner will be helped to meet Head Start Performance
Standards to ensure a quality early childhood program.
Thus, all Head Start programs, either directly or
through referral, provide comprehensive education, health, nutrition,
and social services to enrolled children and their families. In
addition, all programs actively engage parents in the governance
and management of the Head Start program and build relationships
with community partners. They all must meet a set of Program Performance
Standards and are provided training and technical assistance to
continually enhance their effectiveness. The opportunity to vary
practices and approaches is simply an attempt to ensure that the
program meets the needs of the children and families in the particular
community.
Early Childhood
Options
Just as Head Start has blossomed, so too have other
options for early childhood services. In 1965 when Head Start began,
children were primarily cared for by parents and family members.
Since that time, there has been an increase in the number of children
with both parents or their single parent working outside the home.
For example, in 1998, 64 percent of married mothers with a child
under age six were in the work force, compared with only 30 percent
in 1970 (U.S. Department of Labor, 1999). This has created a significant
need for other child care options. In particular, the 1990s have
been marked by a significant rise in the number of children in child
care settings, in part due to welfare reform and other changing
family and economic dynamics. In the fall of 1994, roughly 10 million
children under five years of age had mothers in the work force,
of whom 49 percent were cared for by parents or relatives, 29 percent
in center-based programs, 15 percent in family child care homes,
and 5 percent by an in-home caregiver (U.S. Bureau of the Census,
1995).
The Federal government has responded over the years
with investments in a range of child care options. In addition to
the investment in Head Start, the Federal government, through the
Child Care Development Block Grant (CCDBG), provides subsidies to
low-income parents to access the child care services of their choice-from
relative care to center-based care, family child care and the like.
In fiscal year 1997, 1.25 million of 10 million eligible children
received a subsidy.
Further, the Federal government has invested in building
a cadre of credentialed early childhood staff. In 1971 Head Start
developed and began implementation of the Child Development Associate
credentialing program, which guides and then assesses and awards
a credential to early childhood program staff both within and outside
of Head Start. More than 100,000 Child Development Associate credentials
have been awarded, with nearly half to early childhood staff who
are not employees of Head Start, thus influencing the quality of
care provided in many other early childhood programs.
Like the expansion of federal support and resources
for early childhood, states have also made significant changes to
their investment. In 1965 when Head Start began, there were no states
funding center-based early childhood programs. By 1968, four states,
including New York and California, and the District of Columbia,
were beginning initiatives for 3- to 5-year-olds. By 1998, 39 states
were funding prekindergarten programs (Mitchell, Ripple, & Chanana,
1998). Levels of state investments and number of children served
vary, but it is estimated that in 1998-99 approximately $1.4 billion
of state funds were being spent to provide prekindergarten services
to more than 677,000 children in the United States, often with a
focus on children in poverty (Mitchell, Ripple, & Chanana, 1998).
Notably, Georgia and New York offer a universal program for 4-year-old
children, regardless of family income (Ripple, Gilliam, Chanana,
& Zigler, 1999).
Many states have also invested state dollars in Head
Start programs, which have enabled Head Start grantees to serve
additional children and families. Thirteen states appropriate state
funds to supplement the Federal Head Start program (Mitchell, Ripple,
& Chanana, 1998). For example, Ohio provides approximately $90 million
annually for Ohio Head Start, which enables almost 21,000 low-income
children to be served by the program, in addition to the 33,400
children served with Federal Head Start funds (Mitchell, Ripple,
& Chanana, 1998).
Unfortunately, there is little comprehensive information
on the quality of care provided to young children across the country.
Quality of care may vary both within and across different types
of settings. Recent research raises concern that in many instances,
care is poor or minimally acceptable (Cost, Quality and Child Outcomes
Study Team, 1995; NICHD Early Child Care Research Network, in press).
At the same time, studies are revealing better outcomes for children
who attend classrooms that meet professional standards, thus emphasizing
the importance of quality environments (NICHD Early Child Care Research
Network, in press).
Implications
for Research
These changes-the expansion of Head Start, the influence
of the Head Start program and other contributions to the field of
early childhood, and the increase in the number of children in out-of-home
care settings that range from poor to excellent quality-pose a variety
of challenges for research on the impact of Head Start.
-
In some Head Start communities the children who
would comprise a control group or comparison group are already
in other care situations that reflect to varying degrees the
Head Start Program Performance Standards and philosophy. For
example, Ohio provides preschool services either through Head
Start or other state-funded efforts to all low-income children;
Georgia and New York offer universal preschool programs for
4-year-olds; and Oregon and Ohio require individual preschool
programs to follow Head Start Performance Standards (Ripple,
Gilliam, Chanana, & Zigler, 1999). Thus, the care provided in
these settings may be very much like that provided through the
Head Start program. In these cases, an evaluation will not be
able to easily assess the full impact of Head Start by comparing
the two groups of children, because some alternative programs
have been modeled so closely on Head Start.
-
The increase in the number of child care settings
of extremely varied quality, suggests the possibility of impacts
that vary depending on the type and quality of child care, prekindergarten,
and other settings in which control group children are enrolled.
-
A final complicating factor is that many children
are in multiple care settings. For example, they may be in Head
Start for a portion of the day and then in at least one other
care setting for the remainder of the day while their parents
work. Recent research on Head Start families illustrates that
prior to Head Start enrollment, 49.3 percent of children had
been in child care over 10 hours per week. Concurrent with Head
Start attendance, 28.1 percent of children were also in child
care over 10 hours per week (O'Brien, D'Elio, & Keane, 1999).
These changes create challenges for designing
and implementing a study of Head Start impact. But with careful
planning and ongoing consideration of these issues, members of the
Committee believe a design or designs could be implemented to successfully
address these concerns, especially as they relate to identifying
and maintaining control groups or comparison groups as defined by
Congress4.
|
