Head Start Works, but the Trump Administration Is Undermining It

Head Start is an essential early childhood education and holistic support program, serving many of the nation’s most vulnerable and lowest-income families, including those with children experiencing homelessness or in foster care. Head Start’s ability to deliver its gold-standard services by mitigating poverty and improving long-term outcomes depends on comprehensive performance standards. These standards offer a standardized framework for grantees to ensure eligibility, service delivery, and high-quality care, promoting the program’s consistent and well-documented positive impacts across communities nationwide.

However, in August 2026, the Trump administration proposed a rule that would repeal most of Head Start’s standards, threatening service quality, program enrollment, staffing, and disability screenings while also mandating English-only services—with an exception for Tribal programs—and adding barriers to access for vulnerable families. The rule also proposes linking existing federal standards to basic state licensing rules, a move that risks undermining Head Start’s core mission of delivering high-quality early education and comprehensive support, as state licensing standards are not typically designed to optimize the learning environment, but rather to ensure basic health and safety.

In a public comment submitted to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Center for American Progress urged the full withdrawal of the proposed rule to preserve Head Start’s existing standards. This article details the risks posed by the rule, connects nearly two years of Trump administration threats to the present-day objective of the proposed rule, and provides recommendations for lawmakers to take that would safeguard Head Start and ensure it reaches all eligible children and their families.

The Trump administration has a history of attacking Head Start

The Trump administration has systematically undermined Head Start for nearly two years through targeted measures aligned with the Project 2025 goal of eliminating the program:

• Attempted funding freeze: The administration moved to halt funding across multiple federal initiatives, including Head Start, in January 2025.
• Workforce reductions: Personnel at the Administration for Children and Families who are responsible for issuing grants, administrative oversight, and technical support for Head Start providers faced widespread layoffs in February 2025.
• Regional office closures: The administration closed half of the country’s regional Head Start offices in April 2025, severely limiting technical assistance for local grantees.
• Leaked budget proposing program elimination: A leaked presidential budget in April 2025 omitted funding for Head Start, though the administration later backpedaled.
• Attempted restrictions on services and eligibility: In March, July, and December 2025, officials executed a series of targeted policies to curb specialized support for underserved groups. These included restricting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives; banning specific terms in grantee applications, training, and operational materials; and seeking to implement unprecedented citizenship mandates.
• Efforts to dismantle performance standards: A notice of proposed rulemaking in August 2026 sought to repeal essential federal performance benchmarks, undermining the core regulatory architecture that maintains program quality, consistency, and compliance across the nation.

Together, these regulatory and policy decisions reflect an unwavering stance toward Head Start—a trajectory ultimately designed to lead to its elimination.

Proposed rule change would lead to job losses, reductions in health services, and rising child care costs

The administration’s proposed rule to rescind most Head Start performance standards threatens program quality, financial stability, and long-term viability while risking broader impacts on health systems, child care infrastructure, and the economy:

• Job losses could total nearly 40,000 due to projected staffing cuts that target wraparound support services, such as home visiting.
• Pay cuts of 6 to 9 percent could affect program directors, fiscal officers, support staff directly assisting families, and home-based family child care providers.
• Increased class workloads of up to 32 percent more children per teacher could be imposed without additional pay, despite new research demonstrating that early educators view regulations regarding class sizes, ratios, and qualifications as essential.
• A loss of services for nearly 8 percent of currently enrolled children, per HHS, could occur due to the removal of self-attestation for eligibility verification, creating barriers for families experiencing homelessness in particular.
• Direct cuts of up to $167 million in health services provided through Head Start are outlined under the rule.
• Added annual child care expenses averaging $625 per child could fall on families forced to seek alternative care as program operating schedules and available hours are reduced.

Vulnerable communities bear the biggest burdens under the proposed Head Start rule

Head Start plays an essential role nationwide across all states, the District of Columbia, Tribal nations, and territories. However, access is uneven:

• While an estimated 80 percent of eligible urban children have some access to a Head Start slot, less than 50 percent of eligible rural children do.
• Still, Head Start fills critical gaps, serving 5.9 percent of eligible rural children lacking other licensed care compared with 4.5 percent of urban children.*
• Nationally, children in rural communities make up an estimated 20 percent of income-eligible children under age 5 but 73 percent of those for whom Head Start is the only licensed child care option available.*

While losing access to Head Start services would be devastating for rural families, the proposed rule would also disproportionately harm children with disabilities, children experiencing homelessness, and dual language learners, who face an added English-only mandate.

Moreover, it dismantles Head Start’s health and safety standards by shifting authority to states and eliminating national mandates for group sizes and child-to-teacher ratios. These national standards ensure responsive, individualized learning, whereas state licensing rules only set a basic safety floor. In a recent survey of the early education field, providers reported viewing standards—particularly those related to group sizes, ratios, and educator qualifications—as important, warning that weakening these requirements could drive educators from the field.

The families who rely on Head Start services are among those least able to absorb the notoriously high cost of child care, which can mount to tens of thousands of dollars annually. Yet under the administration’s proposed rule, between reductions in program duration, restrictions on access via self-attestation, and other barriers to care, Head Start families could face new child care costs ranging from $300 annually per child in Mississippi to more than $1,200 annually per child in Washington, D.C., with a nationwide average of approximately $625. While costs across the rest of the economy—from health care and food to housing and energy—continue to rise, new child care expenses could mean deep financial precarity for these already vulnerable families.

Policy recommendations

There are several steps that Congress can take to ensure that Head Start is protected from this and future attacks and is equipped with the guidance and resources necessary to deliver its high-quality services to the vulnerable families who depend on them:

• Lawmakers should consider options to publicly defend Head Start and prevent changes to the program performance standards underlying its documented success.
• Lawmakers should draw on the robust body of research from both the academic and Head Start communities to codify the program’s best practices into statute. These include timely developmental screenings and early intervention; access for categorically eligible families; full-day, full-year services; strong standards for health and safety; and strong workforce qualifications and support.
• Lawmakers should significantly expand federal funding for Head Start programs to ensure they can meet their statutory mandates and reach all eligible children and families.

Conclusion

High-quality child care generates major benefits for families, educators, and the economy. However, Head Start—the gold standard for early education—faces ongoing attacks that threaten its mission of mitigating poverty, supporting families, and promoting children’s developmental and academic outcomes. The latest proposed rule from the Trump administration, in keeping with its history of attacks on Head Start, serves to weaken performance standards, risking job losses, health cuts, and higher child care costs for the nation’s most vulnerable families. The early childhood field needs champions to defend these standards, protect access, and secure vital funding for Head Start so all children can succeed.

The authors would like to thank Jocelyn Moreno for her thorough fact-checking and review of this article.

*Authors’ note: Data analysis is on file with the authors.