Mini Analysis I Head Start PDF

Preview

Summary

Mini policy analysis on the head start policy...

Description

1 Running head: MINI ANALYSIS I: HEAD START POLICY

Mini Analysis I: Head Start Policy Rutgers University

Abstract

2 MINI ANALYSIS I: HEAD START POLICY

This paper provides an analysis of the Head Start Program using a rights-based approach. Overall, Head Start is a beneficial program to its participants, but may need some reform to expand and properly provide all individuals with the access to quality education.

3 MINI ANALYSIS I: HEAD START POLICY

Mini Analysis I: Head Start Policy The United States Head Start program is the country’s largest federally funded early childhood education program (Anonymous, 2019). Head Start was created in 1965 by President Lydon Johnson during his War on Poverty (Bauer, 2019). The goal of Head Start is to provide school readiness to children and families below the poverty line through early education, health, educational, nutritional, and social services (Bauer, 2019). A majority of Head Start participants are around three or four years old, but since 1995, the program has expanded its services to infants, toddlers, and pregnant women (Lynch, 2019). Head Start is administered by the U.S Department of Health and Human Services and awards funds directly to local grantees that include public and private nonprofit and for-profit agencies (Lynch, 2019). In order to continue to receive funding, these grantees must adhere to strict federal performance standards (Lynch, 2019). In 2019, Congress allotted nearly ten billion dollars for Head Start which provided 887,125 available openings for both Head Start and EHS (Lynch, 2019). To be eligible, children and pregnant women cannot have an income that exceeds the federal poverty line, the family receives public assistance, or the child is homeless or living in foster care (Lynch, 2019). Head Start attempts to address the social problem of access to early childhood education for low-income families. The universal human right that is violated by this social issue is the access and right to education. Article 26 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights (1948) says “everyone has the right to education and education should be free” (United Nations, 1948, art. 26). In the United States, public school for primary and secondary education is free and available to everyone. However, early childhood education is not free, and many families cannot enroll their children in such programs due to their inability to afford it. Fortunately, Head Start was implemented as a way to solve this social issue and provide education to children in low-income families that otherwise would not be able to enroll in school. In Head Start, the stakeholders are the Department of Health and Human Services, parents, children, and Head Start agencies; the duty bearers consist of HHS and the Head Start agencies; and the rights-holders are low-income families and children. The HHS and Head Start agencies work together in that the HHS provides the Head Start agency funds that allows a fixed number of children to be accepted into the program each year, while the Head Start agencies use those funds to provide education and other services to families and children below the poverty line (Lynch, 2019). Reviewing the Head Start program as a whole, it does an adequate job at providing education to children and families that may not be able to afford it, but it only focuses on early childhood education. The program provides a temporary fix and lacks in the sense of ensuring quality education in the later years of a child’s life. Primary and secondary education in lowincome communities are held to a lower standard and do not provide as many opportunities and resources compared to educational institutions in higher class communities (U.S Department of Education, 2011). With that being said, children in poverty who reside in these communities are educationally disadvantaged compared to children of a higher socio-economic status. Although Head Start addresses the instant need for education for low-income children, it fails to address the human rights issue of providing an access to quality education for all individuals. Furthermore, there are many people that could incredibly benefit from the Head Start but do not because of strict eligibility requirements. In order to be eligible for the program, a family must be below 130% above the poverty level, on government assistance, homeless, or have a child within foster care (Lynch, 2019). This means that people who are barely outside of this

4 MINI ANALYSIS I: HEAD START POLICY

threshold are ineligible for the benefits of Head Start. This particularly marginalizes children and families who, although are above the poverty line, still cannot afford early childhood education. Now, children and families who are considered poor -but just not poor enough- are disproportionally affected and cannot benefit from the education and social resources provided by Head Start. When analyzing Head Start from a rights-based approach, it is evident that the program fails in the dimensions of participation, nondiscrimination, and equality. There is no participation from the individuals receiving Head Start’s benefits and families who are barely above the poverty line threshold are not considered eligible to participate in Head Start; which violates the principles of nondiscrimination and equality. However, within the dimension of accountability, parents and children have the ability to submit any problems they may have through an online form on Head Start’s website. This grievance process allows rights-holders to hold HHS accountable, while still being able to ask questions and provide suggestions for the program as a whole. This provides people with a voice to express anything they might think could better reform the Head Start program or highlight issues that could also be present. For children that are able to participate in Head Start, research shows that it is an effective program. Schanzenbach and Bauer (2016) did a study that investigated the impact of Head Start on long-term outcomes and how child participants benefitted further into adulthood. They found that Head Start improved educational outcomes by increasing the probability that participants go on to further their education and even receive a post-secondary degree, license, or certification (Schanzenbach & Bauer, 2016). They also found that for participants of Head Start, it causes social, emotional, and behavior development that is shown in adulthood through selfcontrol, self-esteem, and positive parenting practices (Schanzenbach & Bauer, 2016). Schanzenbach and Bauer’s study is evidence that as a whole, Head Start is an effective program that should continue to be implemented and expanded. However, further reform is essential. Eligibility for Head Start should focus less on the poverty level of families and children, but more so on the average cost of early childhood education overall. If these requirements were changed, families that are over 130% above the poverty line, but still cannot afford schooling, will no longer be marginalized within society. Also, if Head Start could expand its education into primary and secondary school, that would ensure low-income children with a better-quality education throughout their life. If Head Start is able to access these issues and reform appropriately, then it would be a great program that addresses children’s right to education.

5 MINI ANALYSIS I: HEAD START POLICY

References Anonymous. (2019, February 12). Head Start CARES Project. Retrieved from https://www.mdrc.org/project/head-start-cares-project#overview Bauer, L. (2019, June 18). Does Head Start work? The debate over the Head Start Impact Study, explained. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brown-centerchalkboard/2019/06/14/does-head-start-work-the-debate-over-the-head-start-impactstudy-explained/

Lynch, E. K. (2019). Head start: Overview and current issues. (CRS Report No IF11008) Retrieved from Congressional Research Service website: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11008

Schanzenbach, D. W., & Bauer, L. (2016, August 19). The long-term impact of the Head Start program. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-long-term-impact-ofthe-head-start-program/

United Nations. (1948). Universal declaration of human rights

U.S Department of Education. (2011, November 30). More Than 40% of Low-Income Schools Don't Get a Fair Share of State and Local Funds, Department of Education Research Finds. Retrieved from https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/more-40-low-incomeschools-dont-get-fair-share-state-and-local-funds-department-

6 MINI ANALYSIS I: HEAD START POLICY...