Department of Health and Human Services 

OFFICE OF 

INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Inspector General 

JANUARY 2004 

OEI-07-01-00560 

Status of Efforts to Increase 

the Qualifications of 

Head Start Teachers 
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

http://www.oig.hhs.gov/ 

The mission of the Office of Inspector General (OIG), as mandated by Public Law 95-452, as amended 

by Public Law 100-504, is to protect the integrity of the Department of Health and Human Services 

(HHS) programs, as well as the health and welfare of beneficiaries served by those programs. This 

statutory mission is carried out through a nationwide network of audits, investigations, and inspections 

conducted by the following operating components: 

Office of Audit Services 

The OIG's Office of Audit Services (OAS) provides all auditing services for HHS, either by conducting 

audits with its own audit resources or by overseeing audit work done by others. Audits examine the 

performance of HHS programs and/or its grantees and contractors in carrying out their respective 

responsibilities and are intended to provide independent assessments of HHS programs and operations in 

order to reduce waste, abuse, and mismanagement and to promote economy and efficiency throughout the 

Department. 

Office of Evaluation and Inspections 

The OIG's Office of Evaluation and Inspections (OEI) conducts short-term management and program 

evaluations (called inspections) that focus on issues of concern to the Department, the Congress, and the 

public. The findings and recommendations contained in the inspections reports generate rapid, accurate, 

and up-to-date information on the efficiency, vulnerability, and effectiveness of departmental programs. 

Office of Investigations 

The OIG's Office of Investigations (OI) conducts criminal, civil, and administrative investigations of 

allegations of wrongdoing in HHS programs or to HHS beneficiaries and of unjust enrichment by 

providers. The investigative efforts of OI lead to criminal convictions, administrative sanctions, or civil 

monetary penalties. The OI also oversees State Medicaid fraud control units which investigate and 

prosecute fraud and patient abuse in the Medicaid program. 

Office of Counsel to the Inspector General 

The Office of Counsel to the Inspector General (OCIG) provides general legal services to OIG, rendering 

advice and opinions on HHS programs and operations and providing all legal support in OIG’s internal 

operations. The OCIG imposes program exclusions and civil monetary penalties on health care providers 

and litigates those actions within the Department. The OCIG also represents OIG in the global settlement 

of cases arising under the Civil False Claims Act, develops and monitors corporate integrity agreements, 

develops model compliance plans, renders advisory opinions on OIG sanctions to the health care 

community, and issues fraud alerts and other industry guidance. 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

OBJECTIVE 

To assess factors contributing to Head Start’s progress and programs’ experiences in 

increasing teachers’ qualifications. 

BACKGROUND 

With the passage of the Community Opportunities, Accountability, and Training and

Educational Services (COATS) Act (P.L. 105-285) in 1998, Congress reauthorized 

Head Start through fiscal year (FY) 2003 and amended the Head Start Act. The amendments

required more specific education performance standards and increased teacher qualifications. 

The COATS Act specifically mandates that by September 30, 2003, at least 50 percent of

Head Start teachers nationwide in center-based programs must have an associate,

baccalaureate, or advanced degree in early childhood education; or a degree in a field related

to early childhood education, with experience teaching preschool children. According to the

Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Head Start met this requirement with 51

percent of teachers nationwide holding appropriate degrees in FY 2002.

In addition, to the COATS Act, ACF established a self-imposed staffing goal for Head Start

programs – that each program should strive to achieve 50 percent degreed teaching staff by the

end of FY 2003. Teaching staff is defined as those staff members who are responsible for

leading a classroom of children in daily activities.

A source of data we used in our analysis was ACF’s Program Information Report (PIR). PIR

is the only comprehensive national source of data available concerning the staffing levels and

qualifications of Head Start teaching staff. We supported the PIR analysis with data collected

from a random sample of 300 Head Start program directors and a separate stratified cluster

sample of 444 current Head Start teachers. We limited our interviews to Head Start programs

(excluding American Indian and Alaska Native, migrant, and Early Head Start programs). This

limitation allowed us to make more uniform comparisons across programs.

FINDINGS 

Several Factors Have Contributed to Head Start’s Progress in Increasing 

Teachers’ Qualifications 

Head Start has made significant progress in increasing the qualifications of teachers. Directors 

of Head Start programs report hiring more degreed teachers to improve their teachers’ 

qualifications. Directors and teachers also reported that their program supports current, 

nondegreed teaching staff in their pursuit of degrees. In addition, programs 

Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers i OEI-07-01-00560 
reported using Quality Improvement funds to retain teachers. Finally, turnover rates for Head 

Start teachers remain low, below that for public schools and non-teaching professionals. 

Data Reflect That Disparities Exist in the Percentage of Degreed Teachers 

Although we recognize that Head Start is not a regionally or State-administered program, we 

note that specific regions, States, and program types have a lower overall percentage of 

degreed teachers. The lack of degreed teaching staff is particularly acute in 15, mostly 

southern, States. Additionally, American Indian and Alaska Native, migrant, and Early Head 

Start programs are well below the 50 percent program goal. We also analyzed program 

performance among programs within the same county, since programs in the same county are 

likely to face similar circumstances and staffing challenges. We identified a total of 72 counties 

that had at least 1 program meeting ACF’s self-imposed staffing goal and 1 program not 

meeting the goal. 

Directors’ attitudes regarding the degreed teaching staff requirement may influence the 

percentage of degreed teaching staff in their programs. Directors we interviewed who had a 

positive attitude concerning the value of degreed teaching staff in Head Start also had a higher 

percentage of degreed teaching staff in their own programs. 

RECOMMENDATION 

Provide Targeted Assistance to Programs Who Have Not Met ACF’s Self-Imposed 

Staffing Goal 

ACF, in conjunction with their regional offices, needs to target assistance to those programs 

where the level of degreed teaching staff is below 50 percent. The first priority should be to 

assist programs in those regions and States that are having the most difficulty. Special attention 

also must be focused on American Indian and Alaska Native, migrant, and Early Head Start 

programs, most of which were well below ACF’s self-imposed goal for degreed teaching staff. 

AGENCY COMMENTS 

In its written response to the report, ACF concurred with our recommendation to provide 

targeted assistance to programs which had not met ACF’s self-imposed staffing goal of 50 

percent degreed teachers with a degree in early childhood education or a degree in a field 

related to early childhood education in each program by September 30, 2003. It will 

prioritize these efforts in Head Start programs in Regions 4 and 6, States that are below 50 

percent, as well as American Indian and Alaska Native, migrant, and Early Head Start 

programs. 

We have made technical revisions to the report based on ACF’s comments. The full text of 

ACF’s comments is contained in Appendix D. 

Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers ii OEI-07-01-00560 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

PAGE 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................... i

INTRODUCTION ............................................................. 1

FINDINGS .................................................................. 5

Several Factors Have Contributed to Head Start’s Progress in Increasing Teachers’

Qualifications ........................................................... 5

Data Reflect that Disparities Exist in the Percentage of Degreed Teachers ............... 7

RECOMMENDATION ....................................................... 11

AGENCY COMMENTS ...................................................... 11

APPENDICES 

A: Methodology - Data Collection and Analysis ................................. 12

B: Confidence Intervals - Reported Teacher Data ............................... 15

C: Traditional Head Start Programs’ Reported Progress in Achieving At Least

50 Percent Degreed Teaching Staff for Head Start Enrollment Year

2001 - by State ...................................................... 16

D: Agency Comments .................................................... 19

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ..................................................... 22
INTRODUCTION 

OBJECTIVE 

To assess factors contributing to Head Start’s progress and programs’ experiences in 

improving teachers’ qualifications. 

BACKGROUND 

With the passage of the Community Opportunities, Accountability, and Training and

Educational Services (COATS) Act (P.L. 105-285) in 1998, Congress reauthorized 

Head Start through fiscal year (FY) 2003 and amended the Head Start Act. The amendments

required more specific education performance standards and increased teacher qualifications. 

The Act sought to:

• Increase the number of degreed teachers and teaching staff seeking degrees. 

• Address issues that could affect teachers’ recruitment and retention, such as salaries 

and benefits. 

• Improve the school readiness of Head Start children. 

• Foster collaboration between the Head Start program and other State and local 

entities involved in child care and/or programs for low income children and their 

families. 

The COATS Act specifically mandates that, by September 30, 2003, at least 50 percent of 

Head Start teachers nationwide in center-based programs1 must have an associate, 

baccalaureate, or an advanced degree in early childhood education; or a degree in a field 

related to early childhood education, with experience teaching preschool children.2 According 

to the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Head Start met this requirement with 51 

percent of teachers holding appropriate degrees in enrollment 2002. 

The COATS Act provided only part of the motivation related to the increase in teachers’ 

qualifications. To further strengthen the educational achievement of Head Start teachers, ACF 

notified each program via Program Instruction that, “Although the statutory mandate is that 

50 percent of Head Start teachers nationally have degrees, we expect that all 

1 Head Start programs are either center-based (services are provided at a facility) or home-based (services 

are provided at an individual’s home). 

2 “Community Opportunities, Accountability, and Training and Educational Services Act of 1998,” 

(P.L. 105-285), Sec. 115 [amended Sec. 648A of the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9843a)]. 

Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers 1 OEI-07-01-00560 
programs will strive to achieve at least this level by the end of FY 2003.”3 An official with

ACF’s Head Start Bureau acknowledged that it is unlikely that each program will

meet the goal by the end of FY 2003, but Head Start expects the programs to do their best.4

Presidential Initiative for Early Childhood Education 

The President has firmly supported the need for increased teacher qualifications. In his 2002 

State of the Union Address, he stated, 

“We need to prepare our children to read and succeed in school with 

improved Head Start and early childhood development programs. We 

must upgrade our teacher colleges and teacher training and launch a major 

recruiting drive with a great goal for America: a quality teacher in every 

classroom.” 

In this address, the President proposed the early childhood initiative - Good Start, 

Grow Smart - to help States and local communities strengthen early learning for young 

children. 

Concerns of Stakeholders and Advocacy Groups 

We held discussions with key internal stakeholders and external advocacy groups (e.g., ACF 

Head Start Bureau, National Head Start Association, National Association for the Education of 

Young Children). Each strongly supported having more highly educated and better paid 

teachers. Yet they described what they believed were potential unintended consequences of 

the COATS Act. These concerns included the following: 

• Head Start programs may need to hire outside the local community to find degreed 

teachers, with such “outsiders” lacking an understanding and appreciation of the local 

community and diminishing the bond between the program and the community it serves. 

• Child Development Associate (CDA) staff – especially those with the knowledge of 

how to “navigate the system” – may be “pushed out” because of the need to hire 

degreed teachers. (CDA staff are those nondegreed staff who have a child 

development associate credential appropriate to the ages of the children in the program 

they work for, or those nondegreed staff who have a State-awarded certificate for 

preschool teachers that meets or exceeds the requirements of the CDA). 

• Head Start pays for teachers to earn degrees, and those teachers then leave for higher 

paying positions in school districts or outside the teaching field. 

• Training opportunities in early childhood education, especially in rural areas, may 

3 The Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Program Instruction: ACYF-PI-HS-00-03, 

December 22, 2000, p. 5. 

4 Discussion with an official of ACF, Head Start Bureau, June 12, 2002. 

Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers 2 OEI-07-01-00560 
be remote or unavailable, which would hinder programs’ progress in attaining the 50 

percent staffing goal for degreed teachers. 

We explored these issues throughout the course of our study. 

METHODOLOGY 

Since 1987, ACF has used the Program Information Report (PIR) to capture information about Head 

Start programs. PIR is the only comprehensive national source of data available concerning the staffing 

levels and qualifications of Head Start teaching staff. (Teaching staff is defined as those staff members 

who are responsible for leading a classroom of children in daily activities.) This annual report collects 

program level data describing the children and families enrolled and the services provided. Over the 

past several years, the report has been modified to collect additional information, including teachers’ 

qualifications, new hires, and staff turnover. To assess Head Start’s progress in increasing teachers’ 

qualifications, we used the PIR. We supplemented this data with information collected from a simple 

random sample of program directors and a random stratified cluster sample of Head Start teachers. 

We conducted a trend analysis of the PIR data for all Head Start programs for the 5 enrollment years 

ending in 1997 through 2001.5 

We selected a simple random sample of 300 Head Start program directors, based on programs who 

submitted PIR data for Head Start enrollment year 2001. We excluded five programs after learning 

that the programs were solely home-based or were no longer active. We received responses from 

263 directors, for an overall response rate of 89 percent (263/295). However, the response rate for 

individual questions varied. We received responses from at least 205 directors for the questions we 

analyzed. 

From a stratified cluster sample of 444 current and 176 former teachers, we gathered information 

concerning their goals for obtaining degrees (if they did not have one), their experiences obtaining 

degrees, the challenges they faced, the support received from the Head Start program, and their 

motivations for remaining with or leaving the program. The overall response rate for the former 

teachers was only 25 percent, which prevented meaningful statistical analysis. Therefore, we dropped 

this group from our sample population. The response rate for current teachers was 94 percent 

(418/444). 

Finally, we reviewed the laws, regulations, and agency policies related to the increase of Head Start 

teacher qualifications. Further details concerning the methods used for this inspection are presented in 

Appendix A. 

5 The enrollment year is defined by ACF as the period of time, not to exceed 12 months, during which a 

Head Start Program provides center or home-based services to a group of children and their families, PIR 

User’s Guide, April 2002, p. 19. The enrollment year 2001 covers the period September 2000 through June 

2001 and was the latest complete year available at the time of our review. 

Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers 3 OEI-07-01-00560 
Limitations 

The data in this report concerning the qualifications of Head Start teaching staff are based on 

the final PIR data reported to ACF by Head Start programs for enrollment year ending in 

2001. We encountered challenges working with these data both in terms of how the data were 

collected year-to-year, and how the programs completed the PIR. An example of the 

problems we encountered was that response categories were not mutually exclusive, meaning 

that some teachers could have been counted more than once. Therefore, comparing the number 

of teachers in relation to degrees could not guarantee accuracy. Also, due to the unique nature 

of migrant programs and the clients they serve, information does not always “fit” into the 

reporting structure of PIR data elements. However, given that the PIR is the only 

comprehensive national source of data regarding Head Start teachers’ qualifications, and that 

the responses we received from Head Start program directors and teachers did not contradict 

the PIR data, our findings reflect PIR data despite its potential problems. 

We also limited our interviews to traditional Head Start programs (excluding American Indian 

and Alaska Native, migrant, and Early Head Start programs). This limitation allowed us to 

make consistent comparisons across programs. 

Inspection Standards 

We conducted this inspection in accordance with the Quality Standards for Inspections 

issued by the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency. 

Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers 4 OEI-07-01-00560 
FINDINGS 

According to ACF, 51 percent of Head Start teachers held appropriate degrees in enrollment 

year 2002, effectively meeting the COATS Act mandate. This percentage is an improvement 

over the 34 percent of teachers who held appropriate degrees in 1997, the year before the 

passage of the COATS Act. Eighty-six percent (184/213) of the responding directors stated 

that having more degreed teaching staff has enhanced their programs. Ninety-two percent of 

degreed teachers and 83 percent of Child Development Associates (CDAs) agreed. As one 

CDA stated, “I always knew what to do as a teacher, but now I understand the theory of why I 

do it.” 

Several Factors Have Contributed to Head Start’s Progress in 

Increasing Teachers’ Qualifications 

Directors Hired Degreed Teachers to Fill Vacancies 

Directors frequently hired degreed teachers to fill vacancies. From September 1998, through 

June 2001, directors reported hiring 1,374 degreed teachers and only 433 CDAs. This trend is 

supported by our examination of the national PIR data for all Head Start programs for 

enrollment years 1997 through 2001, which showed that the proportion of CDAs declined by 

15 percentage points, while the proportion of degreed teachers increased by 11 percentage 

points (Table 1). Directors noted that hiring a degreed teacher is easier, takes less time, and 

costs less than training nondegreed staff. 

Table 1 

National Summary of all Head Start Programs 1997 through 1 

Percent of Increase of Teachers (Degreed and CDA) 

by Head Start Enrollment Year 

Source: Program Information Report Data 

2001

Enrollment 

Year 

Total 

Programs2 

Total 

Teachers 

Total 

Degreed 

Teachers 

Percent 

Degreed 

Teachers 3 

Total 

CDAs Percent CDAs 3 

1997 1,889 35,709 12,167 34.1% 19,964 55.9% 

1998 2,020 39,2494 12,585 32.1% 21,787 55.5% 

1999 2,107 42,471 15,753 37.1% 20,695 48.7% 

2000 2,210 43,364 17,549 40.5% 20,030 46.2% 

2001 2,299 47,161 21,252 45.1% 19,299 40.9% 

1 At the time of our review, PIR data for enrollment year 2001 were the latest complete year available. PIR data for 

enrollment year 2002, which indicate that 51 percent of teachers held appropriate degrees, became available after 

completion of our field work. 2 The numbers and percentages shown above are for those programs that are required to report teaching staff and 

had at least one teacher. 3 The sum of the percent of degreed teachers and the percent of CDAs does not equal 100 percent. Some CDAs 

were in training at the time the PIR was submitted, or their educational qualifications were not specified. 4 In 1998, family childcare providers were included in the total teacher count of the Head Start program. 

Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers 5 OEI-07-01-00560 
Eighty-six percent of the responding directors (205/239) stated that they primarily hire from 

within their local community, and 70 percent of these directors (143/205) were able to obtain 

the required number of degreed teachers. Of the directors who noted challenges in recruiting 

from within the local community, none reported any ill effect on their program from hiring 

“outsiders.” Rather, we were told that hiring teachers from outside the community improved the 

quality of the program and brought in different perspectives and new ideas. 

Programs Were Supporting Staff Efforts to Obtain Degrees 

Teachers reported that programs were providing assistance to help them obtain their degrees. 

Seventy-seven percent of teachers holding CDAs were working toward their degree at the time 

of this review.6 Of these, 87 percent indicated that Head Start had provided assistance to them 

in the form of time off to attend classes, assistance with payment for books and tuition, and/or 

helping with transportation (e.g., payment of mileage). Rather than getting “pushed out,” these 

CDAs will further increase the percentage of teachers with degrees as they complete their 

educations. 

Quality Improvement (QI) Funds Were Instrumental in Retaining Teachers 

Specific QI funding is available for Head Start programs to increase staff qualifications and 

retain experienced staff. In FY 2001, programs received QI funding of $355.5 million.7 

Programs must use at least 50 percent of QI funds to improve the compensation (including 

benefits) of classroom teachers and other staff, unless the program is unable to do so (e.g., 

salaries are tied to the local school district, and the program cannot exceed those salaries). 

Directors stated QI funds are instrumental in the retention of teaching staff and the overall 

improvement of the program. They cited using QI funds to enhance salaries, increase staff, 

improve benefits, and provide resources for teaching staff to obtain college degrees. Seventythree percent (172/235) of the responding directors reported using 50 percent or more of their 

QI funding to enhance salaries and/or benefits. The remaining 27 percent (63/235) also used 

this funding for salary and/or benefits; however, for reasons similar to that described above, the 

program either could not use the full 50 percent to increase salaries and benefits, or the 

responding agencies did not always know exactly how the parent agency spent the QI funds. 

Teacher Turnover Rates Were Low 

Our analysis of the PIR data for all Head Start programs for enrollment years 

1997 through 2001 found the teacher turnover rate did not substantially change in those 

6 Percentages cited for degreed teacher and CDA responses were based on weighted responses 

(Appendix B). 

7 ACF, Head Start Bureau, July 9, 2002. 

Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers 6 OEI-07-01-00560 
years, remaining at approximately 7 percent.8 In comparison, the turnover rate in public 

schools was approximately 13 percent, and the turnover rate for non-teaching professionals 

was 11 percent.9 As such, concerns about teachers leaving the Head Start program may be 

less of an issue than anticipated. 

Stakeholders believe salaries to be a key factor in teacher turnover, especially as teachers earn 

degrees. However, of those teachers who reported that they may leave within the next 3 years, 

only 6 percent of degreed teachers and 5 percent of CDAs stated that salary would be a factor 

in such a decision. Overall, 83 percent of degreed teachers and 89 percent of CDAs stated 

they planned to remain with Head Start for the next 3 years. Factors influencing teachers 

decisions to remain with Head Start are listed in Appendix B. 

Data Reflect That Disparities Exist in the Percentage of 

Degreed Teachers 

In addition to the COATS Act, ACF further strengthened the educational requirement for Head 

Start programs through its self-imposed initiative that all programs would strive to achieve at 

least 50 percent degreed teachers by the end of FY 2003. 

Specific Regions, States, and Program Types Attained Lower Overall Percentages 

of Degreed Teachers 

We recognize that Head Start is not a regionally or State-administered program. Nonetheless, 

for the purposes of assessing programs’ success in increasing the qualifications of teachers, we 

grouped programs based on ACF regional offices’ jurisdiction, by States, and by type of 

program (i.e., traditional Head Start, American Indian and Alaska Native, migrant, and Early 

Head Start). Table 2 on the following page contains regional/program-type breakdowns. The 

table shows that Regions 4 and 6 have a majority of those programs that fall short of ACF’s 

self-imposed goal. Although Region 7 had a majority of programs meeting ACF’s goal, the 

overall percentage of teachers with degrees is below 50 percent. In addition, American Indian 

and Alaska Native, migrant, and Early Head Start programs are well below 50 percent both in 

terms of individual programs and teachers overall. Appendix C lists the ACF regional office 

responsible for Head Start programs in each State. 

8 ACF, PIR reports for Head Start enrollment years 1997 through 2001. Comparison of teachers hired due 

to staff turnover to total teacher staff. 

9 Viadero, Debra (April 10, 2002). Researcher Skewers Explanations Behind Teacher Shortage. Education 

Week on the Web. Retrieved July 10, 2002 from 

http://www.edweek.org/ew/newstory.cfm?slug=30aera.h21&keywords=Teacher%20Shortage 

Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers 7 OEI-07-01-00560 
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Table 2 

Head Start Enrollment Year 2001 

Progress of Programs in Achieving ACF’s Staffing Goal for Degreed Teachers 

= Regions in Which the Majority of Programs Have Not Met ACF’s Goal Source: Program Information Report Data 

Region 

Total 

Number of 

Programs

In the 

Region1 

Number of 

Programs Not Meeting

ACF’s Goal 

for Degreed Staffing 

Percentage of Programs

That Have Not Achieved 

ACF’s Goal 

for Degreed Staffing 

Total 

Number of 

Teachers 

In the 

Region 

Percentage of Teachers 

In the Region

with 

Degrees2 

88 22 25.0% 1,690 59.1% 

237 38 16.0% 4,449 70.4% 

176 50 28.4% 3,080 65.1% 

274 199 72.6% 8,105 34.2% 

329 102 31.0% 5,989 57.8% 

201 133 66.2% 6,078 32.3% 

85 39 45.9% 1,571 43.3% 

86 42 48.8% 1,086 52.9% 

168 81 48.2% 5,597 49.7% 

62 29 46.8% 1,395 52.8% 

Subtotal: 1,706 735 43.1% 39,040 

American 

Indian and 

Alaska Native 130 93 71.5% 1,105 23.4% 

Migrant 63 48 76.2% 3,097 20.3% 

Early Head

Start 400 224 56.0% 3,919 32.0% 

Nationwide: 2,299 1,100 47.8% 47,161 45.1% 

1 American Indian and Alaska Native, migrant, and Early Head Start programs have been excluded from the regions’

total and identified separately. 2 The numbers and percentages shown above are for those programs that are required to report teaching staff and 

had at least one teacher. 

The lack of degreed teaching staff is particularly acute in 15, mostly southern, States (see the 

map on the following page). These States had total degreed teaching staff of less than 

40 percent in Head Start during enrollment year 2001. In contrast, programs in 14 States and 

the District of Columbia achieved rates of 70 percent or more degreed teaching staff. Details 

concerning Head Start programs’ reported progress in achieving ACF’s goal (by State) for 

enrollment year 2001 can be found in Appendix C. 

Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers 8 OEI-07-01-00560 
Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers 9 OEI-07-01-00560

Percentage of Head Start Programs Not Meeting ACF’s Self-Imposed

 Staffing Goal - By State

Note: Territories are Not Displayed on Map

National Total of Programs Not Meeting ACF’s Goal = 47.8% Percent

Source: 

PIR Data Reflect that the Percentage of Degreed Teachers Varied Among

Programs Within Same County

Although it is easy to generalize about the successes and failures in increasing teacher

qualifications based on the Nation, region, or State, our analysis suggests it is important not to

lose sight of individual programs. 

to explore the progress of individual programs facing similar circumstances (e.g., percent

urban/rural population, educational opportunities, competition for potential employees). 

identified a total of 72 counties that had at least 1 program meeting ACF’s self-imposed staffing

goal and 1 program not meeting the goal. 

degreed teachers within these counties varied greatly, as demonstrated in the following

example. 

(degreed and CDA) in these programs range from 8 teachers to more than 40. 

percentages of degreed teaching staff in these programs are as follows:

• One program has 88 percent.

• Three programs range from 60 to 67 percent.

• One program has 50 percent.

• One program has 48 percent.

• One program has 13 percent.

ACF Program Information Report - Head Start Enrollment Year 2001

We compared Head Start programs within the same counties

We

The number of programs and the percentage of

One New England county has a total of seven Head Start programs. Teaching staff

The
The above illustration suggests that although some programs may have experienced barriers to 

increasing the percentage of degreed teachers, other programs in the same local areas 

overcame these barriers. 

The Director’s Attitude May Influence Percentage of Degreed Teaching Staff 

We compared directors’ interview responses regarding the degreed teaching staff requirement 

to the PIR data. Those directors who had a positive attitude concerning the value of degreed 

teaching staff in Head Start had a higher percentage of degreed teaching staff in their own 

programs.10 Correspondingly, directors who responded that this requirement was detrimental 

to Head Start had lower percentages of degreed teaching staff.11 

One director who was not pushing to meet ACF’s self-imposed staffing goal gave the following 

statement about his program’s efforts to increase the proportion of degreed teaching staff: 

“Even if I don’t get 50 percent, Head Start programs that exceed the 50 percent level will bring 

up those programs that are below 50 percent.” 

10 This is statistically significant with a p-Value of <0.05 at the 95 percent confidence level. 

11 This is statistically significant with a p-Value of <0.03 at the 95 percent confidence level. 

Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers 10 OEI-07-01-00560 
RECOMMENDATION 

Overall, there was an increase in the number of Head Start teachers with degrees and in the 

number of programs that had met ACF’s self-imposed staffing goal in the enrollment years that 

we studied. Directors and teachers believed that the increase in teaching staff qualifications had 

strengthened the program. However, some programs had limited or no success in increasing 

the number of degreed teaching staff. Given the need to provide children with the best “Head 

Start” possible, it is important that ACF ensure that all programs are making positive progress 

in their efforts to increase the number of degreed teaching staff. To this end, we make the 

following recommendation to ACF. 

Provide Targeted Assistance to Programs that Have Not Met 

ACF’s Self-Imposed Staffing Goal 

ACF, in conjunction with its regional offices, needs to target assistance to those programs 

where the level of degreed teaching staff is below 50 percent. The first priority should be to 

assist programs in those regions and States that are having the most difficulty. Special attention 

also must be focused on American Indian and Alaska Native, migrant, and Early Head Start 

programs, most of which are well below ACF’s self-imposed staffing goal. 

AGENCY COMMENTS 

In its written response to the report, ACF concurred with our recommendation to provide 

targeted assistance to programs which had not met ACF’s self-imposed staffing goal of 50 

percent degreed teachers with a degree in early childhood education or a degree in a field 

related to early childhood education in each program by September 30, 2003. It will 

prioritize these efforts in Head Start programs in Regions 4 and 6, States that are below 50 

percent, as well as American Indian and Alaska Native, migrant, and Early Head Start 

programs. 

We have made technical revisions to the report based on ACF’s comments. The full text of 

ACF’s comments is contained in Appendix D. 

Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers 11 OEI-07-01-00560 
APPENDIX A 

Methodology

Data Collection and Analysis

Use of ACF Program Information Report (PIR) Data 

We obtained final PIR data from ACF for all Head Start programs for enrollment years 1997 

through 2001. The numbers and percentages shown throughout this report are for programs 

that are required to report teaching staff and had at least one teacher. 

We converted the PIR Microsoft Access® files obtained from ACF into Statistical Analysis 

Software (SAS®) to assess national progress in meeting the COATS Act mandate to increase 

Head Start teacher qualifications. The SAS® data were merged with United States Census 

Bureau urban and rural population statistics by county, allowing us to assess the percentage of 

urban and rural populations in the county where the Head Start program is located. 

Sample of Head Start Directors 

We contacted 300 Head Start programs, based on a simple random sample of programs that 

submitted PIR data for Head Start enrollment year 2001. We limited our interviews to 

traditional Head Start programs. This limitation allowed us to make uniform comparisons 

across programs. We excluded five programs after learning the programs were solely homebased or were no longer active when we contacted them. We received responses from 

263 directors, for an overall response rate of 89 percent (263/295). However, the response 

rate for individual questions varied. We received responses from at least 205 directors for the 

questions we analyzed. All information gathered from Head Start directors was encoded to 

Microsoft Access® and converted into SAS® for detailed data analysis. 

Sample of Head Start Teaching Staff 

We selected a random clustered sample of Head Start programs based on PIR data for Head 

Start enrollment year 2001, limiting the sample to traditional Head Start programs. We 

grouped all Head Start programs into geographic clusters, based on their zip code. Each 

cluster contained five programs. We then randomly selected 16 of these clusters in 3 

geographic strata: 4 clusters from the Western United States, 5 clusters from the Central United 

States, and 7 clusters from the Eastern United States. We used a random stratified cluster 

sampling methodology to select teaching staff for interviews. We chose this sampling 

methodology in order to project our findings to the universe of Head Start teaching staff. Within 

each sample cluster, we stratified teaching staff into four strata: 

• Current teaching staff with an associate degree or higher 

• Current teaching staff with a CDA only 

Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers 12 OEI-07-01-00560 
• Former teaching staff with an associate degree or higher, who resigned from the 

program between October 1, 2000 and June 30, 2001 

• Former teaching staff with a CDA only, who resigned from the program between 

October 1, 2000 and June 30, 2001 

Within each cluster, we randomly selected 15 teaching staff from each of the 4 strata. If a 

stratum contained fewer than 15 teaching staff, we selected all staff in the stratum. We then 

attempted in-person or telephone interviews with all sampled teaching staff. The rate of 

response from former teachers (degreed and CDA) was low because many of them could not 

be located. Therefore, we did not perform statistical analysis on these sampling groups. 

Universe, Sample, and Response Rate for Current and Former Teachers 

Type of 

Teacher 

Universe 

for the 

16 Sampling Clusters 

Total Sample for the 

16 Sampling Clusters Total Responses Response Rate 

Current Degreed 984 237 221 93.2% 

Current CDA 771 207 197 95.2% 

Former Degreed 124 116 29 25.0% 

Former CDA 61 60 15 25.0% 

Total: 1,940 620 462 

We purposively selected 6 of the 16 sampled clusters for in-person visits, varying both the 

percentage of urban population in the cluster and their geographic locations. We conducted 

on-site visits to the following clusters: 

• Cluster 02-Southern California 

• Cluster 06-Texas 

• Cluster 08-Arkansas, Mississippi, Tennessee 

• Cluster 09-Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky 

• Cluster 10-Florida 

• Cluster 11-New Hampshire, Vermont 

For all sampled teachers, we gathered: 

• Pertinent information on their educational opportunities 

• Possible barriers they faced in obtaining their degree 

• Incentives offered to continue their education 

• Salary and benefits offered by their Head Start employer 

• Availability of professional development opportunities since the implementation of 

the COATS Act 

• Factors that influenced their decision to remain with Head Start 

• Factors that may cause them to consider leaving the program 

All information gathered from teachers was encoded to Microsoft Access® and was 

Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers 13 OEI-07-01-00560 
converted into SAS® for detailed data analysis. For current teachers, we performed an 

analysis based on a computed sample weight of each sampling cluster as compared to the 

Nation. We examined issues relating to salary, benefits, and factors that teaching staff 

considered important in their decision to either remain with Head Start or seek other 

employment. 

Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers 14 OEI-07-01-00560 
APPENDIX B 

Confidence Intervals - Reported Teacher Data

Key Estimates 

Affirmative Response 

Point Estimate Confidence Interval 

Are you working toward a degree? 77% - CDAs +/- 11% 

Has Head Start provided any assistance to help 

you in obtaining your degree? 88% - CDAs +/- 5% 

Do you believe the effort to have more degreed 

teachers in Head Start has helped the program 

and the children it serves? 

83% - CDAs 

92% - Degreed Teachers 

+/- 8% 

+/- 3% 

Do you believe degreed teachers are better able 

to address the needs of children? 

50% - CDAs 

57% - Degreed Teachers 

+/- 15% 

+/- 11% 

Do you plan to remain with Head Start for the 

next 3 years? 

Yes 89% - CDAs 

83% - Degreed Teachers 

+/- 7% 

+/- 6% 

No 11% - CDAs 

17% - Degreed Teachers 

+/- 7% 

+/- 6% 

What are the factors that are influencing your 

decision to remain with the program? 

Salary 40% - CDAs 

41% - Degreed Teachers 

+/- 20% 

+/- 11% 

Health Insurance (Self) 34% - CDAs 

39% - Degreed Teachers 

+/- 18% 

+/- 14% 

Health Insurance for Family Members 16% - CDAs 

19% - Degreed Teachers 

+/- 9% 

+/- 8% 

Retirement Plan 35% - CDAs 

38% - Degreed Teachers 

+/- 13% 

+/- 13% 

Working Conditions 50% - CDAs 

55% - Degreed Teachers 

+/- 13% 

+/- 9% 

Family Considerations 41% - CDAs 

30% - Degreed Teachers 

+/- 14% 

+/- 6% 

Training and Educational 

Opportunities 

56% - CDAs 

46% - Degreed Teachers 

+/- 13% 

+/- 11% 

Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers 15 OEI-07-01-00560 
APPENDIX C 

Traditional Head Start Programs’ 

Reported Progress in Achieving At Least

50 Percent Degreed Teaching Staff

for Head Start Enrollment Year 2001 - by State

Head Start Programs 

that Have Achieved at least 50 percent 

Degreed Teaching Staff - By State 

= Majority of Programs are below 50 percent Degreed Teaching Staff 

Source: Program Information Report Data 

States 

Responsible 

ACF 

Regional 

Office 

Number of Programs 

During 

Enrollment Year 

2000 through 20011 

Number of Programs 

At or Above 

50% Degreed 

Teachers 

Percentage of 

Programs 

At or Above 

50% Degreed 

Teachers 

Alabama 4 28 3 11% 

Alaska 10 6 0 0% 

Arizona 9 22 5 23% 

Arkansas 6 19 1 5% 

American Samoa 9 1 0 0% 

California 9 129 75 58% 

Colorado 8 40 20 50% 

Connecticut 1 23 16 70% 

Delaware 3 5 3 60% 

D.C. 3 9 8 89% 

Florida 4 63 18 29% 

Federal States of 

Micronesia 

9 3 0 0% 

Georgia 4 37 5 14% 

Guam 9 1 0 0% 

Hawaii 9 5 5 100% 

Idaho 10 7 5 71% 

Illinois 5 91 80 88% 

Indiana 5 39 24 62% 

Iowa 7 20 11 55% 

Kansas 7 27 18 67% 

Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers 16 OEI-07-01-00560 
States 

Responsible 

ACF 

Regional 

Office 

Number of Programs 

During 

Enrollment Year 

2000 through 20011 

Number of Programs 

At or Above 

50% Degreed 

Teachers 

Percentage of 

Programs 

At or Above 

50% Degreed 

Teachers 

Kentucky 4 43 9 21% 

Louisiana 6 45 16 36% 

Maine 1 13 6 46% 

Marshall Islands 9 1 0 0% 

Maryland 3 29 19 66% 

Massachusetts 1 31 23 74% 

Michigan 5 73 55 75% 

Minnesota 5 27 18 67% 

Mississippi 4 19 10 53% 

Missouri 7 22 6 27% 

Montana 8 13 3 23% 

Nebraska 7 16 11 69% 

Nevada 9 4 1 25% 

New Hampshire 1 6 6 100% 

New Jersey 2 30 17 57% 

New Mexico 6 15 5 33% 

New York 2 169 155 92% 

North Carolina 4 46 21 46% 

North Dakota 8 10 7 70% 

Northern Mariana Islands 9 1 1 100% 

Ohio 5 67 29 43% 

Oklahoma 6 20 3 15% 

Oregon 10 21 11 52% 

Pennsylvania 3 59 47 80% 

Puerto Rico 2 37 27 73% 

Palau 9 1 0 0% 

Rhode Island 1 8 8 100% 

South Carolina 4 14 2 14% 

South Dakota 8 8 7 88% 

Tennessee 4 24 7 29% 

Texas 6 102 43 42% 

Utah 8 8 4 50% 

Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers 17 OEI-07-01-00560 
States 

Responsible 

ACF 

Regional 

Office 

Number of Programs 

During 

Enrollment Year 

2000 through 20011 

Number of Programs 

At or Above 

50% Degreed 

Teachers 

Percentage of 

Programs 

At or Above 

50% Degreed 

Teachers 

Vermont 1 7 7 100% 

Virginia 3 50 37 74% 

Virgin Islands 2 1 0 0% 

Washington 10 28 17 61% 

West Virginia 3 24 12 50% 

Wisconsin 5 32 21 66% 

Wyoming 8 7 3 43% 

Total: 1,706 971 57% 

1 The numbers and percentages shown above are for those programs that were required to report teaching 

staff and had at least one teacher. 

2 This analysis is based on traditional Head Start programs only, allowing for comparison of more “similar” 

programs. Had American Indian and Alaska Native, migrant, and Early Head Start programs been 

included, the total programs would be 2,299, the number of programs not meeting ACF’s self-imposed 

staffing goal would be 1,100, and the overall percentage of programs not meeting ACF’s goal would be 47.8 

percent. 

Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers 18 OEI-07-01-00560 
APPENDIX D 

Agency Comments

Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers 19 OEI-07-01-00560 
Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers 20 OEI-07-01-00560 
Increasing the Qualifications of Head Start Teachers 21 OEI-07-01-00560 
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

This report was prepared under the direction of Brian T. Pattison, Regional Inspector General 

for Evaluation and Inspections in the Kansas City Regional Office and Gina C. Maree, 

Assistant Regional Inspector General. Other principal Office of Evaluation and Inspections 

staff who contributed include: 

Perry A. Seaton, Team Leader 

Zula Crutchfield, Project Leader 

Elander J. Phillips, Program Analyst 

Brian T. Whitley, Program Analyst 

Technical Assistance 

Elise Stein, Director, 

Public Health and Human 

Services Branch 

Linda L. Hall, Program Specialist 

Barbara R. Tedesco, Mathematical Statistician 

Robert L. Gibbons, Program Analyst, San Francisco