Head Start could soon be overhauled. Here’s exactly what would change.

A new proposed rule released last week put more than 1,400 regulatory provisions that govern how Head Start is implemented on the chopping block. Across the country, 1,600 Head Start grant recipients provide quality care for disadvantaged children, as well as support for families by connecting them to health insurance, job training, developmental screenings, specialist referrals and postpartum support.

This latest proposal is aimed at cutting red tape and allowing more flexibility in the programs, the administration said.

“There’s 1,600 providers across the country facing different conditions, and our proposed rule will reduce their paperwork. It will streamline duplicative statutory requirements and give them flexibility for things like personnel and workforce decisions, as well as licensing relief,” said Alex Adams, the assistant secretary at the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), on a call with reporters.

But Head Start providers and experts say the proposal may actually make it harder for programs to operate and transform Head Start to look more like commercial childcare than an anti-poverty program.

“Families lose the assurance that Head Start means the same thing everywhere, and taxpayers lose a clear measure of impact that Head Start funding should have,” said Celena Roldan Sarillo, the president of Start Early, a nonprofit that advocates for quality early learning.

Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said on a call with reporters to announce the changes that “it is important to protect” Head Start, which is administered by HHS and was created in part by Kennedy’s uncle Sargent Shriver during the Lyndon B. Johnson administration. Kennedy wants to see more nutrition and physical activity requirements added to Head Start, and agrees the new rules could streamline it and open seats for more children.

That messaging, however, is misleading, said Yvette Sanchez Fuentes, the senior vice president at Start Early.

“At first glance, these proposed changes might not seem so terrible, but as you dig deeper into it, what we will find is that there really are a lot of changes that will impact what is the heart of Head Start,” Sanchez Fuentes said, adding that the performance standards are not just red tape, “they really are the foundation for how we ensure that programs across the country are supporting children, families and communities in the way that they want best.”

Here is a breakdown of what the administration is proposing to change for Head Start.

Overall, how is this proposal changing Head Start? 

Fundamentally, the changes would have Head Start operate much more like other childcare centers under state and local rules. Because quality is such an important benchmark in Head Start, its rules are more stringent than the rules governing other childcare options — in many places, those differences would disappear.

“States didn’t design their childcare programs to serve the population that Head Start serves. They design those to regulate private businesses and set a floor for safety, like they regulate hospitals or restaurants, not to prepare a high-need community for school,” said Katie Hamm, who oversaw the Head Start program under the Biden administration.

Are there any immediate impacts to my child’s Head Start program? 

No. The public has until October 6 to comment on the proposed rule before HHS reviews the comments and issues a final rule. That review process can take time — months or longer — in addition to any legal challenges that may arise, so it’s unlikely, though not impossible, for changes to happen this year.

How would classrooms change? 

One of the biggest changes in the proposal is eliminating Head Start’s teacher-to-student ratios. One of Head Start’s quality initiatives is that it offers more individualized care — each teacher is in charge of a smaller number of students than in most other childcare settings. The policy is both about safety and support for low-income kids, some of whom need more focused attention.

Under the proposed changes, an estimated 80 percent of children currently in Head Start would be subject to worse ratios. The maximum number of toddlers per teacher would more than double in nine states: Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nevada, North Carolina and Texas.

The proposal also removes the cap on group sizes, so it’s likely classrooms would have more children.

Another big change: All instruction will have to take place in English instead of offering bilingual support to children who are not native speakers. More than a quarter of children in Head Start come from homes where a language other than English is spoken.

The only exception is for Head Start programs on Tribal lands.

Are there any changes that impact health and safety? 

Yes.

Detailed requirements on how to prevent lead exposure are gone and replaced with a broader requirement that programs prevent children from being exposed to lead in water and paint in however way they see fit.

A requirement that a bus monitor be on board any buses transporting children at all times has also been removed.

Other detailed rules on facilities, safety training, hygiene, disaster preparedness and equipment and materials are also gone; instead programs are instructed to follow state laws in those areas.

Is discipline changing under the new regulations? 

Currently, children generally cannot be expelled from Head Start. The proposed rule would remove that prohibition and allow programs to set their own disciplinary rules, as long as they align with state and local requirements. Head Start would still need to provide children with any behavioral problems with screenings and referral services.

The administration said it made these changes because when the expulsion and suspension rules were first implemented in 2016, many states did not have their own rules governing those issues. Since then, many states have adopted their own.

“These proposed changes are not an endorsement of suspension and expulsion as approaches to address persistent and serious behavioral concerns; rather, the intent is to allow programs to determine their own discipline policies, within the context of state and local licensing requirements,” the rule says.

Are there changes related to health support? 

Head Start typically offers a variety of mental health and health screenings as part of its program requirements. For example, within 30 days of enrollment, programs have to check that a family has insurance or ongoing medical care; within 45 days it needs to check for or conduct vision and hearing screenings; within 90 days, it needs to check on whether children have immunizations up to date, have had their well-child pediatrician checkup and had dental visits. Programs also require that children brush their teeth at school. All of those specific requirements are gone under the proposed rule.

Many mental health supports, such as a monthly mental health consultation, would go away.

So while the requirement from the Head Start Act — that programs support families with a comprehensive array of health services — remains, the set rules on how to achieve that, like the timeline requirements, disappear. Advocates say this could lead to inconsistent care and less accountability.

How does this impact children with disabilities? 

Similarly, the proposed rules require that Head Start programs comply with all applicable federal and state regulations in providing services to children with disabilities, but eliminates much of the structure for how to provide those services.

What about impacts on unhoused children? 

The proposed rule removes a provision that allows families experiencing homelessness to simply confirm their situation and thus qualify for Head Start. Families that are unhoused may also be in situations where they are living with someone else or in a temporary structure — situations they could rarely prove through documentation.

Under the new rules, families and children would have to provide some documentation.

Would newborn and pregnancy services be impacted? 

Yes. Early Head Start, which services low-income pregnant people and children under the age of 3, would lose a lot of tailored requirements. Newborn home visits would still be required, for example, but the requirement that they happen within two weeks of birth was dropped.

Also gone is a requirement around addressing racial and ethnic disparities in birth outcomes. Currently, programs must track demographic data on pregnant people, identify any disparities and provide services to close those gaps. The administration said cutting that requirement is in line with its mission to cut back on diversity, equity and inclusion programs, and claims programs said it was beyond the scope of what they could reasonably be expected to do.

Would parent involvement change? 

Possibly.

The way Head Start works now, parents are actively engaged with much of the decision making at individual centers. Each center is required to have a parent committee that has power in advising the school on activities, policies and services, and the regulations determine how those must function.

Under the proposed rule, those committees would be optional, and the rules that govern how they operate would also be eliminated, which the administration said were designed to give programs more flexibility.

Are there any new rules being suggested? 

Yes, and they largely have to do with nutrition and physical activity.

Programs will be required to offer 30 minutes of physical activity, ideally outside, for every three and a half hours of classroom instruction. That would expand the existing general requirement that programs “recognize physical activity as important to learning and integrate intentional movement and physical activity into curricular activities and daily routines.”

The current Head Start regulations require that programs generally fulfill a third to a half of children’s daily nutritional needs with meals at Head Start. Three- to 5-year-olds must get healthy meals and snacks that conform to U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) guidelines, and meals should be culturally appropriate as well as developmentally appropriate — infants and toddlers are fed according to their individual needs and readiness.

Under the new proposal, they will also be required to offer nutrient-dense whole foods within the framework of the USDA Child and Adult Care Food Program meal standard, ensuring that “all the meals are aligned with the dietary guidelines,” Kennedy said.

What is the new addition around “healthy marriage”?

One of the less-talked-about additions the administration is proposing is providing educational material to children that “demonstrates healthy marriage as a positive good,” in concert with new strategies to engage parents in their kids’ learning, and particularly fathers, the rule says.

“This proposed change to current requirements reflects ACF’s commitment to supporting strong families as the cornerstone of a healthy society,” the administration said.

If the rule is finalized, do programs have to adhere to it? 

It’s unclear.

Adams emphasized that programs can continue to operate as they currently are if they wish to. In the areas where the administration is adding new requirements, however, such as nutrition and physical activity, programs would have to make changes.

“If a program likes its ratio, it can keep its ratio. If a program likes its group size, it can keep its group size. This does not require them to do anything different. As I said, flexibility is permission; it’s not a mandate,” Adams said.

But the actual regulations that would be part of the final rule — the final 13 pages of what was released last week — don’t specify that most of this is optional.

“If they truly mean, for example, a program can decide to keep the ratios that exist in the regulations today, the regulation should say that. It should say programs have a choice,” Hamm said. “It doesn’t say that, and so that’s a problem for a lot of reasons.”

Head Start centers receive grants from the federal government to offer services — it’s unclear what assurance there is that the administration will offer grants to programs that choose to adhere to prior rules.

There’s already some evidence HHS could target programs it deems to be in misalignment with  the Trump administration. Earlier this year, the agency tried to withhold funding to Head Start programs that used words like “women” and “race” in their grant applications, what it perceived to be diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives that have been a target of the administration.

Head Start programs in Illinois, Pennsylvania, Washington and Wisconsin sued and a judge granted them a preliminary injunction, blocking the Trump administration from cutting funding while the case is litigated.

“When grants get negotiated or when there are grant competitions, and HHS is selecting a grantee, they have a lot of power in that,” Hamm said. “Oftentimes, a Head Start grant feels like they need to comply with what’s being asked of them.”

Why is the administration pursuing these changes? 

Since the start of the Trump administration, Head Start has faced upheaval.

Project 2025, the policy blueprint for President Donald Trump’s second term, advised eliminating the program, claiming it lacked positive outcomes and was rife with abuse. A leaked White House budget in early 2025 showed the administration was hoping to eliminate it altogether before massive backlash from Head Start parents and alumni persuaded the administration to change course.

But programs continued to face financial challenges. Funding was cut off at the start of 2025 as part of a government-wide freeze, leading some to close their doors. Then in April of last year, the administration closed five of the 10 regional offices that support Head Start programs.

Last summer, the administration released a proposed rule that would bar undocumented children from Head Start entirely. The proposal is on pause due to ongoing litigation.

Adams said the goal of the proposed rule is to provide flexibility in the program, not dismantle it.

“In broad strokes, what we are trying to accomplish is we built this rule around trusting local leaders to make the decisions that are best for their local communities,” he said.

If the changes were enacted across programs, the administration estimates a savings of $2.2 billion that would be reinvested in the program to open as many as 236,000 new Head Start spots. There is no national repository of waitlist data on Head Start, though programs are required to be filled and maintain an active waiting list.

“We’re trying to ensure that programs have the flexibility not just to meet their community needs, but to start clearing out some of their waitlists, ensuring more children are served,” Adams said.

How could these changes impact childcare staff? 

The administration is proposing a reduction in how much money programs can spend on administrative overhead, lowering it from 15 percent to 5 percent.

The justification, Adams said, is “so that more money is reaching children and families, and less is going to administrative overhead, like administrator salaries or administrative offices.”

But childcare providers have argued that the reduction will actually mean less money to operate Head Start — money that goes to things like buses and human resources, or to conduct background checks and fix the refrigerator when it breaks.

“Don’t believe that somehow that 15 percent makes our Head Start directors rich. It does not. Everyone I know in Head Start, including myself, has never become rich from being a Head Start employee,” said Lori Pittman, the co-founder of the Washington State Parent Ambassador Program and a former Head Start parent.

By the administration’s own analysis, the changes could lead to a reduction in teaching staff at centers across the country. Other workforces that would be hit: home visit staff, health and mental health personnel, child development specialists and bus monitoring staff.

Is there any new money for Head Start under the proposal? 

No. Funding for Head Start has remained flat for the past three years — about $12 billion — even though operating costs and inflation have risen.

How can I comment on the regulations? 

Comments in the federal registrar can be submitted here. The open comment period will close October 6.

SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX.