The Trump administration has initiated a significant effort to deregulate Head Start, the long-standing federal preschool and child care program that has historically supported tens of millions of low-income children. On August 5, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced that his agency is pursuing a sweeping rollback of much of the more than 100 pages of federal rules currently governing the multibillion-dollar program. The administration contends that these changes will streamline operations and cut red tape while potentially expanding the number of children enrolled in the program.
The proposed 75-page rule, which was officially published in the Federal Register on August 7, targets a wide array of existing requirements. Among the items on the chopping block are mandates for school bus monitors, requirements to keep class sizes small, and rules that help children brush their teeth daily. Additionally, the proposal seeks to remove requirements for conducting screenings for children with disabilities, as well as existing mandates regarding pay parity for staff and a ban on expelling students. However, the proposal is not entirely focused on deregulation. It introduces new directives, including a requirement that English become the primary language of instruction, with students who speak a different first language expected to learn it while enrolled. The rule also includes new dietary guidelines and a mandate for 30 minutes of physical activity for every 3.5 hours of classroom instruction.
The administration's approach has generated bipartisan pushback in Congress, including notable wariness from members of the president’s own party. Senator Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, told reporters that she has been hearing concerns from Head Start providers in her home state. "That’s something that we’re monitoring," she said. Senator Thom Tillis, R-North Carolina, expressed skepticism regarding the breadth of the deregulation. While he noted that he explored reforms to the program at the state level during his time as speaker of his state’s legislature, he cautioned against a broad approach. "Just walking away and turning a blind eye toward it, I don't think that'd be a good idea," he stated. Senator Jim Justice, R-West Virginia, also urged caution, acknowledging that while the program already helps a significant number of children, any changes must be carefully considered. "When we start tweaking with stuff, a lot of times we can make it better," he said. "But there are ways we can make it worse, too."
Defending the initiative, Alex Adams, a deputy to Kennedy who runs the Administration for Children and Families, stressed on a recent call with reporters that providers will still be subject to state and local regulations. He argued that the move provides flexibility rather than a mandate, noting that fewer federal rules do not mean providers should ignore what works for them. "Flexibility is permission. It’s not a mandate," Adams said. Conversely, Senator Patty Murray, D-Washington, offered sharp criticism of the plan. "They’re saying they might be able to serve more children by promising each child less," she said, adding that "President Trump has all but declared war on Head Start."
Senator Bill Cassidy, the chairman of the Senate health and education committee, which holds jurisdiction over the program, said he is currently discussing the proposed changes with his staff. As of August 6, he noted that he had not yet fully delved into the details of the proposal. "I’d like to see what they actually put out," he told reporters. Because the regulatory process is still in its early stages, stakeholders anticipate a 60-day public comment period. Khari Garvin, who ran the Office of Head Start during the Biden administration, emphasized that there is still an opportunity for families and teachers to have their voices heard. "No one should surrender and feel like, well, all is done," Garvin said, noting that the proposal may ultimately face challenges in court.
