Use Your Voice: Comment to Support Head Start and Early Head Start Children and Families

Since 1998, MCC has provided Early Head Start (EHS) programming. We serve 300 families a year in South Philadelphia, Norristown, and Pottstown.

The Office of Head Start has published concerning revisions to Head Start and Early Start Head programs. These revisions:

• Eliminate proven interventions
• Weaken accountability
• Undermine the comprehensive model defining Head Start for decades

Low-income children will feel the impact. MCC believes that all children deserve the best start possible, and that includes consistent, high-quality early education, health, disability, nutrition, and family-support services.  

To support Head Start and Early Head Start children and families, submit a comment! See below for template messaging, including more detailed messaging about the 6 most concerning proposed revisions. The public comment period for these revisions ends on October 6, 2026. Supporters of Head Start and Early Head Start have an opportunity to tell the federal government how these proposed changes will harm children and families. 
 

TEMPLATE PUBLIC COMMENT MESSAGE
  
As an advocate for children and families, I strongly oppose the Office of Head Start’s proposed rule to rescind and replace the Head Start Program Performance Standards. This proposal would weaken accountability, reduce federal consistency, and undermine the comprehensive services that children and families rely on.  

Head Start and Early Head Start are more than childcare. They are comprehensive programs  that connect families to early learning, health screenings, nutrition, disability supports, prenatal supports, and family services that help young children thrive and promote family well-being. These standards are essential protections, not unnecessary red tape. Weakening these supports puts infants, toddlers, young children, and families at risk.    

Shifting too much responsibility to state or local discretion would create uneven access to critical services. Families should not lose vital supports because federal standards are weakened.  

I urge the Administration for Children and Families and the Office of Head Start to withdraw this proposed rule and preserve strong, comprehensive, federally consistent standards. Children and families deserve a stronger Head Start system—not weakened protections.  

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO INCLUDE IN PUBLIC COMMENT

1. Proposed Revision: Reduce the administrative cost cap from 15% to 5%.  

Your message:  

I strongly oppose the proposed reduction of the administrative cost cap from 15% to 5%. Research from the Urban Institute demonstrates that increasing public investment per child is associated with more positive child outcomes for development, education, and health, and that early childhood investments in high-quality early interventions have long-term returns on investment for economies and society overall. The new administrative cap will make it impossible for many programs to operate effectively, resulting in reduced quality, shorter care hours, layoffs, and even shuttered programs. Reducing the resources that support those functions could make it harder for programs to provide the child care parents need, at the times they need, or the quality services children and families depend on. It will also have spillover effects on local economies. Rather than imposing an arbitrary cap that may weaken essential safeguards, the Office of Head Start should reduce administrative burden by eliminating duplicative forms and reporting requirements.  

2. Proposed Revision: Require classroom instruction only in English.  

Your Message:  

I strongly oppose the proposed revision requiring classroom instruction only in English. The proposal would limit educators’ ability to build on the languages, experiences, cultural and family background, and strengths that children bring with them. Language restrictions limit communication, undermining kids’ ability to participate in the classroom and parents’ ability to participate in their children’s learning. Babies and toddlers learn best when teaching connects to what they already know and helps them develop new skills, including English learning, from that foundation. Programs should be accountable for helping every child develop English proficiency, while allowing educators to use proven strategies including context, repetition, visuals, routines, gestures, and a child’s home language to support learning and understanding. Programs must also communicate essential safety, screening, and referral information to families in a language they understand.  

3.  Proposed Revision: Replace Head Start’s specific disability-services requirements with a general instruction to comply with existing federal and state law.  

Your Message:  

I strongly oppose replacing Head Start’s specific disability-service requirements. Head Start classrooms provide a critical opportunity to identify developmental concerns early, giving families time to seek evaluations, adapt learning environments, and connect children with appropriate services before kindergarten. Maintaining clear, specific requirements is not about labeling children; it is about ensuring programs consistently help families secure legally available supports when early intervention can make the greatest difference.  

4. Proposed Revision: Remove specific requirements around health, mental health, dental, vision, and developmental screenings and related family support.  

Your Message:  

I strongly oppose removing Head Start’s specific requirements for health, mental health, dental, vision, and developmental screenings and related family supports. The proposal removes clear expectations and services for health and dental care, developmental checks, follow-up, and early intervention. When a child has a developmental, health, emotional, or behavioral challenge, intervening early has the greatest impact. When concerns are missed or help is delayed, children can lose valuable time to get the support they need to learn and grow, costing more in the long term. Screenings help educators differentiate health concerns versus a behavioral or learning delay. Head Start does not need to provide every service directly, but it must retain clear responsibility for identifying barriers and connecting families to appropriate care, because ready to learn means able to learn. These supports work. In Pennsylvania, while only 53% of EHS children were up to date on appropriate preventive and primary health care at the start of enrollment, this number rose to 70% at the end of enrollment (accounting for an increase in 5,775 children who were up to date on health care). Additionally, in Pennsylvania among the 2,937 Head Start classroom teachers, home visitors, and family child care providers, nearly half (1,447) received assistance from a mental health consultant during the 2024-2025 program year.  

5. Proposed Revision: Eliminate federal staffing ratios in favor of state licensing standards, and reduce required program hours and days.  

I strongly oppose eliminating federal staffing ratios in favor of state licensing standards and reducing required program hours and days. Young children need individual attention and responsive relationships as well as safe learning environments. The proposal would allow more children and fewer adults in infant classrooms in 15 states and toddler classrooms in as many as 48 states, removing safeguards on adult-to-child ratios and group sizes. Local flexibility should expand options for serving children, not reduce the quality, consistency, or amount of care they receive. A substantial body of research confirms that lower ratios and smaller group sizes are critical to infant and toddler development, producing healthier and safer learning environments, stronger language and vocabulary outcomes, richer teacher-child interactions, fewer behavior problems, and better school readiness.  

In Pennsylvania, childcare licensing laws set the maximum staff-to-child ratio as one adult for every five toddlers ages 13-24 months, and every six toddlers age 25-36 months. By comparison, Early Head Start programs require at least one adult for every 4 children under age 3. Lowering standards to meet state licensing laws in Pennsylvania means that children would have less individualized support, less supervision, and fewer opportunities for rich teacher child interactions.    

6. Proposed Revision: Removes federal requirements governing the number and length of home visits, group socializations, and home visitor caseloads.  

 Your Message:  

The proposal removes the requirements that make home visiting programs effective, including caseload, staff training, and visit frequency requirements that help families build close relationships. Research shows that the home-based option provides powerful impacts on child and family outcomes longitudinally.  

Families could receive less consistent support for child development and family well-being at a time when building strong parent-child relationships matters most.