Children in foster care need more than just a child care slot

The Trump administration has proposed major changes to how Head Start programs enroll children, structure classrooms, provide health and family services, and ensure the quality of the services children receive. Head Start currently provides more than 700,000 children across the U.S. with early education embedded within a broader system of health, developmental, and family engagement support.

Although the overall impacts of Head Start participation remain a subject of debate, there is reason to believe that many children benefit from attending Head Start. This is particularly true for children in foster care: For them and others in nonparental care, there is solid evidence that participation in Head Start leads to improvements in academic skills and fewer behavioral problems. Other research points to longer-term developmental and health benefits, including stronger social skills and more-positive approaches to learning, for these children.

The federal Administration for Children and Families (ACF), which oversees Head Start, has made improving the foster care system a key priority. The proposed overhaul of Head Start maintains children in foster care’s categorical eligibility for the program and aims to remove barriers around attendance and program capacity that could limit their access. But getting children in the door is only half of the challenge. Proposed changes also weaken protections that help children remain enrolled and requirements that support program quality and service coordination, compromising the very features of Head Start that children in foster care may need most.

Currently, too few children in foster care participate in Head Start

ACF is right to ask whether federal rules make it harder to serve the needs of children in foster care and their families. Despite the documented benefits of Head Start, only about 1 in 5 young children in foster care participate in the program.¹ Our team looked into why this is. We surveyed over 100 child care providers and spoke with dozens of foster parents, faith-based leaders, and state officials about how to best serve the early care and learning needs of young children in foster care, including through Head Start. 

Many foster families told us they would gladly take more children into their homes if they could be certain that they could quickly find and sustain quality child care for them. We also heard that the realities of foster care sometimes don’t align with how Head Start programs operate. A child can enter a foster home with little notice at any point in the year. Foster parents often need full-day care so they can work outside the home. Children may miss days for family visits, court proceedings, therapies, or placement transitions. Head Start programs, though, may have no open slots midyear, typically operate with shorter days and school-year schedules, or have attendance requirements that make it difficult to accommodate children in foster care’s unique schedules.

The proposed changes include several efforts to decrease costs and burden for programs, including removing federal group size and ratio requirements and reducing some administrative requirements around attendance. ACF estimates that savings from the proposed changes could allow programs to serve more children, potentially expanding access for children in foster care.

Yet these same changes that aim to reduce costs also have implications for the safety and quality of care Head Start children receive, especially when coupled with reductions in other requirements that support program quality through teacher coaching, and staff qualifications. For children in foster care, changes to current discipline regulations and support for service coordination are especially concerning, because they undermine the continuity and comprehensiveness that make Head Start especially valuable for this group of children.

Removing prohibitions on suspension and expulsion could make it difficult for children in foster care to remain enrolled

The proposed changes would eliminate Head Start rules that sharply limit suspension and prohibit programs from expelling children because of their behavior. Instead, programs would be permitted to establish their own disciplinary policies, subject to state and local requirements.

Young children in foster care may enter programs carrying the effects of trauma, disrupted relationships, and repeated transitions. These can manifest as challenging behaviors in the classroom. Removing a child from a program because of their behavior does not address their underlying needs but adds yet another disruption in a life that has already known too many.

Head Start should retain strong protections against suspension and expulsion and help programs respond to challenging behavior with the developmental and mental health supports children in foster care need to be successful in school and their communities.

Removing guidance on coordination of services could increase burden on foster parents

The proposed changes would also remove federal guidance on how Head Start programs coordinate with local agencies and community organizations serving foster families and children. Such coordination is essential to the comprehensiveness of Head Start services.

State and local early childhood systems are far stronger than they were when Head Start began in the 1960s, but effective coordination does not happen automatically. Head Start programs and child welfare agencies need practical systems for referrals, information sharing, and transitions so that children in foster care don’t lose services when their circumstances change.

Access and continuity of services is only part of the challenge. In our conversations with other public and private community-based and faith-based child care providers, we repeatedly heard how difficult it is for them to meet the range of needs children in foster care bring.

For example, one program may provide a safe and nurturing classroom but lack systems and staffing to coordinate with child welfare agencies, therapists, caseworkers, and families when a child’s circumstances suddenly change. Another provider may be deeply connected to foster families in the community but lack staff with the needed expertise in mental health or developmental disabilities to integrate children in foster care into their classrooms.

Head Start is different. Its value for children in foster care is not simply that it provides another child care option. It’s that Head Start brings early learning together with health, mental health, developmental, and family supports within a single program. Maintaining federal support for this coordination and allowing for associated administrative expenses is essential.

Head Start can become more accessible without losing what makes it so helpful for children in foster care

For young children whose lives have been shaped by adversity and instability, Head Start’s comprehensiveness and continuity matters. For foster parents trying to navigate child welfare agencies, courts, health care providers, therapists, schools, and other systems, asking them to assemble those supports themselves is an inadequate substitute for Head Start’s coordinated services. And for all Head Start children, including those in foster care, the proposed changes to remove federal requirements around group size and ratios, teacher coaching, quality monitoring, and staff qualifications risk weakening important mechanisms Head Start programs use to support the quality classroom experiences that help children succeed.

It is reasonable to examine whether Head Start regulations continue to best serve the needs of children and families. Yet, given ACF’s commitment to supporting children in foster care, it is critical to distinguish between regulations that create unnecessary barriers and the standards and infrastructure that make Head Start such an important resource for foster families.

As it develops a final rule, ACF should preserve greater flexibility where it improves access and continuity while maintaining protections against suspension and expulsion, comprehensive services and coordination, and strong supports for instructional quality and staff expertise. The goal should not simply be to create more slots for children in foster care, but to ensure that when they arrive, they receive the supports they need to thrive.