Sacramento Head Start Alumni Association

NAEYC Special Update

Feb 07, 2003

NAEYC Special Update
February 5, 2003

PRESIDENT'S BUDGET REQUEST CUTS OPPORTUNITIES FOR YOUNG CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES
Yesterday, President Bush released his budget request for fiscal year
2004 (October 1, 2003 - September 30, 2004). The Administration's
budget for Fiscal Year 2004 proposes significant cuts or freezes in the
amount of funding compared to last year in programs that are helping many
more young children get a strong foundation for learning and
development:

*Child Care and Development Block Grant has been frozen at fiscal year
FY 02 level, even though federal child care subsidies currently serve
only one out of seven eligible children.

*Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) has been frozen at last
year's level, and the proposal calls for increasing the TANF work
requirement from 30 to 40 hours per week - which will increase the demand
for federal child care subsidies through CCDBG.

*Early Childhood Educator Professional Development Grants frozen at FY
02 level
*Early Learning Opportunities Act - designed to help communities create
a more comprehensive, high-quality system of early childhood education
- would be eliminated.

*21st Century Community Learning Centers - which provide after-school
enrichment and academic programs for children who would otherwise be
home alone - have been cut by $400 million (40 percent reduction.)

*Title II, teacher quality grants in No Child Left Behind frozen at
last year's level
*Preschool grants through the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act (IDEA) have been frozen at last year's level.
*IDEA Part B $1 billion increase
*IDEA Part C infants and toddlers increased $10 million
*IDEA preschool grants frozen at last year's level
*Even Start $25 million cut
*Reading First $50 million increase
*Early Reading First $25 million increase
*Title I of No Child Left Behind, $1 billion increase, although NCLB
Act calls for $6.15 billion more this year
Title III, bilingual education in No Child Left Behind, frozen at last
year's level
*Over 40 programs in the US Dept. of Education eliminated, including
the Elementary and Secondary School Counseling grants, Javits
Gifted/Talented, Comprehensive School Reform, Star Schools distance learning, and
the OERI Regional labs

In addition, the budget request would allow states to block grant
Medicaid and CHIP and be able to reduce the range of health services and
access to care.

NAEYC's press release included the following: "This budget proposal is
a national shame, and should be rejected by Congress immediately," said
Mark Ginsberg, Ph.D., Executive Director of the National Association
for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). "Early childhood education
is severely under-funded, and states are already making cuts. If the
President's budget is not improved, the results will be devastating,
especially for young children from low-income families."

HEAD START REAUTHORIZATION DETAILS RELEASED
In a press release published yesterday, the Administration outlined
more fully the details of its Head Start reauthorization. The President's
budget documents provide an increase of $148 million for FY 2004
(inflation) and would move Head Start to the US Department of Education.

Here is a summary of the proposal:
*States can apply to receive Head Start and then consolidate the funds
from Head Start, IDEA (special ed) preschool grants, state prek, Title
I prek, and CCDBG in exchange for meeting certain accountability
requirements. States must submit a state plan for approval to the Secretary
of Health and Human Services and the Secretary of Education that

*State must work with the public schools at the state or local level to
develop the skills and behaviors that children must possess to perform
well in kindergarten.

*States will develop and implement a set of guidelines for use by
individual programs to develop these skills and behaviors during the
preschool years. The skills and behaviors should include: language
development; pre-reading skills including phonological awareness, letter
knowledge, and vocabulary; numeracy; and social and emotional competence.
(There is no mention in the proposal of the Head Start performance standards
or outcomes framework.)

*States must develop and implement an accountability program that shows
how children in individual programs are performing relative to the
skills and behaviors identified by the state as prerequisites for effective
kindergarten performance. These results will be made public.

*States must cover at least as many Head Start eligible 3 and 4 year
olds (but not necessarily in a Head Start program) as currently served in
the state. The plan would identify funding levels spent on state
preschool and Head Start in the previous fiscal year, and assure it will
maintain those funds. State must provide comprehensive services, but the
proposal does not list for whom or which services. States should
ensure that all their preschool programs are coordinated with the Medicaid
and State Child Health Insurance Program as well as with social service
programs that provide help to poor and low-income families.

*States will provide information on their plan for assuring
professional development opportunities for preschool teachers and administrators,
but the proposal does not call for more funding for professional
development.

*A portion of the current Technical Assistance funds in Head Start
($165 million) would be used to help states design and implement their
plans.

*States will explain how they intend to coordinate the use of funds
across all state and federal programs that have the purpose of promoting
school readiness and how they will administer the program. These
programs they may consolidate, at a minimum, Head Start, Early Head Start,
Title I preschool, the special education preschool program, and
state-funded preschool programs. States are encouraged to include child care
programs in their plan, especially programs supported by funds from the
Child Care and Development Block Grant.

*Parental choice is encouraged, but the proposal does not speak to
parent involvement.

NAEYC has grave concerns for what these proposals mean for the future
of Head Start and all of early childhood education. Together, the
proposals aim to serve more children through greater coordination and
consolidation but do not invest additional resources. Flexibility and
coordination should help improve and expand services. They are not a
substitute, however, for other key components and resources necessary for a
sustained, high quality system of early childhood education for all
children. These proposals could lead to lowered quality standards for
programs and child outcomes in all domains, reduced availability and range
of comprehensive services, inappropriate testing of young children, and
a continued crisis in attracting and keeping quality staff.