U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

20-629 PDF 2005

THE BEST OF HEAD START: 

LEARNING FROM MODEL 

PROGRAMS

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EDUCATION REFORM

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION 

AND THE WORKFORCE 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

April 14, 2005

Serial No. 109-7

Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and the Workforce

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/house 

or 

Committee address: http://edworkforce.house.gov 

(II)

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE 

JOHN A. BOEHNER, Ohio, Chairman

Thomas E. Petri, Wisconsin, Vice Chairman 

Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ McKeon, California 

Michael N. Castle, Delaware 

Sam Johnson, Texas 

Mark E. Souder, Indiana 

Charlie Norwood, Georgia 

Vernon J. Ehlers, Michigan 

Judy Biggert, Illinois 

Todd Russell Platts, Pennsylvania 

Patrick J. Tiberi, Ohio 

Ric Keller, Florida 

Tom Osborne, Nebraska 

Joe Wilson, South Carolina 

Jon C. Porter, Nevada 

John Kline, Minnesota 

Marilyn N. Musgrave, Colorado 

Bob Inglis, South Carolina 

Cathy McMorris, Washington 

Kenny Marchant, Texas 

Tom Price, Georgia 

Luis G. Fortun ̃ o, Puerto Rico 

Bobby Jindal, Louisiana 

Charles W. Boustany, Jr., Louisiana 

Virginia Foxx, North Carolina 

Thelma D. Drake, Virginia 

John R. ‘‘Randy’’ Kuhl, Jr., New York 

George Miller, California 

Dale E. Kildee, Michigan 

Major R. Owens, New York 

Donald M. Payne, New Jersey 

Robert E. Andrews, New Jersey 

Robert C. Scott, Virginia 

Lynn C. Woolsey, California 

Rube ́n Hinojosa, Texas 

Carolyn McCarthy, New York 

John F. Tierney, Massachusetts 

Ron Kind, Wisconsin 

Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio 

David Wu, Oregon 

Rush D. Holt, New Jersey 

Susan A. Davis, California 

Betty McCollum, Minnesota 

Danny K. Davis, Illinois 

Rau ́l M. Grijalva, Arizona 

Chris Van Hollen, Maryland 

Tim Ryan, Ohio 

Timothy H. Bishop, New York 

John Barrow, Georgia

Paula Nowakowski, Staff Director 

John Lawrence, Minority Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EDUCATION REFORM 

MICHAEL N. CASTLE, Delaware, Chairman

Tom Osborne, Nebraska, Vice Chairman 

Mark E. Souder, Indiana 

Vernon J. Ehlers, Michigan 

Judy Biggert, Illinois 

Todd Russell Platts, Pennsylvania 

Ric Keller, Florida 

Joe Wilson, South Carolina 

Marilyn N. Musgrave, Colorado 

Bobby Jindal, Louisiana 

John R. ‘‘Randy’’ Kuhl, Jr., New York 

John A. Boehner, Ohio, ex officio 

Lynn C. Woolsey, California 

Danny K. Davis, Illinois 

Rau ́l M. Grijalva, Arizona 

Robert E. Andrews, New Jersey 

Robert C. ‘‘Bobby’’ Scott, Virginia 

Rube ́n Hinojosa, Texas 

Ron Kind, Wisconsin 

Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio 

Susan A. Davis, California 

George Miller, California, ex officio 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

Hearing held on April 14, 2005 2003 ..................................................................... 1

Statement of Members: 

Castle, Hon. Michael N., Chairman, Subcommittee on Education Reform, 

Committee on Education and the Workforce .............................................. 2

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 3

Woolsey, Hon. Lynn C., Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Education 

Reform, Committee on Education and the Workforce ............................... 4

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 4

Statement of Witnesses: 

Cunningham, Gayle, Executive Director, Jefferson County Committee for 

Economic Opportunity Child Development Services, Birmingham, AL ... 29

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 31

Daeschner, Dr. Stephen W., Ph.D., Superintendent, Jefferson County 

Schools, Louisville, KY ................................................................................. 7

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 8

Mainster, Barbara, Executive Director, Redlands Christian Migrant Association, Immokalee, FL ................................................................................. 21

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 23

Marker, David, Chief Financial Officer, Miami Valley Child Development 

Centers, Inc., Dayton, OH ............................................................................ 14

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 15

Siegfried, Scott, Program Coordinator, Miami Valley Child Development 

Centers, Inc., Dayton, OH ............................................................................ 18

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 19

Additional materials supplied: 

Field, Dr. Charles R., MD, MPH, FAAP, Mary Kaye McKinney and Patricia A. Price, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Department 

of Pediatrics Head Start Program, Pulaski County, AK, Statement 

submitted for the record ............................................................................... 49

Melmed, Matthew E., J.D., Executive Director, Zero to Three Policy Center, Washington, DC, Statement submitted for the record ....................... 53

Nolan, Dr. Tim, Director, Head Start Program, Waukesha County, WI, 

Statement submitted for the record ............................................................ 57

Pagliaro, Ann, Head Start of Eastern Orange County, Newburgh, NY, 

Statement submitted for the record ............................................................ 62

(1)

THE BEST OF HEAD START: LEARNING FROM 

MODEL PROGRAMS 

Thursday, April 14, 2005

U.S. House of Representatives 

Subcommittee on Education Reform 

Committee on Education and the Workforce 

Washington, DC 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:32 a.m., in 

room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Michael Castle 

[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Castle, Osborne, Ehlers, Biggert, Woolsey, Grijalva, Scott, Hinojosa, Kind, Kucinich, and Davis of California. 

Ex officio: Representative Boehner. 

Staff present: Amanda Farris, Professional Staff Member; Kevin 

Frank, Professional Staff Member; Jessica Gross, Legislative Assistant; Lucy House, Legislative Assistant; Kate Houston, Professional Staff Member; Sally Lovejoy, Director of Education and 

Human Resources Policy; Alexa Marrero, Press Secretary; Deborah 

L. Samantar, Committee Clerk/Intern Coordinator; Rich Stombres, 

Assistant Director of Education and Human Resources Policy; Ruth 

Friedman, Minority Legislative Associate/Education; Lloyd 

Horwich, Minority Legislative Associate/Education; Ricardo Martinez, Minority Legislative Associate/Education; Alex Nock, Minority Legislative Associate/education, and Joe Novotny, Minority Legislative Assistant/Education. 

Chairman CASTLE. The Subcommittee on Education Reform of 

the Committee on Education and the Workforce will come to order. 

We are meeting today to hear testimony on ‘‘The Best of Head 

Start: Learning from Model Programs.’’ Under Committee Rule 

12(b), opening statements are limited to the Chairman and the 

Ranking Minority Member of the Subcommittee. Therefore, if other 

Members have statements, they may be included in the record. 

With that, I ask unanimous consent for the hearing record to remain open 14 days to allow Members’ statements and other extraneous material referenced during the hearing to be submitted in 

the official hearing record. Without objection, so ordered. 

2

STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL N. CASTLE, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON EDUCATION REFORM, COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE 

Good morning, and thank you for joining us today for a hearing 

on ‘‘The Best of Head Start: Learning from Model Programs.’’ As 

Congress prepares to strengthen and reauthorize the Head Start 

program, I think it’s vital that we listen to those who have been 

successful so that we may learn from their experience. 

For the better part of 2 years, this Committee has been making 

the case that Head Start is a good program that can be made 

stronger. Since 1965, the Head Start program has provided comprehensive health, developmental, and educational services to disadvantaged four- and 5-year-olds. Head Start involves parents and 

communities in helping prepare needy children to succeed in school 

and beyond. 

Yet despite the many success stories in the program, and there 

are many, we have also heard troubling stories about program 

weaknesses. The GAO recently released a report that warned that 

the financial control system in the Federal Head Start early childhood program is flawed and failing to prevent multi-million dollar 

financial abuses that cheat poor children, taxpayers, and law-abiding Head Start operators. 

The GAO made some helpful recommendations on how we can 

strengthen the oversight structure to prevent abuses and protect 

good grantees. It recommended that increased competition in the 

program could help weed out poorly performing grantees and ensure high quality services are available to children and families. 

This Committee has long supported competition as a way to foster 

innovation and quality, and that is a recommendation we intend to 

take seriously. 

In addition to listening to the GAO, we are reaching out to the 

public for insight and input on how we can make Head Start 

stronger and ensure its continued success into the future. We 

launched a website about 2 weeks ago, and already we’ve received 

more than 200 responses from parents, teachers and other stakeholders in early children education with recommendations on how 

the program can be made stronger. We’re also seeking success stories about exemplary programs in local communities. We want to 

know what works and what doesn’t so that we can learn from the 

experiences of those programs that are leading by example. 

Today we’re going to hear from representatives of a few of the 

many high quality programs participating in Head Start. We’ve invited these witnesses to share their stories and help us to better 

understand what factors can help a program to succeed. 

Exemplary programs should demonstrate success in multiple facets of their program, including strong parent involvement; success 

in improving child outcomes across all developmental domains; a 

language-rich learning environment; well-qualified staff and administrators; an engaged board of directors; clean financial audits 

and program reviews; and full program enrollment. Actually, it 

sounds like something Congress should be doing. 

Additionally, exemplary programs should secure community involvement and support, and when possible, integrate Head Start 

3

with pre-kindergarten and other early learning programs within 

the community. 

Programs that exhibit these qualities should be the rule, not the 

exception. Today I hope our witnesses will help us to define a gold 

standard for Head Start so that this Committee can enact legislation that makes it easier for all programs to meet it. 

I thank the witnesses for joining us today, and I look forward to 

hearing your testimony. 

I will now yield to the gentlelady from California, the Ranking 

Minority Member of this Subcommittee, Ms. Woolsey, for her opening statement. 

[The prepared statement of Chairman Castle follows:]

Statement of Hon. Michael N. Castle, Chairman, Subcommittee on 

Education Reform, Committee on Education and the workforce 

Good morning, and thank you for joining us today for a hearing on ‘‘The Best of 

Head Start: Learning from Model Programs.’’ As Congress prepares to strengthen 

and reauthorize the Head Start program, I think it’s vital that we listen to those 

who have been successful so that we may learn from their experience. 

For the better part of two years, this committee has been making the case that 

Head Start is a good program that can be made stronger. Since 1965, the Head 

Start program has provided comprehensive health, developmental, and educational 

services to disadvantaged four and five-year olds. Head Start involves parents and 

communities in helping prepare needy children to succeed in school and beyond. 

Yet despite the many success stories in the program—and there are many—we 

have also heard troubling stories about program weaknesses. The GAO recently released a report that warned the financial control system in the federal Head Start 

early childhood program is flawed and failing to prevent multi-million dollar financial abuses that cheat poor children, taxpayers, and law-abiding Head Start operators. 

The GAO made some helpful recommendations on how we can strengthen the 

oversight structure to prevent abuses and protect good grantees. It recommended 

that increased competition in the program could help weed out poorly performing 

grantees and ensure high quality services are available to children and families. 

This committee has long supported competition as a way to foster innovation and 

quality, and that is a recommendation we intend to take seriously. 

In addition to listening to the GAO, we are reaching out to the public for insight 

and input on how we can make Head Start stronger and ensure its continued success into the future. We launched a website about two weeks ago, and already we’ve 

received more than 200 responses from parents, teachers, and other stakeholders in 

early childhood education with recommendations on how the program can be made 

stronger. We’re also seeking ‘‘success stories’’ about exemplary programs in local 

communities. We want to know what works and what doesn’t so that we can learn 

from the experiences of those programs that are leading by example. 

Today, we’re going to hear from representatives of a few of the many high quality 

programs participating in Head Start. We’ve invited these witnesses to share their 

stories and help us to better understand what factors can help a program to succeed. 

Exemplary programs should demonstrate success in multiple facets of their program, including strong parent involvement; success in improving child outcomes 

across all developmental domains; a language-rich learning environment; well-qualified staff and administrators; an engaged board of directors; clean financial audits 

and program reviews; and, full program enrollment. Additionally, exemplary programs should secure community involvement and support, and when possible, integrate Head Start with pre-kindergarten and other early learning programs within 

the community. 

Programs that exhibit these qualities should be the rule, not the exception. Today, 

I hope our witnesses will help us to define a gold standard for Head Start so that 

this Committee can enact legislation that makes it easier for all programs to meet 

it. 

I thank the witnesses for joining us today, and I look forward to hearing your testimony. I will now yield to the gentle lady from California, the ranking minority 

member of this subcommittee, Rep. Woolsey. 

4

STATEMENT OF HON. LYNN C. WOOLSEY, RANKING MEMBER, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EDUCATION REFORM, COMMITTEE ON 

EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE 

Ms. WOOLSEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I, too, appreciate 

your holding this hearing, because it’s a very important topic, 

learning from model programs. 

As we continue the reauthorization process that we began last 

Congress, the 108th Congress, I’m pleased that we have another 

opportunity, and this one in particular, to hear directly from four 

high-quality Head Start programs. We want your thoughts. We 

want to know what makes your programs great and what you 

think about reauthorization in general. 

In any reauthorization, I think one of the most important steps 

is to listen to the people who put the laws that we write into practice every day. We already know that the vast majority of Head 

Start programs provide comprehensive, high quality services that 

help children make academic and social gains so that they can 

close much if not all of the achievement gap before they begin kindergarten. 

Head Start also has strong standards, and we know that, and 

monitoring and accountability measures built into the law to ensure high performance, although we need to make certain that 

those measures are enforced. 

I look forward, as I said, to hearing from our witnesses about 

how those measures have helped them and if it’s improved the 

quality of their programs, and if not, what we can do to improve. 

Because all of us, most of all the people involved in the Head Start 

programs around the country, who have dedicated themselves to 

improving our most vulnerable children’s lives, all of us recognize 

that standards and accountability are not about Democrats, not 

about Republicans, they’re about our children. 

And, of course, another way to improve those children’s lives is 

to devote more resources to Head Start. In that way, more children 

can benefit from the programs like the ones represented on this 

panel. Unfortunately, this President and this Congress have not 

done well in that area, so we need to hold ourselves accountable 

as well. 

But again, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to what I hope will be 

a bipartisan reauthorization of Head Start and to hearing from the 

experts on this panel. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Woolsey follows:]

Statement of Hon. Lynn C. Woolsey, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on 

Education Reform, Committee on Education and the Workforce 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I appreciate your holding this hearing today on this important topic—‘‘Learning 

From Model Programs.’’

As we continue the reauthorization process that we began last Congress, I am 

pleased that we have an opportunity to hear directly from four high-quality Head 

Start programs about what makes a great program and on reauthorization in general. 

In any reauthorization, I think one of the most important steps is to listen to the 

people who have to put the laws we write into practice every day. 

We already know that the vast majority of Head Start programs provide comprehensive, high quality services that help children make academic and social gains 

5

so that they can close much, if not all, of the achievement gap, before they begin 

kindergarten. 

Head Start also has strong standards, monitoring, and accountability measures 

built into the law to ensure high performance, although we need to take care to see 

that those measures are enforced. 

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses about how those measures have 

helped them improve the quality of their programs and what we can do to improve. 

Because all of us—most of all, the people in Head Start programs around the 

country, who have dedicated themselves to improving our most vulnerable children’s 

lives—recognize that standards and accountability are not about Democrats or Republicans; they’re about those children. 

Of course, another way to improve those children’s lives is to devote more resources to Head Start so that more children can benefit from programs like the ones 

represented on this panel. 

Unfortunately, this President and this Congress have not done well in that area, 

and so we need to hold ourselves more accountable as well. 

But again, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to what I hope will be a bipartisan reauthorization of Head Start, and to hearing from this panel. 

Thank you. 

Chairman CASTLE. Thank you, Ms. Woolsey. And we do have a 

very distinguished panel of witnesses today, and we’re going to go 

through the introductions at this point. And we’ll do it across the 

order here. 

But the first is Stephen W. Daeschner, Ph.D. Dr. Daeschner is 

the Superintendent of the Jefferson County Public School District 

in Louisville, Kentucky. JCPS is the 28th-largest district in the nation, serving 96,000 students from preschool through grade 12. 

Since 1993, Dr. Daeschner has been responsible for the implementation of a systemic pre-kindergarten program for three- and 4-

year-olds using funding from Head Start and state level school 

readiness initiatives. Dr. Daeschner is a board member for Greater 

Louisville, Inc., the Metro Chamber of Commerce, and is an adjunct professor at the University of Louisville. He holds a Ph.D. in 

education administration from the University of Wisconsin. 

And thank you. We appreciate having you here, Dr. Daeschner. 

At this time I would like to welcome the Chairman of the Full 

Committee, John Boehner, to the Subcommittee. A few of the witnesses joining us today are from the Chairman’s district, and it’s 

my pleasure to recognize him for the purpose of introducing these 

witnesses. 

Mr. BOEHNER. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I’m pleased 

to introduce David Marker. Mr. Marker is the Chief Financial Officer of the Miami Valley Child Development Centers, a single-purpose Head Start agency in Dayton, Ohio. Working for the agency 

for over a decade, Mr. Marker was promoted to chief financial officer in 2002 and is responsible for assisting with the overall management of the organization. 

Mr. Marker is a recognized expert in nonprofit management who 

is dedicated to the agency’s goal to maintain professional standards 

of conduct in all aspects of fiscal and program management. And 

before working with the Miami Valley program, Mr. Marker managed the Dayton Metropolitan Housing Authority. 

He’s joined with one of his colleagues, Scott Siegfried, who is 

with the Miami Valley Child Development Centers, as well. He is 

the agency’s program director, responsible for supervising all education, staff, and activity since 1991. He oversees child assessment 

activities to ensure that all children are making academic progress, 

6

and maintains a successful track record in preparing their students 

for kindergarten. 

Mr. Siegfried is a member of the National and Dayton Associations for the Education of Young Children, as well as the Dayton 

Public Schools Preschool Network. And he holds a master’s degree 

in early childhood education from Nova Southeastern University. 

I might also add that they have with them their boss, Ms. 

Sherrie Lookner, who is the president and CEO at Miami Valley. 

She’s here today, and we want to thank her for coming. They together operate a top notch Head Start program, covering part of 

my district and Mr. Hobson’s district, as well, and I think she and 

her staff deserve great credit for the successful program that they 

have. And I’ll say welcome. 

Chairman CASTLE. Sherrie, could you raise your hand, please, so 

we can know who you are. Sherrie Lookner, right there. We appreciate having you here, as well. 

The next witness is Barbara Louise Mainster. Ms. Mainster is 

the Executive Director of the Redlands Christian Migrant Association, a Head Start agency serving the children of migrant and seasonal farm workers. Ms. Mainster has worked with RCMA for over 

30 years in capacities including program director and education coordinator, and was a member of the State of Florida Universal Prekindergarten Advisory Council. Ms. Mainster holds a degree in social services from Michigan State University. 

Welcome. 

And Gayle Cunningham is with us. Ms. Cunningham is the Executive Director of the Jefferson County Committee for Economic Opportunity located in Birmingham, Alabama, and director of the 

agency’s Head Start and Early Head Start programs. 

She is a research partner with the Georgia State University 

Head Start Quality Research Center, where her Head Start program participated in a design effectiveness study for the 1998-1999 

program year. 

Ms. Cunningham was formerly an assistant professor of early 

childhood education at Delgado Community College in New Orleans and a senior research associate for Bank Street College, where 

she led the expansion of the Child Development Associate 

Credentialing Program to include infant and toddler caregivers, 

home visitors, and family daycare providers. 

Ms. Cunningham received her M.S. in early childhood education, 

supervision, and administration from Bank Street College of Education. 

And before the witnesses begin, I would like to remind the Members here that we will be asking questions after the entire panel 

has testified, for your information, as well. In addition, Committee 

Rule 2 imposes a 5-minute limit on all questions. And you all have 

the clock system in front of you. I think you understand it. You 

have 4 minutes on green, one on yellow, and when you see the red, 

you’re supposed to start winding down, shall we say, or get wound 

down. But we do want to hear from you, and we really do appreciate all of you being here. We always know there’s some logistical 

issues in getting here and being with us, so we do appreciate you 

being here on time and ready to go. 

7

And with that, Dr. Daeschner, we look forward to your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF STEPHEN W. DAESCHNER, PH.D., SUPERINTENDENT, JEFFERSON COUNTY SCHOOLS, LOUISVILLE, 

KY 

Dr. DAESCHNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Honorable Members of the Subcommittee. Our Head Start, Early Head Start programs, our State Preschool Program for students on subsidized 

meals, and our Tuition-based Preschool currently serve more than 

5,400 children ages 4 and under. 

Our school district’s Early Childhood Education Program is exemplary and unique in large part because we use an integrated, 

seamless approach to provide programs and services. The Head 

Start and State Preschool Programs are intentionally connected 

through common leadership to provide a uniform, developmentally 

appropriate curriculum. 

Our program is outcome based, and assessment is the key. Every 

three- and 4-year-old student receives frequent assessments and 

also completes an end-of-year profile that measures mastery of the 

physical, social and pre-academic skills. 

Teachers certainly receive intensive monthly and summer training based on these skill sets that we assess quite frequently. 

Teachers are supported, as an example, with a web-based Core 

Content Guides that match the curriculum with calendar-based 

timelines to ensure that every classroom is presenting the same instructional material with the same level of rigor. 

Another exemplary strategy rests in our creative yet physically sound management of financial resources. Our $35 million annual 

preschool budget consists of 58 percent Head Start and other Federal programs like Title I, 22 percent state preschool funds, 16 percent from our district through local taxes, 3 percent from parents 

that pay tuition, and 1 percent from local business donations. This 

integrated funding allows all children to receive increased instructional and support services without regard to where their program 

funding is generated. 

Meaningful parent involvement is absolutely essential. Parents 

are engaged through a home/school contract that includes daily 

reading with their child and take-home activities. Since 76 percent 

of our preschoolers are from single-parent households, our nationally recognized Fatherhood/Male Initiative ensures that more children are connected with a significant, positive male role model. 

How do we know our efforts are working, is with our results and 

our outcomes. Let me give you an example of the 2004 end-of-year 

outcomes. With 91 percent mastery for the economically disadvantaged students funded by our state program, 96 percent mastery 

for our middle and upper class students who pay tuition, and 97 

percent mastery for children funded by Head Start. As you can see, 

it makes a big difference. 

What can you do to support our efforts? A quality Head Start 

program integrated into or with a school district operation program 

we think is very important. Creative implementation strategies are 

required to effectively meet the regulations of both Head Start program and a state department of Education’s preschool program. 

8

Without a doubt, we can do a better job for our children and families by operating under one set of guidelines. 

We certainly ask your considerations to grant at least a handful 

of large districts that are current Head Start grantees the authority to operate Head Start programs within state regulations while 

maintaining the integrity of the standards provided by Head Start. 

We would be most eager to serve as one of these pilot projects. 

We support a proposal offered by Congresswoman Anne Northup 

to enable states to allow some of their school districts and Head 

Start programs to apply for the pilot programs. 

Finally, I feel compelled to draw your attention to one very intrusive, as an example, regulation, that has recently sprung up from 

Head Start, which is the requirement that all vehicles transporting 

Head Start children have restraint. Our preschoolers in our district 

are transported on buses that meet state standards, and Kentucky 

has one of the toughest bus regulations in the nation. Purchasing 

and installing child restraints would cost our district approximately 

$5.8 million. The diversion of these funds would result in a reduced 

number of children served by Head Start. Later I might give you 

an example. 

We appreciate Congresswoman Northup’s action to resolve this 

issue for us and hope this reauthorization of Head Start can adopt 

the language she has proposed for permanent enactment. 

I would certainly encourage your review of my written comments 

that expand on many of these verbal statements. I certainly appreciate and thank you for allowing me to share our successes and 

some of the recommendations. We think Head Start is just an absolutely essential part of our program. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Daeschner follows:]

Statement of Stephen W. Daeschner, Ph.D., Superintendent, Jefferson 

County Schools, Louisville, KY 

Chairman Castle and Honorable Members of the Subcommittee on Education Reform, as you consider the reauthorization of Head Start, I appreciate your invitation 

to address the issue of exemplary programs for our youngest students. My name is 

Stephen Daeschner, and I am superintendent of the Jefferson County Public School 

District in Louisville, Kentucky, the nation’s 28th largest school district, serving 

more than 98,000 students from birth to grade 12. Our Head Start and Early Head 

Start programs, our State Preschool Program for students on subsidized meals, and 

our Tuition Preschool Program currently serve more than 5,400 children ages four 

and under. 

Our school district’s Early Childhood Education Program is exemplary and unique 

in large part because we use an integrated, seamless approach to providing programs and services. The Head Start and State Preschool Programs are intentionally 

connected under common leadership to provide a uniform, developmentally appropriate curriculum. Because Kentucky uses high stakes accountability testing, our 

District has much to gain by ensuring the early preparedness of all our preschoolers. 

In addition to our common curriculum and services, there are other exemplary 

strategies that contribute to our success. These strategies include assessment and 

outcome standards, professional development, core content guides, interventions, 

combined funding sources, and parent involvement. 

Our program is outcome based and assessment is key. Every three- and four-yearold student receives frequent assessments and also completes an end-of-year profile 

that measures mastery of physical, social, and pre-academic skills. Results from the 

individual profiles also are used to monitor curriculum implementation districtwide 

and to plan for teacher training in any curricular area that shows systemic weakness. 

Teachers receive intensive monthly and summer training focused on core content 

areas, math and literacy curriculum, intervention strategies, and summer skills reVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:01 Jul 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 H:\DOCS\20629 EDU1 PsN: NNIXON
9

inforcement to ensure that all children are academically prepared for kindergarten, 

regardless of family economic circumstances.. Weekly site meetings are held to discuss program issues and collaborate on student needs. 

Teachers are supported with web-based Core Content Guides that match the curriculum with calendar-based timelines to ensure that every classroom is presenting 

the same instructional material with the same level of intensity. Technology plays 

a major role in student learning today, and our preschoolers get a jumpstart on computer learning, especially in the area of literacy, thanks to the provision of computers in every classroom. 

Another exemplary strategy rests in our creative yet fiscally sound management of financial resources. Our $35 million annual preschool budget consists of 58 percent federal Head Start funds, 22 percent state preschool funds, 16 percent from the 

district in local tax funds, 3 percent from parents for tuition programs, and an additional 1 percent from local business donations. This integrated funding allows all 

children to receive increased instructional and support services without regard to 

where their program funding is generated. 

Meaningful parent involvement is essential to our early childhood program. Parents are engaged through a home/school contract that includes daily reading with 

their child and take-home activities. Since 76 percent of our preschoolers are from 

single-parent households, our nationally recognized Fatherhood/Male Initiative 

helps ensure that more children are connected with a significant, positive male role 

model. 

We also use a formal transition program to assist students and parents as they 

move on to kindergarten, and we operate a Parent Assistance Center and Family 

Resource Centers that help families with a variety of school programs and social 

services. The intent is to remove any family barriers that would impede a child’s 

academic progress. 

How do we know our efforts are working? The proof is in the data. First, over 

a three-year period, our preschoolers’’ mastery of skills deemed important for kindergarten success has increased from the level of 65 percent to 94 percent. Meanwhile, our Head Start students’’ performance exceeds both state and National Reporting Systems averages. Additionally, results on the nationally-normed Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills show our third graders progressing from the 46th 

percentile in 1999 to the 59th percentile in 2004. We attribute much of this gain 

to the long-term effect of our strong Head Start/preschool program. 

Second, community support and partnerships continue to grow, with Louisville Metro businesses giving over $3 million for additional early childhood classrooms. 

Third, by integrating our funds from multiple sources, we have increased the number of children served, the amount of instructional time each child receives, and the 

social services provided. Finally, one of our most significant and unexpected outcomes is that we are now in the process of designing a more rigorous kindergarten 

curriculum because our preschool/Head Start programs are sending children on to 

kindergarten with a much higher level of skill mastery. 

What can you do to support our efforts? A quality Head Start program integrated 

into or with a school district-operated program is essential. This developmental education process and seamless transition are as important to schools today as the kindergarten program debate and implementation were in the 1960s and ‘‘70s. 

Creative implementation strategies are required to effectively meet the regulations of the Health and Human Services Department’s Head Start program, while 

simultaneously operating a state Department of Education preschool program. Without doubt, we can do a better job for our children and families by operating under 

one set of guidelines. 

We understand that you are considering allowing a limited number of states or 

localities to participate in State Demonstration programs. We ask your consideration to grant a handful of large districts, that are current Head Start grantees, the 

authority to serve as local demonstration projects that would operate Head Start 

programs within state regulations while maintaining the integrity of the health and 

social services standards provided by Head Start. We would be most eager to serve 

as one of those demonstration projects. 

Many states face political pressure from other agencies operating Head Start programs. Some states may not be able to apply for school districts that are operating 

as grantees. As an alternative, we support a proposal offered by Congresswoman 

Anne Northup to enable states to allow some of their school districts and Head Start 

programs to apply for the demonstration programs. Kentucky’s program could be administered under the Secretary of Education and the Office of the Governor. 

Finally, I feel compelled to call to your attention one very intrusive regulation 

that has recently sprung from Head Start, which is the requirement for seat belts 

on all vehicles transporting Head Start children. Our preschoolers are transported 

10

on buses that meet state standards. Purchasing and installing seat belts would cost 

over $3.6 million and require another $2.2 million annually for maintenance. Even 

then, our insurance companies inform us the buses may not be insurable due to 

changes in the vehicles’’ structure. The diversion of these funds would result in a 

reduced number of children served by Head Start. Additionally, there is no evidence 

that seatbelts provide additional protection but, in fact, may actually create a safety 

hazard. We appreciate Congresswoman Northup’s action to resolve this issue for us 

and hope this reauthorization of Head Start can adopt the language she has proposed for permanent enactment. 

Thank you for allowing me to share our successes and recommendations with this 

Honorable body.

[Attachments to Dr. Daeschner’s statement follow:]

11


20629.001
12


20629.002
13


20629.003
14

Chairman CASTLE. Thank you, Dr. Daeschner. We appreciate 

your testimony a great deal, and we’ll get back to you shortly here 

with a few questions. 

And now we’ll turn to Mr. Marker and Mr. Siegfried, who are 

going to do this jointly, as I understand it. 

Mr. MARKER. Yes, sir. 

STATEMENT OF DAVID F. MARKER, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, MIAMI VALLEY CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTERS, INC., 

DAYTON, OH 

Mr. MARKER. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I’m 

David Marker and this is Scott Siegfried to my left. We are both 

pleased to be here this morning to discuss accountability and child 

outcomes in the Head Start program. 

This Committee has heard of luxury SUVs, exorbitant salaries, 

credit card abuse and unallowable program expenses that have resulted in eligible children not being served. These headlines anger 

me and the people I work with. 

Since 1964, MVCDC has operated with oversight from concerned 

community leaders on our board of trustees. Our corporate culture 

is based on a core value of honesty, integrity and understanding 

that we are stewards of tax dollars entrusted to our care. Desired 

results require continual training, review of current law, and review of internal controls. In the absence of strong internal controls, 

you will find fraud, waste and mismanagement. 


20629.004
15

High levels of integrity require hard work. We did not wait for 

the effects of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act to filter down to 501(c)(3) organizations. We embraced the concept of executive-driven, internal 

control management, and it’s now in effect. 

There’s no magic formula to maintain strong financial and accounting practices. Success requires effort and a conscious desire to 

operate a quality program in accordance with regulations. 

Suggestions to protect funds and increase accountability, as an 

example, OMB Circular A-133 requires audits to be submitted no 

later than 9 months after the end of a fiscal year. I suggest a 

change from 9 months to 6 months. Critical information can then 

be in the hands of DHHS 3 months sooner. 

Most grantees draw down Federal funds from the Division of 

Payment Management’s website. DPM is efficient, but grantee expenditures are not reconciled with funds received except at six and 

12-month intervals with the standard Form 269 report. At a minimum, the report should be submitted on a quarterly or even a 

monthly basis to allow for simple reconciliation. 

Mismanagement of Federal funds requires swift intervention. 

DHHS can terminate a grantee’s ability to draw down funds and 

to change that grantee to funding on a reimbursement basis. This 

action protects Federal funds by allowing the regional office to authorize payment only after documentation has been reviewed. 

GAO has recommended allowing recompetition of grants. Grantees with consistent poor financial and programmatic performance 

would be the ideal candidates for recompetition. DHHS should remove dysfunctional programs. 

I want to thank the Chairman and Members of the Committee 

on Education and the Workforce for providing me this opportunity 

to summarize my written testimonial report. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Marker follows:]

Statement of David F. Marker, Chief Financial Officer, Miami Valley Child 

Development Centers, Inc., Dayton, OH 

Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, I am David Marker and this is Scott 

Siegfried and we are both pleased to be here this morning to discuss accountability 

and child outcomes in the nation’s Head Start program. 

Operation of exemplary programs 

From previous testimony, the committee has been apprised of apparent misfeasance or malfeasance in some Head Start programs across the country. These problems range from a luxury SUV and exorbitant salaries and credit card abuse, to unallowable program expenses that result in eligible children not being served. These 

headlines anger me, the staff I work with, and the people at the majority of Head 

Start programs where problems of this nature do not occur. 

Miami Valley Child Development Centers, Inc. (MVCDC) was incorporated in 

1964, at the time of the creation of the nation’s first experiment with Head Start. 

Operating over the years with strong management, and oversight from concerned 

community leaders participating on the Board of Trustees, MVCDC developed a corporate culture with core values of honesty, integrity, service to the community, and 

an understanding that we are stewards of tax dollars entrusted to our care. During 

our 40 year history, there have been problems and bumps in the road, but the culture of MVCDC has survived and enabled the agency to operate for more than 15 

years without any audit findings related to financial management. Although 

MVCDC may be considered an exemplary program within the Head Start community, a designation as exemplary today is no guarantee that the program will be exemplary tomorrow without continued hard work. 

The culture of MVCDC dictates a professional approach to financial management 

and accounting practices. To achieve the desired result requires continual training, 

review of current laws and regulations, and a constant review of internal controls. 

16

In the absence of strong internal controls, you will find misuse of credit cards, unallowable expenses, waste, and possible fraud. It is important not only to maintain 

strong internal controls but to sharpen the focus of all staff members to be alert 

for the signs of waste, fraud, and mismanagement. 

MVCDC has been successful in maintaining high levels of integrity through dedication and hard work. As an example, we did not wait for the effects of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act to filter down to 501(c)(3) organizations. As a corporation, we embraced the basic concept of executive-driven internal control management. The 

Board of Trustees adopted an extensive misconduct, dishonesty, and fraud policy 

which was added to our Personnel Policies, and various staff have been involved in 

implementing the policy. Additionally, staff are involved in a detailed risk assessment activity that is assessing all aspects of the corporation. Once completed, the 

risk assessment will be presented to the Board of Trustees for their evaluation and 

comment. 

There is no magic formula to maintain strong finance and accounting practices. 

Success requires dedication, hard work, and a conscious desire to operate a quality 

program in accordance with the regulations. The people who operate programs in 

this manner are easy to identify; they take no offense at being called a variety of 

names, and they have thick skin because the job requires them to say ‘‘no’’ more 

often than they say ‘‘yes’’. The easy way to deal with difficult financial and accounting issues is to be lax and accommodating. Unfortunately, this type of management 

will eventually result in violation of regulations and ultimately, serious financial 

problems. 

Again, I want to express my anger at the examples of program abuse that we 

have all read in the newspapers. The vast majority of programs struggle everyday 

to operate in accordance with the regulations to serve all of the children for which 

they are funded. To protect tax dollars and ensure services are delivered to the atrisk population, however, accountability for program performance and fiscal management must be strengthened. From my perspective as a program operator, I believe that accountability can be vastly improved in the following ways. 

Proper review and follow-up of audits 

O. M. B. Circular No. A–133, known as the Single Audit Act, contains the audit 

requirements for recipients of federal awards. For those agencies with awards less 

than $500,000, audits are still required under the Department of Health and 

Human Services (DHHS) CFR Title 45, Part 74. The potential problem I see under 

A–133 is that audits must be submitted no later than nine (9) months after the end 

of the fiscal year. I believe that by changing the submission date from nine (9) 

months to six (6) months, controls would be strengthened by putting the completed 

audit in the hands of DHHS three (3) months sooner, and would not present an 

undue hardship for programs. 

Once the audit has been received by the DHHS national center, it is imperative 

that the entire audit be reviewed for financial or programmatic irregularities. If 

irregularities are found in the audit, this information must be provided to the appropriate Regional Office for immediate follow-up. Obviously, findings of questioned 

costs or other serious fiscal problems, along with issues regarding the health and 

safety of children must receive the highest priority for action by the Regional Office 

staff. Swift follow-up action as early as possible is a key to limiting the loss of dollars and guiding the agency into compliance from a programmatic standpoint. 

Although auditors only offer opinions on the financial statements and information 

provided by management, I believe that it is important that all audits be reviewed 

for their compliance with the audit requirements of Circular A–133 and Government 

Accounting Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Lack 

of comments regarding performance of the activities required by the grant, qualified 

opinions, or a statement that the audit was completed under some standard other 

than Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, should be cause to examine the 

audit more closely. 

Identifying potential financial and programmatic mismanagement 

In addition to the annual financial and performance audit, financial mismanagement may be identified in other ways. One method is to reconcile the federal funds 

drawn-down by a grantee to the amount that is spent throughout the year. Currently, most Head Start grantees draw-down their federal funds from the Division 

of Payment Management’s (DPM) website. All grant information is entered into 

DPM’s database, and grantees use the site to request funds. The regulations for 

cash advances state, ‘‘The timing and amount of cash advances shall be as close as 

is administratively feasible to the actual disbursements by the recipient organization’’. 

17

The DPM system is very efficient for grantees to obtain funds, but it does not appear that DHHS or the Regional Offices attempt to reconcile grantee expenditures 

except at six and 12 month intervals by utilizing the SF–269 report. At a minimum, 

the SF–269 should be submitted on a quarterly or possibly a monthly basis. This 

report could be developed as an on-line report which would make it simple for the 

Regional Office to compare expenditures with the data from DPM. Reconciliation 

would be straightforward to determine the amount of funds being requested by a 

grantee and the amount that has been expended as reported on the SF–269. As an 

example, if, at the end of the first quarter of the grantees fiscal year they have already drawn-down 50 percent of their annual funding, it would seem reasonable to 

think there may be a serious problem with that grantee. Making this change would 

provide DHHS with the ability to identify potential problems early as a means of 

preventing the financial mismanagement from worsening. 

Fiscal and programmatic mismanagement may also be identified during the onsite monitoring visit with the Program Review Instrument for Systems Monitoring 

(PRISM) every three years. The PRISM was described in previous testimony so 

there is no need to provide you with the same information again. I will say that 

since the Fiscal Checklist was modified in 2004, the instrument has a design which 

will help to identify fiscal problems more effectively than the previous version. A 

potential problem with the PRISM is the shear volume of data that is reviewed and 

processed. The review team rates the grantee on about 670 performance indicators 

during the one week visit. If the review is focused on critical indicators, both financial and programmatic, serious problems would be more readily discernable rather 

than lost in the minutia that is collected. 

An area of programmatic performance that may now be assessed is the data that 

is submitted via the National Reporting System (NRS). These assessment data are 

submitted in the fall and spring of each year for the four year old children who will 

be attending kindergarten in the fall of the following school year. Although the NRS 

was not designed to determine the performance of the Head Start program, the data 

that is generated may raise questions regarding curriculum or teaching methods. As 

an example, if the data indicates that children from one Head Start program are 

consistently more than one deviation below the national average, it would seem reasonable to contact the program to find out if there are reasons for the lower scores. 

Based on the response from the agency, along with other outcome data, it may be 

determined that additional training and technical assistance are required, or it may 

be determined that there is a more systemic problem that may require an on-site 

visit by a Regional Office staff member. 

Required follow-up for financial and programmatic mismanagement 

I believe that it is reasonable to expect that Head Start grantees that mismanage 

funds or fail to perform all the requirements of the grant will be sanctioned in some 

manner. I am not describing actual accounting errors where something was posted 

to the wrong account, and is later identified and corrected, I am describing serious 

cases where money or assets have been wasted or used for personal gain. In almost 

all cases involving money, the mismanagement can be clearly identified from the 

records; an expenditure is allowable or it is not; money is either properly accounted 

for, or it is not. In either event, the appropriate action should be taken as quickly 

as possible. Failure to perform all the requirements of the grant can also be identified and must also be acted on as quickly as possible. 

If the mismanagement of federal funds results from apparent malfeasance, then 

serious intervention is required. Although action to de-fund a grantee may be difficult and time consuming, it may be possible to change the grantee’s payment status to protect federal funds. I believe that it is possible, with good reason, to terminate the grantee’s rights to draw-down funds through DPM and to fund them on 

a reimbursement basis. That is, on a weekly or monthly basis, the grantee pays all 

expenses and submits the appropriate documentation to the Regional Office for reimbursement. Under this scenario, if the grantee can fund the operation up-front, 

the Regional Office will have ample time to review invoices and billing prior to providing reimbursement. The Regional Office will also have time to investigate the initial incident of malfeasance that came to their attention. If it is determined that 

the grantee did nothing wrong, and that internal controls are sound, then DHHS 

may reinstate the grantee’s ability to draw-down funds in advance. 

Many of the programmatic problems that are identified have to do with nonhealth and safety issues. As described previously, with over 670 performance indicators in the PRISM instrument, it is not difficult to find areas of non-compliance. All 

of these issues can be dealt with effectively under the current system by having the 

grantee prepare a corrective action plan. The Regional Office can follow-up in writing with the grantee until the grantee ensures that the non-compliance have been 

18

corrected. Depending on the number of non-compliances and the seriousness of the 

issues, the Regional Office may send a staff person on site to verify that the noncompliances were corrected. 

Increased competition for Head Start Grants 

The independent Government Accountability Office (GAO) has recommended that 

the federal government take steps to allow the ‘‘recompetition’’ of grants awarded 

to Head Start grantees. It has been suggested that all Head Start grants should go 

out for open competition every third year of the grant cycle. In light of the many 

problems identified in Head Start programs during the past year, I understand the 

desire to fix the problem through competition. 

I believe there is a relative agreement that the majority of Head Start programs 

are operating within the regulations and are clearly documenting the progress children make during their stay in Head Start. Rather than re-compete every Head 

Start grant at the end of their three year grant cycle, at great expense, I believe 

that re-competition can be combined with de-funding activities to remove all of the 

poorly performing grantees. Grantees with serious financial mismanagement issues 

or serious health and safety violations should either undergo the de-funding process 

or be placed on a reimbursement basis of funding as previously described. The key 

is to act swiftly to ensure safety and to limit the loss of federal funds. 

Head Start grantees that consistently have generally poor programmatic performance due to on-going deficiencies would be likely candidates for re-competition. 

DHHS would be responsible to determine a ranking process that is based on audit 

findings, PRISM findings, and any other financial and programmatic data the Regional Office may determine. Re-competition would provide DHHS with an additional tool that would remove those programs not operating in an efficient and effective manner. 

I want to thank the Committee on Education and the Workforce for providing me 

this opportunity to testify before you. As you consider legislation to re-authorize the 

Head Start program, I hope you will consider some of the information I have provided in conjunction with testimony provided by others. I believe in the goals of 

Head Start. I also believe that when operated in conformance with the laws and regulations, coupled with the infusion of new early education research, Head Start will 

make progress in closing the readiness gap that exists between some Head Start 

children and their peers, and all funding will reach the children it is meant to serve. 

Chairman CASTLE. Good morning. Thank you very much, Mr. 

Siegfried. 

STATEMENT OF SCOTT SIEGFRIED, PROGRAM COORDINATOR, 

MIAMI VALLEY CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTERS, INC., DAYTON, OH 

Mr. SIEGFRIED. The Miami Valley Child Development Centers 

does not look through one lens to make one decision. Our system 

of assessing child outcomes and program quality is comprehensive 

in its approach. Just as a strong financial system requires checks 

and balances, program quality and child outcomes must also have 

such a system. Although we have a long history of collecting and 

analyzing child outcome data, our approach has become increasingly sophisticated in recent years. 

Our objective is to create a system where child outcome data can 

be incorporated into our agency’s continuous improvement plans. 

Our model remains flexible to allow for adjustments as a result of 

the relevant research in the field as well as the patterns and 

trends we observe when analyzing our data. For example, Breakthrough to Literacy, a research project piloted with Abt Associates, 

resulted from our endeavor to strengthen the language and literacy 

skills of our children. This plan incorporates teacher and child directed activities that provide a balance of experiences in vocabulary, alphabet knowledge, word recognition and phonological 

awareness. 

19

Some of our systems, such as National Reporting System, and 

the mandated system through the state called Get it, Got it, Go, 

require the use of a standardized instrument implemented in a uniform manner. 

Other tools designed to measure child outcome such as High/

Scope’s Child Observation Record, and individual portfolios, rely on 

teacher observation, anecdotal notes, work sampling and photography. These ongoing methods of assessment produce observationbased data in a familiar setting to children. 

The Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale and the Infant 

and Toddler Environmental Rating Scale provide holistic and quantifiable data and seven subscales related to space and furnishings, 

personal care routines, language reasoning activities, interaction, 

program structure and parents and staff. Action plans are developed and implemented after each data collection period. These 

plans address professional development, resources and any curricular adjustments to ensure maximal child outcomes. 

Parents and staff are partners in the care and education of children. Our system therefore supports, educates and guides parents 

to provide meaningful experiences for the children at home. To 

strengthen the role of families as the primary educator of their 

children, we have developed a monthly checklist using materials 

traditionally found in the homes that support the content of the 

child observation record. 

In addition, backpacks are sent home on a regular basis with materials, parental strategies and extensions that can support the development of critical concepts when that child is away from school. 

By relying on multiple systems of child assessment, we are better 

able to make informed decisions regarding curricular adjustments 

at the agency, classroom and individual level. The complex nature 

of measuring the outcomes of children in Head Start and their 

progress demands our relentless commitment. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Siegfried follows:]

Statement of Scott Siegfried, Program Coordinator, Miami Valley Child 

Development Centers, Inc., Dayton, OH 

I am pleased to be here this morning to discuss child outcomes in the nation’s 

Head Start program. 

Changes in educational requirements and legislative mandates have resulted in 

our development of an increasingly comprehensive child outcome measuring system. 

Our agency’s continuous improvement plans are adjusted according to our child outcome data. It is important that our system remain flexible to allow for adjustments 

as a result of the relevant research in the field as well as the patterns and trends 

we observe when analyzing our data. 

By utilizing the Brigance tool to complete our developmental screening process, 

we begin to understand the teaching strategies required to encourage children’s 

learning. Results from this screen offer support for early intervention services where 

applicable. 

In November 2004, author and scientist Dr. Debbie Cryer provided training for 

our support staff on the implementation of the Early Childhood Environment Rating 

Scale (ECERS) and the Infant/Toddler Environment Rating Scale (ITERS). This nationally recognized evaluation system quantifies several items under the broad categories of Space and Furnishings, Personal Care Routine, Language–Reasoning, Activities, Interaction, Program Structure and Parents and Staff. As a result of classroom observations, action plans are developed to share findings with staff and to 

support their professional growth. 

To strengthen the role of families as the primary educator of their children, we 

have developed a monthly checklist using materials traditionally found in the homes 

20

that support the content of the Child Observation Record (COR). In addition, 

backpacks are sent home on a regular basis with materials, parental strategies and 

extensions that can support the development of critical concepts when that child is 

away from school. 

We began a researched-based pilot project this school year when we initiated the 

Breakthrough to Literacy model in five of our Head Start classrooms. This plan incorporates teacher and child directed activities that provide a balance of experiences 

in vocabulary, alphabet knowledge, word recognition, and phonological awareness. 

Components include small group reading and writing experiences, independent 

reading and writing, daily writing, book of the week, take me home books, and a 

software curriculum. A research team from Abt Associates is conducting the ongoing evaluation of the pilot project. 

Although we realize that there are additional national accrediting bodies, we have 

17 centers that are accredited through the National Association for the Education 

of Young Children (NAEYC). There are an additional five centers that are in the 

self-study process. In this design, we are able to document the relationship between 

the quality that accreditation demands and positive child outcomes. 

In our state funded classrooms, we conduct additional assessments of children 

using the Get it, Got it, Go screening tool. This system, mandated through the Ohio 

Department of Education (ODE), measures vocabulary, rhyming, and alliteration 

through a series of picture cards presented to each child in a one-on-one setting. 

In the fall of 2004, we completed almost 1,300 assessments using the National Reporting System (NRS). The results of this national effort allow us to review our 

agency’s progress compared to national averages in the domains of language, literacy, and math. 

This school year, the Miami Valley Child Development Centers, Inc. has implemented High/Scope’s Child Observation Record (COR) in all of our state and federal 

classrooms including our Home Base option. The COR categories have been aligned 

to the Federal Domains and Elements as well as the Early Learning Content Standards developed by the Ohio Department of Education (ODE). Teachers make ongoing observations using a paper version of the COR. This information is then 

transposed into the COR–PC software. COR data are collected on October 29, 2004, 

February 25, 2005 and May 13, 2005. In addition, data are collected on June 30, 

2005 in our year-round sites. The data are maintained in multiple databases that 

allow us to filter information by county, program option, and age. Statistics are applied to the High/Scope software called the Outcomes Reporter. Reports indicating 

progress in COR categories, Federal Domains and required elements are then made 

available to stakeholders for further analysis and discussion. 

Children’s progress is also evaluated by using an individual portfolio system. 

Throughout the school year, children’s experiences with writing, alphabetic principles and counting are captured through anecdotal notes, work sampling and photography. Along with results from our more formal child assessment system, these 

concrete images of progress are shared with parents during home visits and parent/

teacher conferences. 

Miami Valley Child Development Centers does not look through one lens. Our system of assessing child outcomes and program quality is comprehensive in its approach. Just as a strong financial system requires checks and balances, program 

quality and child outcomes must also have such a system.

[An attachment to Mr. Siegfried’s statement follows:]

21

Chairman CASTLE. Thank you, Mr. Marker, thank you, Mr. Siegfried. We appreciate your testimony. 

Ms. Mainster, it’s your turn. 

STATEMENT OF BARBARA MAINSTER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

REDLANDS CHRISTIAN MIGRANT ASSOCIATION, 

IMMOKALEE, FL 

Ms. MAINSTER. Thank you, Chairman Castle, Ranking Member 

Woolsey, and others for having this hearing. We appreciate and are 

all very honored to be part of this exemplary group. 

I wrote testimony, submitted it. It would take me 16 minutes to 

read, so I’m not doing that. I’m going to just cover some key points. 

I’m going to tell why there is a Migrant and Seasonal Head Start 

program. I’m going to tell you a little bit about the services. I’m 

going to tell you about the importance of collaboration, and I’m 

going to close with some resource issues. 

First of all, my agency, the Redlands Christian Migrant Association, is a large agency. We’ve got about a $47 million budget. We 

serve 6,200 children. We have funding that is like quilting. We’re 

a Head Start grantee, but I am speaking to you today as a migrant 

Head Start delegate agency under East Coast Migrant Head Start 

Project. 

The characteristics of our program I think that make us exemplary is that we have committed, well trained staff we hire from 

the communities we serve. Our staff are bilingual. They can communicate with the parents well, which is critically important when 

two-thirds of the children you’re serving are infants and toddlers. 


20629.009
22

We have very strong parent involvement. We have a board that 

understands its role and takes it seriously and is well informed, 

and we have infrastructure that support the staff both fiscally and 

programmatically. And we use technology appropriately. Since 

we’re in rural counties, we really don’t have much choice. 

Let me just talk about Migrant and Seasonal Head Start. In 

1969, you in Congress, those of you who might have been here 

then, saw the wisdom of a program—nobody up there is that old, 

I know—saw the wisdom of setting aside a separate bit of money 

and recognizing that the migrant and seasonal kids were never 

going to get served in regular Head Start programs for the simple 

fact that they travel. 

Florida, Texas, and California are home-based states. That’s 

where the family spends six to 7 months of the year working in the 

crops in those states. Then they travel and go up north. We gave 

you a map with colors so you could see it, and I was happy to see 

where most of you are from, because they go to your states. Our 

families go to South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, Delaware, 

Maryland, Virginia, New York, and many go Ohio and Michigan. 

When they’re in Florida, they’re picking oranges, tomatoes, 

strawberries, peppers, squash, cucumbers, et cetera. They do the 

same things up north with the exception of the oranges, which become cherries and apples when you go north of the Mason-Dixon 

line; and peaches. 

If Congress had not set aside a special program for migrants, 

they would never get served, because they go to rural areas, and 

when they get to rural areas, the Head Start programs and child 

care programs are full. They follow the weather. 

The services that are different is that our centers are open from 

six in the morning till six in the evening usually. We serve—and 

the dates vary, because depending upon the crops, you may have 

to open earlier because the families are back, or you may open 

later. You have to be a very flexible program to handle this money 

and to handle the services properly. 

We serve babies through 4-year-olds, and our parent involvement 

has a lot of ESOL, teaching English as well as adult literacy in it. 

I want to just tell you one quick story. One of our children, his 

name is Rosember, came to us. His mom is from Guatemala. She 

spoke Kanjoval in that country. She’s totally illiterate, but 

Kanjoval is a dialect. She learned enough Spanish to get by. So 

when Rosember came to us, staff thought he was a little delayed. 

He wasn’t delayed. He simply had Kanjoval and Spanish in his 

head. Then he came to us and he also heard English. So his computer just needed some time to catch up in his brain. 

And I want you to know that at the end—we also have charter 

schools, so he had the good fortune to go from our migrant Head 

Start program into our charter schools, passed his third grade 

FCAT with a three, which is a very good score, and his mom is now 

attending adult literacy at night and has learned to read and write, 

and Rosember is her tutor. 

So that’s the kind of thing we get to do, which is why we love 

our programs. 

Our collaborations are critical. In rural areas, you either collaborate or die. We have wonderful collaborations with Agriculture. 

23

Most Migrant and Seasonal Head Start programs do. We collaborate with our state child care. The quilting allows us—our state 

has set aside a pot of money actually for seasonal farm workers out 

of their child care allocation, which I believe we’re the only state 

to do that. And health services, of course, the Governors Literacy 

Council and the Mexican consulate are all our partners. 

The resource issue that I want you to look at is that we are only 

serving about 19 percent of the children who are eligible. We are 

funded out of a 13 percent set-aside in HHS. We would really appreciate it if—Congressman Grijalva, thank you for your work last 

year. Also tell your colleague, Senor Hinojosa and Mr. Ehlers, we 

appreciated their work. But we now need to tie down, and we’d like 

a 5 percent set-aside so that we can count on having some programs that don’t have to worry about funding every year. 

We also are concerned about some flexibility in standards, particularly for short-term programs up north in terms of getting everything done, if you’re only running a 3-month program, you’re 

kind of asking people to fail. 

I want to thank you, Congressman Castle, for going to our program last year. I understand you enjoyed seeing brain development 

in action with those toddlers. We appreciate very much your time 

in doing that, and we appreciate the Committee’s time in inviting 

us here today. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Mainster follows:]

Statement of Barbara Mainster, Executive Director, Redlands Christian 

Migrant Association, Immokalee, FL 

Thank you Chairman Castle, Ranking Member Woolsey and honorable members 

of the Education Reform Subcommittee for the opportunity to submit testimony and 

contribute to this hearing on Head Start as you begin the reauthorization process. 

While I administer a range of Head Start and education programs—my comments 

this morning will focus on the unique challenges faced by Migrant and Seasonal 

Head Start Programs and how we have overcome them in order to deliver critical 

education and child development programs and services to some of the most vulnerable children in our country—children of migrant and seasonal farm workers. 

Why Migrant Head Start? 

Migrant and Seasonal Head Start was started in 1969 as a direct response to the 

unique seasonal needs of migrant farm worker families—to ensure that these families and their children can enjoy the same advantages made available to other low 

income children through Head Start as they move across the country with their 

families to pursue their work. 

Most migrant workers stay in Florida, Texas or California, called home base 

states, from October/November until May/June. Then they leave to find work moving north. When cold weather sets in there, they come back to their home base. A 

map is attached which gives a view of the most common migrant streams. 

To illustrate, one of our families, Daniel Jaime, works in the oranges in Florida, 

then goes to Ohio to work in the cucumbers and on to Michigan to work in cherries, 

before returning to Florida in October or November, depending on the weather and 

availability of work in both states. His children are served in one of our Migrant 

Head Start Centers in Polk County, and when he leaves us, he takes their records 

containing their educational outcome data, and health data with him. When he arrives in Ohio, the Texas Migrant Council Center he attends there picks up where 

we stopped and continues the services without unnecessary duplication. A web 

based data transfer system is being piloted right now and will make even more data 

available faster in the near future. 

Ideally, MSHS programs would provide seamless Head Start services to eligible 

families as they move from state to state to ensure that migrant children are given 

the same advantages that children attending regular Head Start enjoy. This is what 

MSHS programs strive for because we know that conventional child care is not 

24

available to these families and for the most part regular Head Start is unable to 

address the particular needs of these families. 

In most states, local childcare resources are not available at the times when migrants come into a community, especially for infants and toddlers. Regular Head 

Start centers recruit for the fall in the preceding spring and usually follow a school 

calendar. Rural areas in our country all suffer from lack of resources and facilities, 

and of course, the migrants all work in rural areas. When child care centers are 

not available, parents have no choice, but to take the children to the fields where 

they are exposed to pesticides, hazardous equipment, extreme heat and other health 

dangers. This is not acceptable to agricultural businesses, or to child advocates. In 

addition, the primary language spoken by most farm workers is Spanish, and programs need to have bilingual staff available in order to be able to communicate. 

Services need to be available from 6 am until 6 pm, and sometimes on Saturdays, 

in order to provide care for the hours both mom and dad are working. Like the immigrants before them, the migrant families believe in hard work and have strong 

family values. They participate in opportunities to better their own education, learn 

English and how to help their children be successful in our public schools. 

MSHS programs respond effectively to these challenges. We are grateful Congress 

recognized the need for a Migrant Program Branch in Washington to address the 

mobility issues and other unique needs of this special population. 

Background on RCMA 

Since 1965 Redlands Christian Migrant Association has provided quality child 

care for migrant and rural poor children throughout the State of Florida. RCMA 

began in the Redlands area of Dade County where a group of Mennonites provided 

care for farm worker children, so they would not be taken to the fields. Today we 

serve over 6200 children in seventy programs including 1704 in the Migrant and 

Seasonal Head Start Program, 343 in Early Head Start and 952 in Regional Head 

Start. An enrollment report showing all the children served in our centers/schools 

on February 5, 2005 is attached to this testimony. The information is broken down 

by county and funding source and documents the waiting list of 2078 children in 

need of services. You will note we serve children with many different funding 

sources, rather like a patchwork quilt, designed to ensure that as many as possible 

of the low income children who live in the communities can qualify for services. 

RCMA grew as a result of needs expressed to us by migrant parents, by farmers, 

by school districts, by church groups and by our State child welfare agency. 

In addition to being an Early Head Start and Head Start Grantee, RCMA is a 

delegate agency of East Coast Migrant Head Start. East Coast Migrant Head Start, 

along with 25 other grantees, serve nearly 32,000 migrant children and 2,500 seasonal farm worker children annually, operating in 39 states in every region of the 

country. As you may know, Migrant and Seasonal Head Start programs were the 

first Head Start programs to serve infants and toddlers. Today, two-thirds of the 

children in the program are infants and toddlers. 

In Florida, we serve farm workers who spend the fall, winter and spring harvesting our nation’s citrus crops, strawberries, tomatoes, squash, peppers, cucumbers, corn, celery, radishes, melons, eggplant, cauliflower and many other vegetables. They leave us after the harvest and go to Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Ohio, Michigan, and 

Indiana to do the same jobs, with apples, peaches and cherries substituting for oranges. It is hard work and requires special skills. Most farmworker families earn 

less than $10,000/year and very few have health benefits, according to a study submitted to Congress in 2000 by the United States Department of Labor. 

RCMA as a Collaboration Model in Community Partnerships 

When a program operates in rural areas, collaboration is not only necessary, it 

is expected. I would point to the partnerships that we have forged with governments, private industry and others to be at the core of our success. 

RCMA has been extremely successful in forging a partnership with agriculture. 

Long ago we realized that the agricultural employer and farm worker had more in 

common than not. For example, both farmers and their workers agree on the need 

for child care, health services, housing, and pesticide training. As a result, RCMA 

has received support in the form of buildings for child care centers, land on which 

to build, monetary support to draw down matching federal dollars, and advocacy 

with the State Legislature, resulting in a State child care set aside for children of 

farm workers. Other important partners include the school systems in the twenty 

counties in which RCMA operates. We work together to prepare children for a successful kindergarten transition, help with the enrollment process and orientation of 

parents, and jointly serve preschool children with disabilities. They, too, have supVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:01 Jul 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 H:\DOCS\20629 EDU1 PsN: NNIXON
25

plied facilities in which to operate our Head Start programs. Local health centers 

and public health departments work with us to assure medical services and refer 

children for our services. Of special importance are the 0 to three year olds, who 

benefit tremendously from the early intervention we are able to provide. Therapies 

are provided in our centers. In return, the agencies know they can count on our staff 

to help translate or transport special cases for critical care. It is a win/win situation. 

The local Early Learning Coalitions in our state are now working with us to ensure 

that migrant children will be served in the Voluntary Pre K program beginning this 

year. In order to meet the mandated number of UPK hours, our centers will adapt 

our curriculum as needed. Funding received from the state for these four year olds 

will allow us to serve more infants, toddlers and three year old children in our Head 

Start centers. Churches are also active partners with us. They help provide the 

emergency food needed when families arrive with little money, or when weather 

does not permit families to work, such as during our recent hurricane season. The 

Governor’s Family Literacy Initiative and the Mexican Consulate are very important 

collaborators in helping us provide family literacy programs in our centers. Funding, 

software, materials and guidance are all part of those relationships. In return, our 

centers are available on weekends for programs or services the Consulates may wish 

to bring to the rural communities. 

RCMA as a Leader in the Field 

I credit our high quality services and solid track record to our philosophy and 

practice of bringing farmers and farm workers together on our Board, along with 

experts in early childhood, health, business, banking, the law, and housing. 

Included in RCMA’s philosophy is that we hire from the communities served. Staff 

who know what it is to stoop and pick crops, to travel in search of work, to start 

school late each fall and leave early every spring—those are the people in charge. 

They ensure our programs are comprehensive in nature, prepare children to succeed 

in school and meet the needs of the families we serve. RCMA provides on going 

training and educational opportunities to help ensure their continued success. We 

are committed to finding and maintaining the most qualified staff and in rural 

areas, this is one of our most serious challenges. The length of the time they are 

employed each year further exacerbates the problem. To compensate, we have 

adapted a model with one early childhood professional per center, who then trains 

the paraprofessional staff on an ongoing basis. In addition, our benefits structure 

is designed to continue health insurance during the period of lay off, which can be 

up to five months long each year. Collaborations with community colleges to bring 

classes closer to the communities we serve is beginning to yield results. Of most importance are the outcomes we are achieving, in spite of the lack of degreed teachers. 

Attached to this testimony is data on our results. 

Former farm workers become leaders in their communities and strong role models 

for families. Since they are trusted and respected by our families, they have the 

ability to create and instill an awareness of the importance of education, both for 

the children and for their parents. Head Start has long recognized that unless very 

low income families were helped to change and develop new skills, and raise their 

own literacy levels, that long term gains for the children would not be sustained. 

The importance of reading to their children and for their own education is key. Children live in families, and unless parents are sold on the importance of being an advocate for their children as they go through school, expecting high achievement from 

their youngsters, then many of the gains will be lost. 

Former farm workers are found at all levels of our organization. They are paired 

with professionals to form teams which have experience and expertise in early childhood, health, and social work. Each of RCMA’s sixteen individual geographical areas 

around the state is led by a former farm worker staff, some of whom have achieved 

degrees. 

In addition, we embrace high quality early childhood and expect all our centers 

to become accredited by the National Association for the Education of Young Children. At the present time, 76% of all our centers have attained that recognized seal 

of excellence. High quality and comprehensive services with the involvement of parents is what RCMA believes Head Start is all about and that is what we continue 

to practice. 

Migrant and Seasonal Head Start Challenges 

Despite our best efforts to collaborate and stretch current resources, we still maintain waiting lists for services and hundreds of children in many parts of the country 

go unserved. 

In fact, families that leave our program in Florida and migrate up north to states 

like North Carolina, Alabama, Indiana and Ohio often return in the fall and share 

26

with me that their children’s names sat on a waiting list all summer. Based on a 

2001 Head Start Study, (Descriptive Study of Seasonal Farmworker Families—September 2001) which was requested as part of the last Head Start Reauthorization 

bill (Coats Human Services Amendments of 1998 P.L. 105–285), only 19% of the eligible migrant and seasonal children in our country were being served. 

Migrant and Seasonal Head Start programs are funded along with Indian Head 

Start, children with disabilities, technical assistance, program review, and research 

demonstration out of a 13 percent statutory set-aside from the annual Head Start 

Appropriation. 

Existing MSHS programs maintain significant wait lists and, in many areas of 

the country, there are no MSHS programs in operation to provide services to migrant farm worker children when they move into a state. Despite the documented 

unmet needs of this population, funding for Migrant and Seasonal Head Start as 

a percentage of the overall Head Start appropriation has not grown—in fact, according to our calculations, it has been reduced slightly since 2003. I have attached a 

chart to my testimony which shows MSHS funding as a percentage of the overall 

Head Start appropriation. 

We urge the Committee to look at ways by which additional resources can be directed to meet the needs of migrant and seasonal children that are currently unable 

to move off wait lists and access services to keep them out of the field and give them 

the important step up that Head Start can provide. 

The National Migrant and Seasonal Head Start Association, of which I am a 

member, put forward what we thought was a modest proposal during the last reauthorization debate—that a funding floor of not less than 5% of the total annual 

Head Start appropriation be set-aside for MSHS. According to the calculations used 

in the 2001 HHS study, this would enable us to serve about 25% of the eligible migrant and seasonal children. 

While I want to thank several members of this Committee for their work to bring 

more attention to this issue- particularly Congressmen Hinojosa, Grijalva and 

Ehlers–we still find ourselves well short of the resources needed to properly serve 

these children. 

I urge this Committee to address this resource issue again as you consider reauthorizing the underlying Head Start Statute and I request you put in place a funding mechanism whereby we can be assured that additional resources will be directed 

to address the documented needs of MSHS programs. I would be happy to work 

with you and your staff in this effort. 

Closing 

I’d like to close by sharing just one success story as a way to illustrate how our 

Migrant and Seasonal Head Start programs impact the lives of children and parents 

served. Many of our former parents and children are now staff. One is a woman who 

came to us as a migrant farm worker, high school dropout, married and the mother 

of three rambunctious children. She was active in the Center’s activities, served on 

the Policy Committee and Council, and then, when her children went on to school, 

joined our staff. While working full time and raising three children, she attained 

a GED, and then her two year and four year degrees. She and her husband own 

a nice home, and her three children are all in college at this time. She is now 

RCMA’s Migrant Head Start Manager, responsible for ensuring all the contractual 

and performance standards are met for the 1704 migrant children entrusted to our 

care. 

I understand, Chairman Castle, that you visited a Migrant Head Start Center last 

year and have experienced first hand how clear brain development becomes when 

observing a happy toddler. Thank you for taking that time and for the opportunity 

all of you have provided for us to be here today.

[Attachments to Ms. Mainster’s statement follow:]

27


20629.007
28


20629.008
29

Chairman CASTLE. Well, thank you. And we appreciate you being 

here, Ms. Mainster, and your testimony here today. 

Ms. Cunningham? 

STATEMENT OF GAYLE CUNNINGHAM, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMITTEE FOR ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY CHILD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, BIRMINGHAM, AL 

Ms. CUNNINGHAM. Good morning. Chairman Castle, Congresswoman Woolsey, and distinguished Members of the Committee, it 

is an honor to be here. And I thank you for this opportunity to 

share about our program. We serve 1,431 Head Start children and 

148 pregnant women, infants, and toddlers in Early Head Start. 

Head Start is more than a Federal program. It’s more than the 

best thing that this nation does for its neediest children. For many 

children and families, Head Start is a lifeline. Sadly, we have a 

650-child waiting list for our Early Head Start program, and more 

than 1,900 children are on the waiting list for our Head Start program. 

In addition to these Head Start-eligible children, more affluent 

parents regularly ask us if they can pay for their child to participate in our great Head Start program. 

We promote excellence by meeting and exceeding Head Start performance standards and using the Head Start Child Outcomes 

Framework to guide our teaching and other services, by providing 

staff with continuing educational and career development opportunities to improve their knowledge and skills, and by creating collaborations with many agencies to address the wide range of needs 

faced by our Head Start families and children. 

The Head Start performance standards, together with the Child 

Outcomes Framework, assure that our program staff attend to each 

area of children’s development, support family development and 

provide optimal program management and accountability. 

Our planning and quality improvement process uses the Head 

Start performance standards as its base. The Child Outcomes 

Framework helps us to use the most appropriate observation and 

assessment procedures and instruments. The data from these assessments helps us to make adjustments in our curriculum and 

daily schedule, to plan in-service teacher training, and to make 

purchase decisions for classroom curriculum resources. The framework has helped us to make our teaching and other work with children more intentional to better achieve Head Start’s child outcome 

goals. 

We are committed to career development for our staff. Eightyfour percent of our teachers have associate degrees or higher. As 

staff members have obtained higher credentials, we could pay for 

their training, increase compensation and maintain the teaching 

staff that we have invested in, with the Head Start quality dollars 

that sadly no longer come to us. 

Degrees are important, but ongoing professional development is 

also key. Based on the large body of research on effective teaching 

practices and curricula, we have developed a unique system of supports for classrooms and teachers that includes education specialists assigned to each cluster of centers to provide day-to-day staff 

development and assistance with planning; a program-wide, themeVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:01 Jul 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\20629 EDU1 PsN: NNIXON
30

based curriculum with accompanying theme boxes of resource materials; a resource center where staff can obtain and prepare materials for their classrooms, for teaching and for their college 

coursework; and a cadre of ‘‘mentor teachers’’ who provide peer 

support. 

Ensuring that children receive services and not just referrals is 

another key to school readiness. Each child is assisted to have a 

medical home, a provider that they can go to regularly for checkups 

and illnesses. We help parents to take care of any health needs 

their children may have while they’re in Head Start, and we also 

provide dental and visual screening and help children get dental 

services or glasses. 

We also identify mental health problems and provide assistance 

to parents and teachers to address them. We have extensive collaborations with a wide range of medical, dental, psychological and 

social services providers. And we have assistance from the local 

school systems to provide special services to children with disabilities and their families. 

We help parents to learn parenting skills to better support their 

children’s learning and development, to learn more about resources 

in their communities, and to participate as advocates for their children, families and neighborhoods. For eleven years, we have provided special programming for fathers, encouraging them to play a 

strong role in their children’s lives both at home and at our centers. 

A growing number of grandparents are raising our children. Several years ago we began a support group for them that provides 

monthly sessions on a range of topics, occasional outings and individual assistance. Because most of our parents work, we provide 

before and after school care, and Head Start quality enhancement 

funding enabled us several years ago to add Summer Head Start 

for those children. 

We collaborate with public schools to ensure that children are 

ready for kindergarten and that they and their families experience 

smooth transitions into Head Start. And we’ve worked with those 

schools to determine their expectations for kindergarten and to arrange our curriculum and in-service training for teachers so that 

children are better prepared for later schooling. 

Thirteen of our Head Start classrooms are located in public 

schools in seven different public school systems, and most of our 

classrooms are located in buildings donated by either school systems or Catholic parishes. 

All of the services I’ve described are also provided to Early Head 

Start infants, toddlers and pregnant women, but we have six children waiting for every slot that we have in Early Head Start. 

So how do we know that we’re successful? The data we collect as 

we assess our children tells us that our children are making huge 

strides. Kindergarten teachers who receive our Head Start children 

tell us that they are better prepared for school than almost any 

others in their classes. Principals and superintendents ask us to 

add classrooms to their schools and systems. And we regularly hear 

from parents that their Head Start graduate children are on honor 

rolls, winning awards, graduating from high school, going to college 

31

and to graduate school and contributing to our communities and to 

society. 

A local Birmingham bank vice president is a Head Start graduate, as are two local city councilmen. Head Start truly is our national child development laboratory, and it deserves far more credit 

for all that it has contributed to the large field of early childhood 

education. We at JCCEO take that title seriously, and we seek in 

all that we do to find the most effective ways to serve each child 

who comes to our program and each family that brings them. 

Head Start truly is our nation’s best gift to our neediest families. 

Our goal is to make sure that it is a gift that works well and one 

that lasts. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Cunningham follows:]

Statment of Gayle Cunningham, Executive Director, Jefferson County Committee for Economic Opportunity Child Development Services, Birmingham, AL 

Mr. Chairman Castle, Congresswoman Woolsey, and distinguished members of 

the committee. Head Start is very, very special. For many of the children and families that I have worked with in Head Start, it is more than a federal program, more 

than the best thing this nation does for its neediest children: for many children and 

families it is a lifeline. 

Let me share with you an email that I received just last Sunday.

To Whom It May Concern:

My name is Melissa Johnson, my son is Christian Tyler Johnson. He attends Tarrant Head Start center. I am writing to let you at the main office 

know of the OUTSTANDING and WONDERFUL teachers and staff you 

have. Not only has my son enjoyed his two years at Head Start but he is 

excited and most of all ready for Kindergarten. Everyday he comes home 

with something new that he has learned.

Not only has my child grown and matured from the program but so have 

I. I had him when I was sixteen so I thought the teachers would teach him. 

They have done a great deal but they showed me that the learning has to 

start from the home.

I apologize for the lengthy letter I just love the Head Start program, and 

I wanted to THANK everyone involved. I know you have lots of work to do 

so thank you for your time.

Sincerely, 

Melissa J. Johnson

We know there are many similar stories in every one of your districts, in every 

Head Start and Early Head Start program across this country. 

My name is Gayle Cunningham and I appreciate and am honored to have this 

opportunity to testify before you today. It was my privilege to be the director of the 

Head Start program at JCCEO in Jefferson County, Alabama, where the largest city 

is Birmingham, for eighteen years, from 1986 until 2004. Since 1990, I have also 

served as Executive Director of JCCEO, the Jefferson County Committee for Economic Opportunity, the Community Action Agency for our county. Our Head Start–

Early Head Start program serves 1431 preschoolers, and 148 pregnant women, infants, and toddlers. 

To meet our goal of providing the best possible Head Start for the children and 

families that we serve, we have worked on every aspect of the program, and our 

efforts, a true collaboration between our agency Board, our staff, our parents, our 

community, and the Region IV and Bureau Head Start staff, have resulted in a 

highly functioning program that seeks higher and higher levels of quality programming for children and for families. 

Excellence is our goal. Excellence in supporting and promoting children’s development and learning; excellence in our staff and our services; and excellence in supporting families to be successful. So how do we strive for excellence? 

32

Meeting Standards: 

The Head Start Performance Standards have been our foundation and they were 

critical to improving our program. The Head Start Performance Standards are comprehensive and therefore ensure that we look at all of the conditions that support 

children’s learning, their social, emotional and physical development, and family 

success. Our internal, yearly, quality improvement and planning process uses the Head 

Start Program Standards as its base. The Standards are used for a program-wide 

self-assessment at the beginning of each calendar year. The findings from this assessment are submitted to ‘‘Program Quality Improvement Workgroups’’ that include staff, policy council members and other parents, board members, and community representatives. Each workgroup focuses on a different program service area, 

and reviews all program documentation related to that area. The workgroup’s recommendations for improvements then go to the management team for deliberation, 

and the accepted recommendations are implemented during the next program year. 

Tri-annually there is an in-depth review of our program, and every Head Start 

program, by a Federal monitoring team, using an instrument based on the Head 

Start Performance Standards. We believe that these reviews, in combination with 

our yearly self-evaluations, are an important factor in maintaining ongoing program 

quality. 

Head Start’s Child Outcomes Framework has proven an invaluable tool for improving the quality of our classroom services to children. It is comprehensive, multidimensional, and appropriate for young children, focusing on the whole child. It has 

provided the framework for a multitude of decisions that have improved our program for children. We used it to help us determine, and create, the most appropriate 

observation and assessment procedures and instruments for our children. The data 

from these assessments have been used to help us make adjustments in our curriculum and daily schedule, plan in-service teacher training, and make purchase decisions for curriculum enhancements for our classrooms, such as additional math 

materials. The Framework has helped us to make our teaching and other work with 

children more intentional, so that we can better achieve Head Start’s child outcomes 

goals. 

Staff and Teacher Quality: 

We know that the knowledge and skills of our directors, service area managers, 

teachers, and all of our staff are critical to our success. That is why we are committed to career development for all of our staff, finding and providing opportunities 

for both education and in-service training, with a special commitment to teachers 

and teaching after all, that is where our children are. 

In 1986, we had nine Child Development Associate credentialed staff, mostly in 

management, and no other appropriate credentials among our teaching staff. Today, 

84.62% of our teachers (66) have an Associate’s degree or higher. Most began with 

us with no credentials and, through Head Start, were able to earn their CDA credential, and then we assisted them to build upon it to earn their Associate’s degree. 

Six more of our teachers will have earned their Associate’s degrees by August, 2005. 

Eight-nine (89) of our teacher aides have Child Development Associate credentials, which we consider the basic credential for working in the classroom and the 

first step towards the Associate’s and Bachelor’s degrees. We expect a teacher aide 

to begin working on qualifying for the Child Development Associate as soon as possible after beginning employment. Six teacher aides have Associate’s degrees. As 

staff members obtain higher credentials, increased compensation is provided to reward and acknowledge achievement and increased skills, and to maintain the teaching staff that we have invested in, again, thanks to funding from Head Start. 

How did we accomplish these career development goals? Primarily, it was the receipt of Head Start quality enhancement funds over the years that made it possible. 

With those funds, we could provide tuition and book scholarships, provide release 

time and substitute teachers to cover classrooms while teaching staff were in school, 

and increase compensation once credentials were earned. On average, it has taken 

our teachers six years to obtain their Associate’s degree. Because we know that better child outcomes are associated with higher degrees, we have worked with others 

in the state, including the Alabama Head Start Collaboration Office, to develop articulation arrangements to move our teaching staff from the Associate’s to the Bachelor’s degree, and we learned last week that such an opportunity will soon be available to us with a local university. We don’t, however, know how we will provide the 

scholarships and other supports that will be needed to assist our staff to earn Bachelor’s degrees, or how we will adequately compensate them once they have earned 

the BA. This is a worthy goal, but it would require new, additional Head Start resources for teachers to go back to school, for programs to provide release time and 

33

substitutes, and for compensation increases that are at least comparable to those 

of kindergarten teachers with similar degrees and experience so that our teachers 

remain with us in Head Start. 

Effective Teaching Support: 

We believe that teachers need more support on a regular basis, in addition to credentials and degrees. Ongoing quality professional development is key. Based on the 

large body of research on effective teaching practices and curricula, we have developed a unique system of supports for classrooms and teachers that includes: Education Specialists assigned to each cluster of centers to provide day-to-day staff development and assistance with planning for teaching staff in a role that is completely separate from supervision; A program-wide theme-based curriculum with 

supporting theme boxes of materials that rotate to provide an array of teaching resources to classrooms; A resource center where staff can obtain and prepare materials for their classrooms, for teaching, and for their college coursework; and a cadre 

of ‘‘mentor teachers’’ who provide peer support to other teachers. These mentor 

teachers were selected because they were effective in their own classrooms, and they 

also demonstrated the capacity to work well with and support other adults. They 

each attended an eight session course on mentoring, participate in monthly mentor 

teacher training sessions and meetings, work with a protege teacher, assist with 

program-wide teacher training, and receive a monthly stipend for these additional 

responsibilities. 

Again, the importance of the comprehensive Head Start Program Performance 

Standards and the Child Outcomes Framework must be emphasized. These assure 

that in our service delivery and in our training and support of staff, we attend to 

each area of a child’s development—because learning to read, and to count, do not 

occur in isolation from a child’s other areas of development, or in isolation from 

their families. 

A Community Program: 

Head Start is unique because it provides an opportunity to lift entire families and 

communities to better economic, educational, and personal lives. We collaborate 

with a large network of public, private, and faith-based community resource providers to help us meet the needs of our participants. To improve our work with families, we used Head Start Quality Enhancement funding to lower family services 

worker caseloads to two-to-three classrooms each. This enables us to give each family more attention and to help them with the wide range of issues and needs that 

confront low-income families, especially when there is a crisis. We have helped families get better and safer housing, in several instances helping them to purchase 

homes through Habitat for Humanity; we have helped families that have been evicted or burned out, helping them to find temporary and then permanent housing; we 

have helped families when they or their children have medical emergencies; and 

much, much more. 

We help families to assess their current situations, set goals, and take concrete 

steps to achieve them, be they more schooling, job training, better jobs, better housing, or more food in the house. Self-sufficiency is our goal for every family that we 

work with. School readiness, especially for the low-income children in Head Start, 

is about letters and numbers and colors and shapes, but it also includes so much 

more. We assure that each child has a medical home–a provider that they go to regularly for check-ups and for illnesses, and we assist parents to take care of any 

health or medical needs they might have while they are in Head Start. We provide 

dental and visual screening and then assist parents to obtain any needed dental 

services or glasses. We identify mental health problems and provide assistance to 

help parents and teachers address them. Our extensive collaborations with a wide 

range of medical, dental, psychological, and social services providers enable us to 

address these needs. And, with assistance from local school systems, we provide special services to children with disabilities and their families, making at least ten percent of our enrollment opportunities available to them. 

We also assist parents to learn parenting skills, to better support their children’s 

learning, to learn more about resources available in their communities, and to participate in their communities as citizens and advocates for their children, families, 

and neighborhoods. We provide special programming for our children’s fathers, encouraging them to play a strong and effective role in their children’s lives, both at 

home and as volunteers in our classrooms and centers. We call our father involvement project ‘‘CHIEFS’’ and it is now in its eleventh year. 

In response to the growing number of grandparents raising young children in our 

program, we began a support group for grandparents several years ago, named 

‘‘GEMS’’, that provides monthly sessions on a wide range of useful topics, occasional 

34

field trips, and individual assistance when needed. Grandparents raising young children are a growing phenomena in our communities, and their needs are unique and 

sometimes difficult to address through regular Head Start resources. 

Most of our parents work, and it is sometimes a challenge to make arrangements 

to bring their children to our centers after 7:30 a.m., or pick to them up when our 

program day ends at three. So we assist them by providing before and/or after program care for approximately 200 children through a collaboration for vouchers with 

our local childcare (block grant) subsidy provider, along with private payments by 

parents not able to obtain vouchers. (The waiting list for vouchers in Jefferson 

County is 3000 children long.) Several years ago Head Start quality enhancement 

funding enabled us to add ‘‘Summer Head Start’’ for the children who participate 

in after school care to our program, so this group continues with us until August, 

receiving a full day of learning and care while their parents work. 

Public schools are an important part of our families’’ communities, and we collaborate with them in a variety of ways to assure that our children are ready for kindergarten and that they and their families experience a smooth transition from Head 

Start. We have worked with public school systems to determine their expectations 

for children entering kindergarten and arranged our curriculum and in-service 

training for teachers to both prepare children for kindergarten and beyond, and to 

provide appropriate pre-school education. Thirteen of our Head Start classrooms are 

located in public schools in seven different school systems. Most of our other classrooms are located in school buildings no longer in use by the systems or by Catholic 

parishes, and provided to our program at no cost. We have a special partnership 

with the Birmingham Public School System, equally sharing three pre-k classrooms 

for a Head Start–Pre–K partnership. Most of our disabilities screenings and services 

are provided by our partner school systems. And each participates in a variety of 

transition activities for children and parents as the end of the program year approaches. 

All of the services that I have described are also provided to our Early Head Start 

infants, toddlers, pregnant women, and their families, with particular attention to 

the special needs of pregnant women and babies. The need for infant-toddler care 

and learning opportunities in our community is acute, and our small program, serving about 100 babies and toddlers, meets only a fraction of the need. There are more 

than six children on our waiting list for every Early Head Start slot that we are 

funded to provide. 

How Do We Know We are Successful? 

So how do we know that all of this works? There are many ways. The demand 

for our program is enormous. In addition to the more than 650 child waiting list 

for Early Head Start, there are more than 1900 children on our waiting list for 

Head Start. In addition to these Head Start eligible children, more affluent parents 

regularly ask us if they can pay for their child to participate in our Head Start program. 

Kindergarten teachers who receive our Head Start children tell us that they are 

better prepared for school than most others in their classes, and principals and superintendents ask us to add classrooms to their schools and systems. We have had 

a classroom in one local system for two years and the superintendent recently met 

with our Head Start director to tell her what a difference the school staff sees in 

the children who have attended Head Start. He wants another classroom. 

We regularly hear from parents that their children are on honor rolls, winning 

awards, graduating from high school, going to college, going to graduate school, and 

contributing to our communities and to society. A local bank vice president is a 

Head Start graduate. Two local city councilmen are, too. And another graduate of 

our program has earned his Ph.D. and is the director of a local Head Start program 

and the childcare subsidy program that serves our area. 

The data that we collect as we assess our children at the beginning, middle, and 

end of each program year also tells us that we are successful. Our children make 

huge strides while they are with us, and our Child Outcomes data documents and 

verifies this, as do our own observations when we visit our wonderful classrooms. 

Our program has participated in a number of local and national research and 

evaluation projects, always seeking to both benefit by learning more about our program’s effectiveness and to contribute to the body of knowledge about what works 

best for Head Start, young children, and their families. With every measurement 

we learn that our program is making a significant difference as we work with our 

Head Start children and families, the children and their families in Birmingham 

and Jefferson County, Alabama, who are most in need. 

Head Start truly is our National Child Development Laboratory, and the program 

deserves much more credit for all that it has contributed to the larger field of early 

35

care and education. We at JCCEO take that title seriously, and seek in all that we 

do to find the most effective ways to serve each child who comes to our program, 

and each family that brings that child to us. Head Start truly is our nation’s best 

gift to our neediest families. Our goal is to make sure that it is a gift that works 

well, and one that lasts. 

Chairman CASTLE. Thank you very much, Ms. Cunningham. Before we go forward, I don’t know if there’s any Member here—we’re 

going to have a motion to adjourn on the floor. We’re all going to 

have to go vote in seven or eight or 9 minutes. Is there anyone here 

who won’t be able to come back, would like to ask their questions 

now? Or do you want me just to go ahead and start? 

I’ll go ahead and start, then. But if somebody needs to finish before I leave, let me know. 

Actually, my questions are too general for everybody to answer 

everything. So you’re going to have to sort of limit yourself here, 

if you will, because I want to get in a few things. 

I’m worried about what we’re doing here at the Federal level. Let 

me congratulate each and every one of you, first of all, you know, 

for running exemplary programs. You wouldn’t have been here if 

you hadn’t been doing that. And you’re doing it within the framework of the law and the regulations in dealing with HHS as far as 

this is concerned. A couple of you used the expression ‘‘quilting,’’ 

I think, meaning you’re running a variety of programs, and that’s 

generally true of Head Start providers, which is fine. 

But I want to sort of look at it from that point of view; how we 

can run exemplary programs, and what is it in the law or in the 

regulations that may in some cases restrict you or perhaps allow 

some of the other problems which exist out there that perhaps we 

could address as we take up our new legislation, which is what 

we’re doing. 

So let me just start with that. As you know, we have the basic 

law here. You probably deal mostly with the regulations, if I had 

to guess, the administration of children and families and the Head 

Start Bureau, and there’s a series of performance standards and 

forms you have to fill out and that kind of thing, some of which—

and frankly, we had an analysis of this, and some of it was critical. 

And so I want to see how it is out in the field. 

So my question to you is, in doing what you’re trying to do—and 

you’re doing everything from migrant programs to combining it 

with school programs. You’re doing a lot of things in your different 

areas. My question is, is there anything in the law or the restrictions that—and you can answer this generally. You don’t have to 

cite statute numbers or whatever—that you think is a block to continuing progress in terms of what you are doing? I know that’s a 

very general question, and I’m looking for specific answers, but I’m 

interested in that. 

Any volunteers? Dr. Daeschner. 

Dr. DAESCHNER. First of all, thank you. I think that is an essential question. I’m different in that I run a district, and I have like 

these 5,400 early childhood. And I satisfy lots of different standards. 

As an example, and most you just allude to it, there’s almost 

1,700 standards connected with Head Start. And they’re very specific. I’m not too sure they’re not specific for a reason. 

36

Our state has some like that, but they’re somewhat different. So 

when you work in a district, you’re faced with not necessarily competing, but how do you fit one and the other and satisfy all those? 

Let me give you one good example, and I alluded to it earlier. 

These child restraints. A great example is I run all these buses. I 

have 850 buses that I run on a three-tiered system. And they pick 

up my high school kids, it’s our elementary and then our preschool. 

And you can imagine we have to use all the buses to do all that. 

It’s almost prohibitive to put these seat restraints on, because it 

reduces my numbers. The buses are absolutely safe. I have to follow the Kentucky bus regulations. And I will give you one particular example. We had a month ago a car run into a back of a 

bus. The car caught fire. By the way, the driver took off. The front 

of the car caught fire underneath the bus. The bus was consumed 

in about a minute and a half with smoke and fire. Now, the good 

news is that there were high school kids on that bus. But if I’d 

have had child restraint hooked up in harnesses on that bus with 

preschool, I’m here to tell you, at least half of those children would 

have died, because we couldn’t have got them out. 

Chairman CASTLE. But in a more general sense. I don’t know if 

my question was too long or your answer is too long, but between 

us, we’ve taken up almost all my time. 

Dr. DAESCHNER. I’m sorry. That was my fault. 

Chairman CASTLE. But I’d just like to follow up in way to cut you 

off a little bit. 

Dr. DAESCHNER. OK, sure. 

Chairman CASTLE. I mean, but is that something that we can address? I mean, that’s one specific thing. 

Dr. DAESCHNER. That is. 

Chairman CASTLE. You’re saying maybe we shouldn’t have those 

particular things. But in a more general sense— 

Dr. DAESCHNER. Yes. 

Chairman CASTLE [continuing]. Are you hindered by all these 

various performance standards you have to live with, or do you 

think they should be changed in some way or another, a whole 

management model from the Federal Government? 

Dr. DAESCHNER. I can answer that very quickly. It’s a management style. I believe we ought to, policy-wise, ought to be adjusted 

to the most exemplary classrooms you have and not to the lowest 

classrooms that we have. I as a manager need to drive up my lowest classrooms that aren’t performing well to the highest standards. 

All standards, for example in Head Start, are geared so that you 

just take one step forward, two steps left, one step right. There’s 

certainly a lot of those, now, to go in there and give you specifics. 

But I would rather have policies that adhere with the general so 

that all my preschool kids can serve. 

Chairman CASTLE. How about those of you who are working in 

the so-called quilting effect in terms of your running multiple programs? Ms. Cunningham obviously mentioned that, and Ms. 

Mainster may have mentioned it, too. But I see that when I go to 

my Head Start programs in Delaware. They’re running a variety 

of things, if you will. 

What are we doing in Head Start that is either positive or negative in the middle of that quilt in terms of what you are doing that 

37

in some way inhibits us from developing these kids as fully as we 

possibly could? 

Ms. MAINSTER. If I may, I would just say that we use the Head 

Start standards because we’re one of your quilters, as those that 

we try to get to with all our programs. The biggest difference in 

our state child care, for example, in Head Start, is that there’s not 

funding there nor is there mandate for the parent involvement and 

the comprehensive services in terms of health and social services. 

I would not want to see those reduced. 

I think the idea of the specificity—in other words, we go out and 

we look for United Way money, for example, to add to our state 

child care money so that we can bring them to the Head Start 

standard. When you’re dealing with low income kids, and Head 

Start founders recognized that this program is as much for families 

as it is for children. Children live in families. And so that’s not a 

standard I want to see changed. 

I do think that you have some language proposed about shorter 

term programs need to have some flexibility in terms of how they 

meet the standards. I think we need to look at outcomes, and if a 

program is meeting the outcomes, be less concerned about—specifically I’m talking about degrees in terms of rural short-term programs, it’s next to impossible, and we’re going to keep struggling 

with that. But if the outcomes are being attained, I think that 

ought to be adequate. 

Chairman CASTLE. OK. Thank you. 

Ms. Cunningham? 

Ms. CUNNINGHAM. I would argue against lots of changes in the 

performance standards. They in fact have been an example for 

other standard systems, licensing systems, accreditation systems 

across the nation. 

Chairman CASTLE. And you think they’re positive, basically? 

Ms. CUNNINGHAM. Oh, yes. 

Ms. MAINSTER. I do, too. 

Ms. CUNNINGHAM. Head Start’s standards are looked up to, and 

actually, efforts are made to find ways to help other child care and 

pre-K systems begin to meet Head Start standards. We really 

should continue to hold them up as the highest standards, national 

standards available. 

Chairman CASTLE. But the criticism—and I probably don’t have 

this quite right—but the criticism has sort of been that while the 

standards are fine, they’re sort of, I don’t know, self-dependent in 

terms of responding to the standards or whatever, and that we 

don’t get—‘‘we,’’ the government who funds this—doesn’t get all the 

information that it needs in order to monitor fiscally and perhaps 

programmatically correctly. 

In other words, there’s been some criticism of that from the point 

of view of what the management team gets back, if you will. You 

may not be—you’re running a program, so you may not be the one 

to answer that question. But we want to make this as secure and 

as positive as possible, but we want to make sure that we’re eliminating things which are not essential and overwork or whatever it 

may be. 

Ms. MAINSTER. I just want to say, you’re just now getting the results of the NRS testing and so forth. I would hesitate to say, until 

38

you’ve really had a chance to look at some of those, you’re finally 

getting some of the stuff you were alluding to wanting. 

Chairman CASTLE. Right. Good. 

Ms. CUNNINGHAM. I think most of the information that you reference is available. It’s very available. It may not have been looked 

at as critically in the past, as carefully in the past, but it’s there. 

And perhaps a stronger system of interaction between regional offices and Head Start programs could strengthen that system. 

Chairman CASTLE. But to the extent that I’m criticizing, I may 

be criticizing, what’s happening at the regulatory end of it, not at 

the Head Start end of it, as much or more than the Head Start end 

of it, because I think there has been some justifiable criticism. I’m 

just trying to see if there’s problems we can straighten out. 

Let me yield to Mr. Grijalva. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and let me join with 

you in thanking our witnesses. It’s very important and very helpful 

information and testimony. 

For the sake of time and to some extent my interest, let me focus 

my questions to Ms. Mainster, if I could. You’re running an Early 

Start, Head Start, and a Migrant and Seasonal Head Start. Briefly, 

what are the biggest differences and to some extent challenges in 

coordinating—not only coordinating between these programs? 

Ms. MAINSTER. Thank you, Congressman. The biggest difference 

I would say is the population, because obviously our Migrant Head 

Start has to has flexible opening dates, so our staff are frequently 

laid off for 5 months a year. So holding onto that staff is always 

a challenge. But of course when you quilt, you find ways to help 

them work in other programs if you need to. 

The clientele actually are easier. People don’t realize that. The 

migrant Head Start families are the easiest to work with. Mom and 

dad both work, but mom and dad have hope, so—I know this is not 

the kind of thing you may be asking, but those are the families 

that are the true immigrants that are looking at the American 

Dream, and they’ll do anything they need to get there. 

So many of our early Head Start and Head Start families have 

very little hope left, so we have to work with them in a different 

way. I don’t think standards-wise, obviously, if you’re only operating a short-term program, and again, we’re lucky in Florida. We 

operate about seven to 8 months. But the short-term programs are 

being killed by trying to fit in, for example, all of the various 

trainings that one must have or all the various sessions parents 

must complete. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. It goes to your point of flexibility. 

Ms. MAINSTER. That’s the point. And I believe there’s some language being looked at for some flexibility for short-term programs. 

I would still want the outcomes, yes, sir. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Let me just follow up, because I—not just because 

of the migrant and seasonal component and your good work in that 

area, but you serve predominantly Spanish-speaking families. 

Ms. MAINSTER. Yes. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. And just for the sake of the record and others, 

what advice would you give to other Head Start centers regardless 

of whether they’re serving migrant and seasonal families who face 

39

both the challenge, and quite frankly, the reality of large populations of non-English-speaking kids and families? 

Ms. MAINSTER. Well, the very, very first piece of advice is they 

must hire people from that community. They must hire Spanishspeaking staff, Spanish-speaking staff who know the cultures of the 

kids that are coming in and who will have the respect of the families. That is critical. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. And I think the last, aside from your point in your 

testimony about the funding and the 19, we’re only serving 19 percent in migrant. 

Ms. MAINSTER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. And I think that’s a very important point that this 

Committee has dealt with and I hope deals with again during the 

reauthorization. But both as it relates to general and migrant and 

seasonal workers, what other kinds of recommendations would you 

have aside from funding for this Committee as we go through this 

reauthorization process? 

Ms. MAINSTER. One of the things I think that we could improve 

programs with is if each program had a seasonal-based funding so 

that they could operate for the seasonals the year round, then they 

could use key staff from that to operate their migrant programs. 

That would have to be worked on to make sure that the migrants 

don’t ever lose the services. That would be— 

Mr. GRIJALVA. I think that transition is very important, and I—

last point and question. How do you coordinate as you follow—as 

the family leaves to follow their work? 

Ms. MAINSTER. OK. We’re actually piloting the promise, which is 

the data web-based system, but the parents are still the most important. The parents get a record with all their children’s scores in 

it on their assessments. They also get the health data, and we let 

them know where the programs are. Those that go to Ohio know 

exactly where they’re going. Those that go to Delaware, they know 

where their centers are. They go in. The center can then pick up 

where we left off and keep going. That’s the idea. 

The problems of course come where there is no room when they 

get to where they’re going. But right now the parents are hand-carrying that record. The coordination is counting—is really dependent upon the parent making it happen. The programs of course all 

know each other and talk. There’s only 25 grantees, so that helps. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you very much. 

Ms. MAINSTER. Thank you. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Chairman CASTLE. Thank you, Mr. Grijalva. Mrs. Biggert is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize for coming 

in late, but I have to say that I have had a connection with Head 

Start and the fact that I volunteered the first year that it had 

opened in Chicago at Hull House and spent a summer with the 

children there. So it’s always been very dear to my heart. 

And I can remember—you were just mentioning about how people have to be Spanish-speaking. And this of course was a Spanish 

neighborhood and I spoke French and Latin poorly, but still, it was 

something that—so I used to run home and turn on Sesame Street 

to watch to see if I could pick up the language in a very short time, 

40

which of course by the end of the summer, there was quite a bit 

of communication. 

But I remember then, and the thing about the culture was that 

the lunches that were served were American food, and these children didn’t know what it was. And they used to just not eat it. And 

finally I said, well, why don’t we just, you know, do something and 

bring in some food that they will eat, that is their own, and that 

worked well. 

But what I’d like to know is how many children are unable to 

get into the Head Start program because there aren’t enough and 

where do they go in your areas? 

Ms. CUNNINGHAM. In our county, we have a 1,900 child wait list 

for our 1,431 child Head Start program, and another 658 children 

on our Early Head Start wait list. We have 148 slots total 100 or 

so in centers. We have a huge wait list in Alabama. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Has there ever been any movement to expand it? 

Ms. CUNNINGHAM. We’ve taken advantage of every expansion opportunity that’s come available. There have not been any recently, 

but we actually have grown from serving 630 children in 1986 to 

1,431 now. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. And you wouldn’t say that it’s diluted the program at all? 

Ms. CUNNINGHAM. What now? 

Mrs. BIGGERT. It has not diluted the program? 

Ms. CUNNINGHAM. Not at all, not at all, because with those additional funds over the years have come the opportunities to expand 

supports, expand space and provide everything that we need for 

each child. 

Ms. MAINSTER. I think the other answer is where are they, those 

that are not in centers? They’re with babysitters in not very good 

settings. Our waiting list—and this was in our packet, but just a 

snapshot on February 5th, we had 2,078 children on waiting lists, 

and we also had our data from last year to this year. So we went—

last year we were 5,837 kids that we served, this year 6,242. So 

we’re like, I think all the exemplary programs must be very good 

at seeking out funds, because we know that the kids need the services. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Marker? 

Mr. MARKER. In our program, we operate an Early Head Start 

program and Head Start program, and obviously, since we only 

have 110 slots for Early Head Start in a three-county area, that’s 

where our largest demand is right now. And we do maintain a 

rather lengthy waiting list on that. I’m not aware of the current 

number of it. 

Head Start is a little bit different in Ohio. Until 4 years ago, we 

had a very strong state Head Start program that had adopted the 

Head Start program performance standards, which made everything very fluid. We could work very easily. But through budget 

problems, that’s gone away, so those children now are going to private child care, which is a good thing in some cases. A larger and 

larger number every day are going to the more unregulated care 

that’s present in Ohio, and there’s no regulation, and it’s really 

very scary. 

41

And I think as—if we ever get to the point where we can expand 

Head Start, that will make our three-county area much better because there will be more opportunities to get those children into a 

good environment that is safe. 

Dr. DAESCHNER. We’re rather unique in that—I’m going to talk 

about a district we had in Head Start. But we basically, I’m going 

to talk about children that qualify for free lunch. What we serve 

is Head Start. When I run out of that, I go to preschool. When I 

run of that, I got tuition-based. When I run out of that, we have 

90 percent of all the 4-year-olds that we serve in Jefferson County 

in an all day, every day 4-year-old program. I’ve got only about 30 

percent of the 3-year-olds. That translates into about 500 children 

that could take advantage of these services. I have actually 300 on 

a qualified waiting list, so. 

But the way you do that is you combine all the funds that I mentioned earlier into a program like we operate, so we can do quite 

a bit with all that funding in a streamless situation. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you for all that you do. I yield back. 

Chairman CASTLE. Thank you, Ms. Biggert. Mr. Kind is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. KIND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I want to 

first of all thank you for holding this very important hearing. I 

know of your great interest and concern about reauthorization of 

the Head Start program, and if and when we start moving forward 

on a Committee basis, once again we’ll look forward to working 

with you in a bipartisan fashion to try to produce a good reauthorized bill. 

And I want to thank all the witnesses for being here and bringing your particular expertise to the subject. This is an incredibly 

important program for many of us, and I think you all appreciate 

the significance of the Head Start program. 

I mean, it’s the most reviewed program at the Federal level it 

seems, and yet it’s also the most popular program when you talk 

to the constituents and the families that it services. I think the 

surveys that come back show a high 90 percent satisfaction and approval rating from the parents who have children in Head Start 

programs. So I think it really speaks volumes in regard to the success the program has had in preparing these children to close the 

achievement gap when it’s time for them to walk through that kindergarten door for the very first time. 

And that’s why many of us are concerned in regard to some of 

the more radical proposals being thrown out there by the Administration in regards to block granting and the impact that’s going to 

have on access, on the quality of the programming, on the accountability and the oversight of that program too. And hopefully with 

your help, we can work through that, because that’s been one of 

the major stumbling blocks as far as reauthorizing this program in 

the last session and perhaps in this session as well. There’s a difference of opinion. 

But from my perspective, one of the areas that I’ve been concerned about is in regards to this rush for more testing of children 

at an early age and the impact that’s going to have on them. In 

fact, I had offered an amendment in the reauthorized bill last year 

that would allow that the National Research Council of the NaVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:01 Jul 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 H:\DOCS\20629 EDU1 PsN: NNIXON
42

tional Academy of Sciences to do a comprehensive study in regards 

to what would be the appropriate measurements for children at 

this age so we don’t end up doing more harm than good just for 

the sake of testing. 

And I think it’s very important as we move forward with the reauthorized bill that we do pay attention to the impact of what new 

measurements and tests that we’re going to be requiring these children to undergo and whether it’s the most effective and scientifically based standards that we can hope for. And I notice the Administration, even though we didn’t reauthorize the bill, nevertheless through an administrative rule, went forward on a new National Reporting System that’s putting in place this new testing regime even before the National Academy has had a chance to complete the work they want to do in reviewing the different standards 

and measurements that we can take. 

I’d be curious to hear your opinion in regards to this new National Reporting System, the impact it’s having, whether you think 

it makes sense or whether there’s another approach that we can 

take in working with the Administration so we get this aspect of 

the Head Start program done right and not wrong, which I think 

is very important in regards to the performance of these kids and 

where they’re going to go from there. And I’d just open it up to anyone on the panel, quite frankly, who’s interested in touching that 

rail. 

Mr. SIEGFRIED. Thank you. Although I appreciate the objectivity 

of the data available through the National Reporting System, it 

only allows me, the user, to see this information at one level, at 

the agency level. Users have no ability to filter out information at 

the center or classroom level and certainly can’t then therefore impact individual teaching, because that report is not available, nor 

can I provide any information back to a parent in that regard. 

It also measures three developmental domains, and we know 

that our holistic service would appreciate eight domains, and that 

certainly is our approach as comprehensive services. We prefer to 

look at child outcomes really through many different lenses. Certainly our Brigance screening done initially within 45 days of enrollment gives us some initial information. 

Also the Child Observation Record, the COR, High/Scope’s COR, 

that we do implement then throughout the school year provides information that is directly aligned to the Federal performance 

standards, certainly the domains and elements and also the ODE 

Early Learning Contents standards. 

We collect data three times a school year, four in our year round 

programs, and then we can filter that information out by county, 

by program option. We can sort that in different ways really to determine the patterns and trends that we see. So that information 

is very useful to us. 

We can also take that information and we can then apply it to 

High/Scope’s Outcomes Reporter software, which then allows us to 

see how the information that we are determining as growth comparatively on the COR six scales then translates to the eight Federal domains as well as the required elements within the framework. 

43

In addition, we use less formal methods of assessment, including 

portfolio systems that parents find very friendly because there’s oftentimes photographs and anecdotal notes that accompany of 

course more formal reports available through some of these other 

observation pieces. 

Last, the piece that we have recently adopted, the ECERS and 

the ITERS, the Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale, 

again, it’s a very comprehensive measure certainly. It measures the 

environment, it measures everything really from how deep the 

mulch is on the playground to how wide the doors in your classroom. And certainly it measures then the adult-child interaction, 

the ability of staff to relate appropriately to children to extend 

ideas, to relate it to concepts, and to really deepen that knowledge. 

Mr. KIND. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I see my time has expired, 

but if any of the other panelists have something to add, I would 

encourage you to maybe forward some information or get directly 

in touch with my office so we can work with you on this very important matter, I feel. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman CASTLE. Thank you, Mr. Kind. Mr. Osborne is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. OSBORNE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you all for 

being here today. First of all, just a rather quick specific question. 

Mrs. Mainster, I think you mentioned that you have a budget of 

$47 million and you serve 6,000 children, and I think that would 

translate to about $7,800 per student. 

Ms. MAINSTER. Yes. 

Mr. OSBORNE. It seems a little high, but maybe I don’t understand. And I wonder if you could comment on that as to what the 

average cost for a Head Start student is and how you justify those 

costs. 

Ms. MAINSTER. Sorry I gave you the numbers, but I’ll try. Actually, we also have two charter schools in those numbers. That is, 

those are not all Head Start children. And in the Head Start arena, 

we serve—two-thirds of the children we serve are infants and toddlers. Infants and toddlers require a one-to-four staff/child ratio. It 

is much, much more expensive, no question. I don’t actually think 

we do it on $7,800. It’s more than that, sir. 

Mr. OSBORNE. Yes. 

Ms. MAINSTER. I would yield if I could, because I would have to 

play with some numbers to get you the actual cost in Head Start, 

in Migrant Head Start and in Early Head Start and in child care. 

I could do that. But when you lump it all together, it’s an average, 

and it doesn’t include the two charter schools. 

Mr. OSBORNE. Well, let me throw out a broader question, and 

that is that every group we have come before us is ecstatic about 

how important Head Start is, how good it is, how much they’re 

doing. And I agree that it’s a very important program, and I think 

it’s obviously something that we need to support as much as we 

can. Do you have any ways of quantifying what you’re getting 

done? In other words, at some point somebody’s going to ask some 

questions and say, well, you know, everybody feels good about it. 

The kids are happier. There’s more socialization. But what evidence do we have? You know, because—do you have any control 

44

studies where you have a set number of people with similar backgrounds and skills, one of which has gone to Head Start, one which 

has not, and where they are 2 years, 6 years, 8 years, 10 years 

later? 

Ms. CUNNINGHAM. There’s a Head Start impact study going on 

right now in its third year I believe collecting exactly that kind of 

data. We’re expecting a report soon. It’s a national study in lots of 

communities across the nation, and it has a control group of children and a group who went to Head Start that it’s comparing over 

several years. 

There are lots of small studies that have also looked at Head 

Start children compared to children not in Head Start. We did a 

small one in our program, and we’re seeking an opportunity to find 

those children now that they’re in about fourth grade to see what 

a difference having been in Head Start made. 

So there are lots of folks looking at how Head Start children 

have done compared to other children across the nation. 

Ms. MAINSTER. And I would just, we tried—we actually contracted with the university to do such a study, and then the—and 

I don’t want to say it wrong, but I think it’s HIPPA—but it was 

another where confidentiality was etched up a notch, and they 

backed out. They said the school district wasn’t allowed to release 

that data. 

Now possibly within a school district they could do it themselves, 

but not for a school district to release the data to the university 

for us. So we did try, because we recognize what you’re saying. We 

have lots and lots of good stories we can prove individuals, but I 

can’t give you the numbers that I think you need. 

Mr. OSBORNE. OK. Go ahead. 

Dr. DAESCHNER. Our programs, Early Childhood has been in 

place about 7 years. That would make the kids about fourth graders if you look at three- and 4-year-olds. And we matched kids 

going into this six or 7 years ago, and we matched it against free 

lunch that got Early Childhood programs and ones that did not. 

At the end of the fourth grade, we’re looking at about an 8 percent difference in standardized reading and similar to that with 

about a variance of two points on either side of that in terms of 

math. 

Where it really begins to also make a significant different is in 

special education. The kids that we can get in special education at 

a preschool, three- and 4-year-old and look at that comparative 

group, we have a lot less that qualify for special education at that 

fourth grade level if it occurs at the three and 4-year-old level. So 

we’ve got real clear data. I’d be happy to give you all those stats. 

We’ve tracked that. We’ve flagged the kids. We watched them, and 

we have all that data from almost 6 years. 

Mr. OSBORNE. Well, I think in reauthorization of Head Start 

which we went through last year and will go through again this 

year, one of the main concerns was that really when you look at 

enhanced academic performance, there wasn’t maybe as much as 

we had hoped would be there, and therefore we put in some stipulations that required a little bit more academic rigor, and that’s 

kind of a tough term to use when you’re dealing with three- and 

4-year-olds, but at least ability to know the alphabet and to write 

45

your name and, you know, the nuts and bolts and some of the basics. 

So the desire is to maybe enhance the academic performance. I 

think what you’re saying is right. There’s a lot of overidentification 

in the special education issue, and it could very well be that Head 

Start does cut down some of that overidentification or 

misidentification. And so anyway, but the more data we can get our 

hands on, you know, the better we can do. And it’s a little sketchy 

right now, so. Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Thank you. 

Chairman CASTLE. Thank you, Mr. Osborne. Mrs. Davis is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you 

all for being here. I’m sorry that I had to be at another hearing, 

but I wanted to just express to you, as others have, I mean, we all 

feel that the program has certainly made a difference for many, 

many children. It is interesting that perhaps the gap has closed a 

little bit between those who do not have the advantage of Head 

Start and those who do. But that may be because of other factors, 

as well. 

I’m amazed by how much young children are exposed to today, 

but the real critical issue is that there are children who are exposed to many, many things and those who are exposed to a little 

bit, and we need to try and balance that. 

I wanted to go to Ms. Cunningham for a second, because I know 

that we speak about the number of children that are on waiting 

lists. And we’re also concerned about funding. If you had more 

funding, however, would you have the capacity to have the teachers 

that you need, the infrastructure, the facilities, all the things that 

are needed to make the program work? 

Ms. CUNNINGHAM. It would take time, but we could do it. It 

takes training teachers. It takes the money to pay them. It takes 

funds to help us find facilities and bring them up to licensing 

standards. But all of that can be done. We’ve done that for years. 

As long as there’s not the expectation that it will be done tomorrow, we can serve more children over time. 

Mrs. DAVIS. OK. Thank you. One other question, and I think you 

probably addressed nutrition earlier, but we are very concerned 

about obesity in young children today. Do you see that Head Start 

is working to address this more? And particularly in the area of 

parent education. Because I think it really starts in the home. And 

kind of tough. I saw that the Cookie Monster is actually going to 

be eating more vegetables, and I was really glad to see that. 

But I wonder if you could talk a little bit about that and what 

plans are being done to really focus particularly on the parent education piece of that, because that’s important. 

Ms. CUNNINGHAM. In our program we did a study of children’s 

and parents’ activity to begin to see what the problem in terms of 

activity—intake versus activity was. And we really determine that 

our children are not getting out and playing enough, not having 

enough physical activity, and that our parents are not serving 

them fruits and vegetables enough to provide the kind of healthy 

intake we’d like. 

So we use our parent involvement component as a vehicle for 

more training and demonstrations to parents about healthy eating. 

46

We participate in a study with the university, the University of 

Alabama, trying to find a way to encourage more low income families, more low income children, more low income parents to provide 

fruits and vegetables for their children. 

I just came from a conversation at the Kellogg Foundation about 

what they can do to begin to help parents of young children provide 

more healthy meals and provide more activity for them. So there’s 

a real interest in Head Start. 

Mrs. DAVIS. That’s great. Thank you. I appreciate that. And it is 

a combination of factors and it applies to all parents, not just parents in Head Start, but we certainly can accentuate that perhaps 

more. 

One other quick question on assessments, because I think that 

is terribly important. We always are telling people, tell us your 

story, but we need to have data, too. It’s not just anecdotal. You 

seem to—you alluded, I think, to the importance of children being 

in programs. I think my colleague mentioned the food that’s presented so that there’s sort of a cultural identity with that. 

When we’re assessing, are we trying to minimize the cultural dissonance with children so that what it is they bring from the home 

actually is carried through and we’re evaluating partly their 

progress in relating to that which they know as well as that which 

is new to them? But is there consistency with that? Do you think 

that there’s enough emphasis on that? 

Ms. MAINSTER. There’s a difference between assessment and testing. In our assessment tools, I think all of us are very cognizant 

and aware of that, and I did include our outcomes in my testimony, 

which your staff might want to wade through. 

But the testing, there were a lot of concerns about that very 

issue in terms of children having to learn what a vase was and 

what a swamp was. Kids are amazing, though. And the teachers 

are also amazing. So we’re teaching more about vases and swamps 

these days. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. 

Chairman. 

Chairman CASTLE. Thank you, Mrs. Davis. I’m going to recognize—actually, I’m going to recognize Mr. Scott and Mr. Hinojosa 

together. Let me explain why. We are in the middle of a vote. 

We’ve got about 10 minutes to go on the vote, and we’ve got to 

leave in about five or 6 minutes to go vote, and it’s a series of 

votes, so it’s going to be 30 or 40 minutes. And rather than bring 

everybody back, I think I’m going to try to finish the panel up. 

I had a few extra questions that I’ll submit in writing, particular 

to you, Dr. Daeschner, that I want to get some answers to. But I 

want to make sure they have their opportunity. So, gentlemen, you 

take whatever time we can allow until we have to go vote in five 

or 6 minutes. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Congressman Scott, for allowing me to ask at least one question before 

we rush off to vote. 

It was last year that three different caucuses, the Congressional 

Hispanic Caucus, the Congressional Black Caucus, and the Congressional Asian-Pacific American Caucus, sent a letter to the Secretary of HHS detailing our concerns about the technical quality of 

47

the assessment and the appropriate use of such assessment of 

Head Start students. Nonetheless, HHS has moved forward with 

this assessment without ensuring that the assessment meets the 

highest quality technical and professional standards, and this is especially true for the test given in Spanish. More seriously, HHS 

has proceeded with this national assessment without clearly defining the purpose nor how the results will be used. 

I would like to ask Ms. Gayle Cunningham, the executive director from the Alabama program, to share with us your view of the 

appropriateness of this assessment for the children that they serve 

and to comment on their understanding of the purpose of such assessment. 

Ms. CUNNINGHAM. The children we serve in Birmingham are predominately black, so we did not have as many of the issues around 

very different cultures. Our concern is about the addition of this 

test to all the other assessment which we developed or made 

choices about which we believe to be appropriate and to fit into our 

program; the amount of time that it has taken for our staff to learn 

this new test and administer this new test; the fact that the feedback that we receive has not yet been useful to us. It’s general. It’s 

about the whole program. It’s not about individual children, individual classes, or even individual centers. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. You’ve made a good point. Can you tell us how 

you and the other members of this panel can help us draft what 

would be the ideal way to do it and how to use that assessment? 

Maybe pass the buck over to the lady to your right. How do we pronounce your name, Mainster? 

Ms. MAINSTER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Thank you. 

Ms. MAINSTER. Please don’t pass the buck to me. 

[Laughter.] 

Ms. MAINSTER. I would say in our Migrant and Seasonal Head 

Start program this year, they didn’t have their act together to get 

the NRS out to us. In our regular Head Start, we serve about onethird Hispanic, one-third African-American, and one-third Anglos. 

And those Hispanic kids, of course, are the more seasonal settled 

out. Their English is better. And so it’s hard for us. They did take 

it in the two languages. 

I guess maybe—I’m writing down that you want information, you 

want to know how to fix it. There are experts here that could do 

that much better than I. I will just tell you that we roll with the 

punches. I’m not—we’re going to do what we have to do. We’re 

going to keep on doing a good program. I would just wait. If anybody every tried to hit us over the head with it, I would come back 

with my ammunition at that point. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Well, we— 

Chairman CASTLE. Mr. Hinojosa, we’ve got to go, Mr. Scott, or 

we’re never going to get to him. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me just make a couple of comments. We talk about these studies and the longitudinal 

studies I hope we’re considering not just the educational aspects 

but the other aspects, reduction in crime, behavior, drug use, teen 

pregnancy and everything else that happens long term. 

48

There’s a reason why this program is in Health and Human 

Services and not in Education, because you have the immunizations, the nutrition, and all the other things that are as much social service as well as anything else, and there’s a strong belief that 

it is in the right department. 

I have the same concern that Mr. Hinojosa had about the high 

stakes test. We don’t want to punish children who fail a test because they were in a bad program, but we do want to make the 

assessments, because the programs—some programs are better 

than others. And if you’re assessing the program, that’s one thing. 

If you’re punishing the children and failing to promote and that 

kind of thing, that is not as useful. The tests obviously have to be 

validated for the purpose for which they are being used. 

Also, as we’re doing these assessments, I would hope they would 

be useful in improving the program. Some programs are better 

than others. If a program is not doing well, the assessment ought 

to be able to show exactly what we can do to improve it. 

So with all of those on assessments and the social aspects of it, 

Mr. Chairman, I’d just express those concerns. I assume we’re 

going to be having other hearings. And I appreciate the opportunity 

for you to kind of squeeze us in at the end. 

Chairman CASTLE. Thank you, Mr. Scott. What Mr. Scott is referring to in the other hearing is we’re having another hearing on 

this subject next week at which point we can continue to develop 

some of these issues, and I appreciate his helping with the time situation that we have. 

Yes, Ms. Cunningham? You’ve got to be brief, but we’d love to 

hear from you. 

Ms. CUNNINGHAM. Just quickly, in response to your first question 

about regulations, there’s a much greater need for managers to 

have more training and support in using and following regulations. 

Chairman CASTLE. Federal managers? 

Ms. CUNNINGHAM. No. Head Start managers. 

Chairman CASTLE. Head Start managers. 

Ms. CUNNINGHAM. There’s no system for bringing Head Start directors on, Head Start fiscal staff on, and helping them— 

Chairman CASTLE. Training for them. 

Ms. CUNNINGHAM [continuing]. Quickly learn the regulations and 

how to assure that they are working in their programs. Each of us 

has had to figure it out for ourselves. And if there were a system 

of supports for management and administration of Head Start programs, I think that would be a path that would yield greater benefits than one of seeking out what regulations could be changed or 

dismissed. 

Chairman CASTLE. That has the ring of a sound suggestion. You 

know, we do have the various regional agencies and that kind of 

thing, so hopefully we could do it. 

Let me close this down, unfortunately rather rapidly, because we 

have to run and vote. Let me thank all of you very much for being 

here. Because we didn’t quite have a chance to do all the questioning we would like to do, we may have some follow-up questions. 

I know in particular I have some questions for Dr. Daeschner. We’ll 

get in touch with you by mail if that’s the case. 

49

But, again, I wanted to thank you all very much for being here. 

As you know, we’re working on this legislation. Hopefully, we’ll 

have a piece of legislation that will benefit all the kids in the country. 

But thank you very much. 

Ms. MAINSTER. Thank you. 

Chairman CASTLE. We stand adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:53 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

[Additional material submitted for the record follows:]

Statement of Charles R. Field MD, MPH, FAAP, Mary Kaye McKinney and 

Patricia A. Price, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Department of Pediatrics Head Start Program, Pulaski County, AR, Submitted 

for the Record 

Since 1998, the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS), a teaching 

university, has had the opportunity to administer the Head Start program in Pulaski County, Arkansas. The UAMS Department of Pediatrics became the grantee 

for the Pulaski County Head Start program in November of that year and today enrolls approximately 1000 Head Start and Early Head Start children and serves the 

interests of many more in the community. 

The primary purpose of the national Head Start and Early Head Start programs—to increase the school readiness of low-income children—is a perfect match 

for the three missions of UAMS: to teach, to search, and to serve. UAMS accomplishes both by offering more than the traditional Head Start services. The UAMS 

Head Start program is highly successful at helping our students prepare for school. 

Attached is graphical information about the success our program has had in educating students and preparing them for elementary school. We are very proud of our 

accomplishments in this area. 

We are pleased today, however, to tell you about two areas of services we provide 

which set us apart from others in the Head Start community. Because of our education mission, we endeavor to promote educational opportunities beyond our students and because we are a medical education institution, we use our Head Start 

program to promote the health of our students, families, and community. 

Educating the Community. In addition to educating children, the UAMS Head 

Start program provides educational opportunities to many others. The program provides service-learning opportunities to students enrolled in the UAMS Colleges of 

Nursing, Medicine, Health Related Professions and Public Health. These graduate 

level students work with our Head Start children and as a result gain valuable experience in dealing with children. Their involvement provides hands on experience 

and prepares them for the challenges they may face in their medical practice. We 

also provide tuition discounts to help our Head Start employees (and their family 

members) continue their education at UAMS affiliated higher education institutions. 

Ensuring a Health Community. The thing that truly sets the Head Start program 

at UAMS apart from others is our commitment to using the Head Start program 

to promote the health and welfare of our community. Children enrolled in our program and their parents have access to health, nutrition, dental and mental health 

services from UAMS and other sources. The services, provided by our students and 

faculty, range from basic medical screening services to consultations with medical 

specialists. 

Since its inception, UAMS has provided free medical services to hundreds of students and families. UAMS staff has performed more than 100 health care screenings 

on students without access to primary care; 719 children without dental insurance 

have received dental checkups from UAMS dentists; and more than 100 children 

have been referred to UAMS physicians for comprehensive specialty pediatric services. In all these cases, the services provided would not have otherwise been available to the students because of gaps in, or lack of, health insurance. Two recent 

cases provide concrete examples of the success UAMS has had in promoting health 

among students: 

• A Head Start mother with a substance abuse problem sought assistance from 

Head Start personnel. The UAMS Head Start personnel referred the mother to 

the UAMS Arkansas Center on Addiction Research Education and Service 

(CARES). The mother continues to receive treatment and job skills training as 

a result of the referral. Most importantly, the services were provided without 

separation from her family and her preschool children continued to receive inteVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:01 Jul 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 H:\DOCS\20629 EDU1 PsN: NNIXON
50

grated early childhood education including therapy services to deal with the 

mother’s addiction. 

• Just last month, Head Start personnel noted a four-year old student with balance difficulty and a propensity to drool. Medical personnel on site at the Head 

Start facility monitored the student and reviewed her medical records. Based 

on these observations the student was referred to UAMS medical specialists. 

UAMS specialists discovered a brain tumor. The child is now undergoing treatment by UAMS Neurosurgeons and Pediatric Specialists. 

Head Start students and families also participate in research programs conducted 

by UAMS. Students and families receive health care services and the information 

derived through the research helps UAMS find ways to improve the condition of the 

students, families, and the community. For example, UAMS Head Start has participated in the following research initiatives: 

• Asthma Project—An initiative, funded by the Agency for Health Care Research 

and Quality, to find better outcomes for children with Asthma. UAMS researchers showed children with Asthma proved better outcomes for children with 

Asthma using the Head Start program by educating parents and staff on Asthma. 

• Obesity Project—The UAMS Department of Clinical Nutrition provides interns 

twice a year to compile data on the height, weight and body mass index profile 

of the UAMS Head Start Children. UAMS uses this information to chart childhood obesity and researchers utilize the data to educate parents and the public 

on ways to address childhood obesity. Information compiled by UAMS supported 

statewide efforts to develop comprehensive nutritional programs and an educational/physical curriculum to help reduce obesity in our children. 

• Health Screening Data—UAMS medical professionals use information derived 

through the health screenings provided to Head Start students and families to 

better understand and promote child development. 

We are very proud of the accomplishments of the children, their parents and our 

staff in our Head Start program. As the attached information shows, we have had 

a great deal of success in educating our students and preparing them for elementary 

school. But in addition to educating the students, the integration between our Head 

Start program and the facilities and personnel of UAMS allow us to offer services 

and accomplish things for our students and families, that sets us apart. We know 

the UAMS Head Start program is laying a foundation for a better tomorrow for 

thousands of families in the state.

[Attachments to this statement follow:]

51


20629.005
52


20629.006
53

Statement of Matthew E. Melmed, J.D., Executive Director, Zero to Three 

Policy Center, Washington, DC, Submitted for the Record 

Chairman Castle and Members of the Subcommittee: 

I am pleased to submit the following testimony on the reauthorization of Head 

Start on behalf of ZERO TO THREE. I am Matthew Melmed, Executive Director 

of ZERO TO THREE. ZERO TO THREE is a national non-profit organization that 

has worked to advance the healthy development of America’s babies and toddlers 

for over twenty-five years. I would like to start by thanking the Subcommittee for 

all of their work to ensure that our nation’s at-risk infants and toddlers have access 

to positive early learning experiences. 

We know from the science of early childhood development that infancy and 

toddlerhood are times of intense intellectual engagement.1 During this time—a remarkable 36 months—the brain undergoes its most dramatic development, and children acquire the ability to think, speak, learn, and reason. All babies and toddlers 

need positive early learning experiences to foster their intellectual, social, and emotional development and to lay the foundation for later school success. Babies and 

toddlers living in high-risk environments need additional supports to promote their 

healthy growth and development. Disparities in children’s cognitive and social abilities become evident well before they enter Head Start or Pre–Kindergarten programs at age four. Early Head Start was created to help minimize these disparities 

and ensure that children enter school ready to learn. 

The Success of Early Head Start 

The Congressionally mandated National Evaluation of Early Head Start—a rigorous, large-scale, random-assignment evaluation—concluded that Early Head Start 

is making a positive difference in areas associated with children’s success in school, 

family self-sufficiency, and parental support of child development. What is most 

compelling about the Early Head Start data is that they reflect a broad set of indicators, all of which show positive impact—patterns of impacts varied in meaningful 

ways for different subgroups of families. The reauthorization provides an opportunity to focus on what can be done to achieve even greater impacts for infants, toddlers and families in Early Head Start. Highlights of the study include: 

Intellectual, Social and Emotional Development 

• Early Head Start Moves Children Further Along the Path that Could Lead to 

Greater School Readiness if the Early Head Start Gains are Maintained By 

Good–Quality Preschool Programs. Early Head Start produced statistically significant, positive impacts on standardized measures of children’s cognitive and 

language development.2 A smaller percentage of Early Head Start children 

(27.3 percent versus 32.0 percent) scored in the ‘‘at-risk’’ range of developmental 

functioning (although still below the mean of national norms). By keeping children from entering the lowest-functioning group, Early Head Start may be reducing the risk of later poor cognitive, language, and school outcomes.3

• Early Head Start Children Had More–Positive Interactions With Their Parents 

than control group children. Positive and secure parent-child relationships may 

reduce a young child’s fear in novel or challenging situations and enable the 

child to explore with confidence.4

• Early Head Start Children Were More Attentive To Objects During Play than 

control group children. Play is important because being attentive to and engaged in play activities is how children begin to learn important cognitive and 

social skills needed for later school and life success. 

Parenting and Families 

• Early Head Start Parents Were More Involved and Provided More Support for 

Learning. Early Head Start programs have significant favorable impacts on a 

range of parenting outcomes. Early Head Start parents were observed to be 

more emotionally supportive and less detached than control-group parents. 

They also provided significantly more support for language and learning than 

control-group parents. 

• Early Head Start Helped Parents Move Toward Self–Sufficiency. Early Head 

Start significantly facilitated parents’’ progress toward self-sufficiency. Although 

there were not significant increases in income, there was increased parental 

participation in education and job-training activities. 

• Early Head Start Programs Had A Substantial Impact on African American 

Families and A Notable Impact on Hispanic Families. Early Head Start programs were especially effective in improving child development and parenting 

outcomes of African American children and parents. The Early Head Start proVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:01 Jul 20, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 H:\DOCS\20629 EDU1 PsN: NNIXON
54

grams also had a favorable pattern of impacts on Hispanic children and parents. • Early Head Start Had Positive Impact for Parents at Risk of Depression. Early 

Head Start parents who had been at risk for depression when they enrolled in 

the program reported significantly less depression than control-group parents 

reported when their child reached age three. Early Head Start also demonstrated a favorable pattern of impact on children’s social-emotional development and parenting outcomes among these families. • Early Head Start Had Favorable Impact on Child–Father Interactions. Early 

Head Start significantly improved how fathers interacted and related to their 

children. Early Head Start children were observed to be more able to engage 

their fathers and to be more attentive during play than control group children. 

Early Head Start fathers were observed to be less intrusive in interacting with 

their children than control group fathers. The emotional quality of the fatherchild relationship appears to be extremely important to children’s adjustment 

and well-being.5

• Early Head Start Participation resulted in Fewer Subsequent Births. Early 

Head Start low-income mothers were less likely to have subsequent births within the two years following enrollment in Early Head Start. 

Children Served by Early Head Start 

Early Head Start began with 68 new programs in 1995. Now more than 700 programs serve over 71,000 low-income families with infants and toddlers. However, we 

know that Early Head Start could benefit many more at-risk children. Currently, 

only 5 percent of the children eligible for Early Head Start are served. Thousands 

of eligible children nationwide remain on waiting lists. And waiting lists can be significant. For example, one program has reported a waiting list of over 400 children 

for only 92 slots. A program in Wheeling, West Virginia reports that they have a 

waiting list of 216 children for 48 slots. And a program in Asheville, North Carolina 

reports that they receive phone calls on a daily basis from desperate parents needing a quality early education program. The program rarely has vacancies and has 

a waiting list of over 100 children for only 40 slots. In short, by every measure of 

capacity, we clearly must do more to serve eligible babies and their families, delivering the proven benefits of Early Head Start to those who are in greatest need. 

There are very few high quality alternatives for at-risk babies. Child care for this 

population is abysmal and there is not much going on in states. Early Head Start 

has really become a ‘‘Beacon of Hope’’ for at risk infants, toddlers and their families 

Funding 

Currently, 10 percent of the overall Head Start budget is used to serve 71,000 

low-income families with infants and toddlers through Early Head Start—only 5 

percent of all eligible children. We strongly encourage the Subcommittee to increase 

the Early Head Start portion of the program to 20 percent of the overall Head Start 

budget. Additional funds will enable us to protect and continue to build on the firm 

foundation that currently exists and to ensure that more eligible babies and families 

are able to benefit from the services of Early Head Start. 

The Head Start Program Performance Standards 

Key to Early Head Start’s success is its emphasis on the implementation of the 

Head Start Program Performance Standards—research from the National Evaluation of Early Head Start demonstrates that programs that fully implement the Performance Standards early on have a greater impact on child and family outcomes 

than those that do not.6 This finding indicates that the success of the program is 

largely dependent on the preservation of these performance standards. The first set 

of Head Start Performance Standards, published more than 20 years ago, focused 

only on the provision of services to preschool children. The revised Standards cover 

the provision of services for pregnant women and children from birth to five years 

of age. We urge the Subcommittee to protect the Performance Standards as they are 

key to Early Head Start’s success. 

The Performance Standards ensure that Early Head Start programs pay close attention to the unique needs of infants and toddlers by: supporting responsive, consistent, nurturing caregiving; promoting social and emotional growth, physical development, and sensory and motor development; and encouraging language development. The Performance Standards pay particular attention to the social and emotional development of infants and toddlers by focusing on their relationship with 

their teachers and ensuring that center-based and home-based teachers are consistent and nurturing, well-trained, and that they understand the child’s family culture. The Performance Standards are different for infants and toddlers. Examples 

include: 

55

• A Higher Ratio Requirement: Agencies must ensure that each teacher that 

works exclusively with infants and toddlers in a center-based setting has responsibility for no more than four infants and toddlers and that no more than 

eight infants and toddlers are placed in a group. This ratio is maintained until 

Early Head Start children are 36 months. For programs serving 3, 4 and 5-year 

old children, the ratio requirements are quite different. Each Head Start class 

must be staffed by a teacher and an aide or two teachers. Three year-olds have 

an average of 15–17 children per class, with no more than 17 children enrolled 

in any class. 4 and 5 year-olds have a class average of 17–20 children, with no 

more than 20 children enrolled per class. 

• More Staff Intensive: Early Head Start program staff working with infants and 

toddlers who are counted in the ratio must be qualified as an infant/toddler 

teacher which means that the individual must have a minimum of a CDA credential for Infant and Toddler Caregivers or an equivalent credential at the 

time of hire or within one year of hire. Thus, the teacher’s aide concept that 

is so common in Head Start preschool programs has no currency in EHS. Unlike 

Head Start teachers, EHS teachers must also have knowledge of infant and toddler development, safety issues in infant and toddler care, and methods for communicating effectively with infants and toddlers, their parents, and other staff 

members. 

• Special Nutritional Requirements: Staff and families must work together to 

identify each child’s nutritional needs. For infants and toddlers, current feeding 

schedules and amounts and types of food provided, including whether breast 

milk or formula and baby food is used, meal patterns, new foods introduced, 

food intolerances and preferences; voiding patterns; and observations related to 

developmental changes in feeding and nutrition. In addition, infants and toddlers who need it must be fed ‘‘on demand’’. Head Start children do not have 

these special nutritional requirements. The Performance Standards do note that 

the feeding experiences for preschoolers should occur at scheduled times, and 

be flexible enough to deal with the individual needs of children. 

• Services to Pregnant Women Enrolled in Early Head Start: Early Head Start 

grantees must assist pregnant women to access comprehensive prenatal and 

postpartum care through referrals—immediately after enrollment in the program. This care must include: early and continuing risk assessments which include an assessment of nutritional status as well as nutrition counseling and 

food assistance; health promotion and treatment including medical and dental 

examinations on a schedule deemed appropriate by the attending health care 

providers as early in the pregnancy as possible; and mental health interventions 

and follow-up including substance abuse prevention and treatment services as 

needed. Requirements for services to pregnant women do not apply for Head 

Start as only Early Head Start serves pregnant women. 

Training and Technical Assistance 

From the beginning, Early Head Start’s implementation was assisted by a dedicated national and regional training and technical assistance network with specialized knowledge of the needs of infants, toddlers and their families. Given the recent 

changes in the overall Head Start training and technical assistance system, the 

small size of the Early Head Start program, and the positive child and family outcomes that the program is yielding, we are concerned about the maintenance of the 

national and regional Early Head Start training and technical assistance system. In 

order to sustain the positive outcomes generated by the program, Early Head Start 

programs and staff need to continue to receive the ongoing training opportunities 

and technical assistance from organizations with specialized expertise relating to infants, toddlers and families and the demonstrated capacity needed to provide direction and support to the national and regional training and technical assistance system. 

Early Head Start’s Comprehensive Approach 

Research demonstrates that comprehensive services, such as education, health 

and family support services have a positive impact on Early Head Start families. 

We urge the Subcommittee to protect Early Head Start’s comprehensive approach 

to serving children and families. Comprehensive services include: 

• Education: In providing services to infants and toddlers, Early Head Start programs must support the physical, social, emotional, cognitive, and language development of each child. Early Head Start programs are to encourage the development of secure relationships for infants and toddlers by having a limited 

number of consistent teachers over an extended period of time and are to encourage responsiveness to infants’’ individual cues and developmental changes. 

56

Teachers in both center-based and home-based settings should understand the 

child’s family culture and speak the child’s language whenever possible. Staff 

must support the social and emotional development of infants and toddlers by 

promoting an environment that will encourage the development of self awareness, autonomy, and self expression and support the emerging communication 

skills of infants and toddlers by providing daily opportunities for each child to 

interact with others and to express him/herself freely. Staff must also support 

the physical development of infants and toddlers by supporting the development 

of physical skills of infants and toddlers including motor skills such as grasping, 

pulling, crawling, walking and climbing and creating opportunities for fine 

motor development that encourage control and coordination of small specialized 

motions using the eyes, mouth, hands and feet. Ongoing assessment of each 

child’s skills and behaviors plays a key role in developing a curriculum that is 

age-appropriate, culturally sensitive, and tailored to meet his or her specific 

needs. As previously mentioned, the National Evaluation found that Early Head 

Start produced statistically significant, positive impacts on standardized measures of children’s cognitive and language development.7

• Family Support: Early Head Start programs are required to involve families in 

every aspect of the program and provide them with added services, such as 

adult education and employment training. Programs are to work with families 

to set goals for themselves and their children and should ensure families’’ access 

to community resources and services. Programs use community partnerships as 

a key vehicle for increasing families’’ access to quality child care, prenatal services, housing, employment, and maternal and child health care. The National 

Evaluation found that Early Head Start helped parents move toward self-sufficiency. Early Head Start significantly facilitated parents’’ progress toward selfsufficiency. Although there were not significant increases in income, there was 

increased parental participation in education and job-training activities. • Health: Early Head Start provides comprehensive health services to infants, 

toddlers and families through prevention and the early identification of health 

and developmental concerns, and through links to community health services. 

Early Head Start programs provide health and developmental screenings when 

children enroll and periodically throughout children’s participation in the program. If a health or developmental concern is identified that indicates a disability or other developmental delay, children are promptly referred to local 

Part C programs for further evaluation and if eligible, early intervention services are provided. The National Evaluation found that few effects on family 

health emerged due to very few overall differences between program and control 

groups in the receipt of health services—nearly all program and control group 

families reported receiving basic health services.8

Conclusion 

During the first three years of life, children rapidly develop foundational capabilities—cognitive, social and emotional—on which subsequent development builds. 

These years are even more important for at-risk infants and toddlers. Early Head 

Start can serve as a protective buffer against the multiple adverse influences that 

may hinder their development in all domains. 

We know based on research from the National Evaluation that Early Head Start 

is working! Key to the program’s success is its emphasis on the implementation of 

the Head Start Program Performance Standards, which ensure the highest quality 

care for babies and families and its comprehensive approach to serving children and 

families. We must protect and continue to build on the firm foundation that currently exists and ensure that our nation’s at-risk babies are able to enter school 

ready to learn. 

Endnotes 

1Shonkoff J., and Phillips, D. (Eds.) (2000). National Research Council and Institute of Medicine. From Neurons to Neighborhoods: The Science of Early Childhood Development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 2 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families 

(2002). Making a Difference in the Lives of Infants and Toddlers and Their Families: The Impacts of Early Head Start. Washington, DC. 3 Ibid 

4Shonkoff J., and Phillips, D. (Eds.) (2000). National Research Council and Institute of Medicine. From Neurons to Neighborhoods: The Science of Early Childhood Development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 5 Ibid 

6 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families 

(2002). Making a Difference in the Lives of Infants and Toddlers and Their Families: The Impacts of Early Head Start. Washington, DC. 

57

ZERO TO THREE Policy Center (2003). The national evaluation of Early Head 

Start: Early Head Start works. Washington, DC: Author. 7 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families 

(2002). Making a Difference in the Lives of Infants and Toddlers and Their Families: The Impacts of Early Head Start. Washington, DC. 8 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families 

(2001). Building Their Futures: How Early Head Start Programs are Enhancing the Lives of 

Infants and Toddlers in Low–Income Families, Summary Report. Washington, DC. 

Statement of Dr. Tim Nolan, Director, Head Start Program, Waukesha 

County, WI, Submitted for the Record 

Chairman Castle, Congresswoman Woolsey and distinguished members of the 

committee, I thank you for inviting my testimony regarding exemplary Head Start 

programs. It has been my honor to serve as the director of the Head Start program 

in Waukesha County, Wisconsin since 1968. I have also served during this period 

as executive director of our agency, operating as Child and Family Centers of Excellence which provides Head Start, Early Head Start, full day child care services and 

a variety of other services for children and families in our community. I am also 

executive director of the newly created Early Childhood Excellence Network with 

members from across the U.S. As president of Innovative Outcomes, Inc. since 1973, 

I have been a consultant to organizations on issues of organizational effectiveness, 

strategic planning and transformational change. I am the author or co-author of 34 

books on these and related topics. It is upon this diverse and rich background that 

I draw as I approach the topic of exemplary Head Start programs. I believe that 

excellent Head Start programs are an untapped asset that can be used to help make 

every Head Start the best that it can be. 

Every Head Start Grantee is Expected to Meet High Minimum Standards: 

The Head Start Performance Standards are the highest minimum standards in 

the field of early childhood development. These standards are comprehensive in nature and reflect the need to deal with a child across all of his or her developmental 

dimensions. All agencies are expected to meet or exceed these minimum standards. 

Meeting the Performance Standards does NOT equate to excellence. 

Exemplary Head Start Agencies: 

Exemplary Head Start agencies see the Performance Standards for what they 

are—minimum standards of performance. For agencies pursuing excellence in their 

operations, the Performance Standards are a foundation, and a reminder of all the 

dimensions necessary to achieve success. Exemplary agencies don’t work to meet 

minimums, they work to shape the standard of excellence through constant innovation. 

Excellent Head Start agencies surpass the minimum standards in measurable 

ways, and are innovative in ways that help to shape the field itself and to improve 

the performance of others. Excellent agencies have staff members who write books, 

act as community leaders, train others and provide support and technical assistance 

to others. 

We at Child and Family Centers of Excellence see ourselves as a ‘‘direct services, 

demonstration, information services organization.’’ We are the largest publisher of 

professional development materials for Head Start other than the federal government itself. As a point of reference, when I relate our experience as an agency, 

please keep in mind that what we are accomplishing is done with the same level 

of Head Start funding as other agencies—our federal investment per child is approximately at the national average. We are proud to say that our administrative 

costs are below the allowable level of 15%, and are closer to 10%. Finally, the staffing levels, degree levels of staff and other variables that we discuss have been our 

pattern for many years, with a constant effort to extend and upgrade quality seeking to reach excellence in all that we do. We are never satisfied. Our organizational 

culture is focused on always being able to affirmatively answer the question ‘‘Is this 

the best we can do for this child or family?’’

Human Resource and Human Resource Development 

The key assets of a Head Start program are its human resources. Exemplary 

Head Start grantees recognize this and focus inordinate efforts at recruiting, developing and retaining the top quality people available to do this work, which is the 

most demanding early childhood developmental work one can be asked to do, due 

to the depth of problems and challenges that enrolled families are experiencing. Excellent agencies have every staff member adhere to a constant professional development effort. 

58

At Child and Family Centers of Excellence, our human resource development 

(HRD) program is headed up by an associate director who holds a master’s degree. 

As executive director, one of my two master’s degrees is also in human resource development, since I take a special interest in this aspect of our work. We not only 

focus on maximizing the quality of our own staff, but provide training and technical 

assistance to other early childhood and family service organizations on these issues, 

both inside and outside of our target area. We are partners with both Viterbo University and the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee. Our work as a Governor’s 

Center of Early Childhood Excellence makes us a training and technical assistance 

resource to other Head Start and early childhood programs. We operate a leadership 

institute in Missouri and are in the tenth year of providing an early childhood leadership laboratory in Colorado. 

Teachers 

While the Head Start Performance Standards specify a minimum of associate degrees for classroom teachers, exemplary Head Start programs are more likely to 

have bachelor’s degreed teachers, in many cases certified or licensed for early childhood. 

All of the teachers at Child and Family Centers of Excellence, Inc., have bachelor’s degrees and are certified in early childhood education with two years of additional training that we provide. Our teachers, who bear the title ‘‘Child and Family 

Specialists,’’ receive training in ‘‘real world’’ child development, learning to apply 

their skills in real early childhood settings with children with relatively deep needs. 

Their training further includes achieving a family services credential (9 graduate 

credits) to prepare them to serve as the primary family service resource to parents, 

making referrals where the needs surpass their capabilities. They also receive training as supervisors since every lead person in a preschool classroom supervises other 

adults, both employees and volunteers. Few colleges prepare even degreed teachers 

for this work as a supervisor. Finally, woven into their child and family specialist 

training process is an ongoing series of personal growth experiences to ensure that 

they are prepared to handle the rigors of working in our complex, demanding environment. They are provided support from internal mental health service personnel 

to support their own mental health while working with demanding child and family 

needs. Other early childhood staff members working under the direction of our Child 

and Family Specialists are hired with as much background and formal training as 

possible. While they may even hold associate or bachelor’s degrees when they join 

us, they are immediately placed into a developmental track to move their skills forward to meet current and future needs of this agency. 

Family Service Personnel 

While the Performance Standards are very light in specifying academic standards 

for family services staff, excellent Head Start agencies develop their own high standards. Excellent agencies seek degreed individuals and tend to seek a variety of backgrounds as they build a diverse interdependent family services team. 

In our agency, this program is lead by an individual with a master’s degree and 

years of experience in working with young children and their families. The Child 

and Family Specialists working here are all carefully selected for their mix of skills 

and training. 90% have college degrees. All are given family service credential training. Our senior staff are approved by our university partners to deliver this training 

for credit. 

Administrators 

Excellent agencies seek the most highly qualified individuals for management and 

place them into an ongoing professional developmental program. 

Our agency management team has a high degree of stability, with 106 years of 

experience with this agency among the top four senior administrators. These four 

individuals hold a total of nine degrees—four bachelor’s, four master’s and a doctorate among them, all relevant to their work. In addition, we have four others currently working on master’s degrees. Our administrators ‘‘lead from out front,’’ doing 

whatever needs to be done, working at those things that will make the biggest difference for the children and families, reducing their pay first when dollars are tight. 

Excellence is About Having Higher Expectations Throughout. . .Think About a Kaleidoscope 

Excellence in Head Start is looking at how to improve—to do a better job—to better respond to the needs of the children and families we serve. One can best think 

of excellence using a kaleidoscope as a frame of reference. When one turns a kaleidoscope, the eye is treated to one beautiful picture followed by yet another beautiful 

picture. This is the case as you explore the top performing agencies in Head Start. 

59

They do NOT fit a single mold, but express their excellence in a variety of ways. 

Their excellence is defined by their vision of what the ideal program must do to best 

serve the children—to get the best possible outcomes for their work. 

Using our agency as a further example, here are a few of the dimensions that I 

would pull to express this: 

Our child nutrition program was very good, certainly the best in our target area. 

Yet as childhood obesity and incredibly poor eating patterns in young children have 

become a more critical national problem, we were not satisfied that our food services 

program met and exceeded the Head Start Performance Standards or the USDA 

Child Nutrition Standards. We went out and recruited a chef. We hired a young chef 

with over a decade of experience in the top restaurants in Milwaukee to lead our 

food program, to develop the most healthy yet economical food program possible 

with low fat stocks made in our own world class kitchen and flavor that doesn’t 

come only from fat and salt. As a center of excellence, what we learn will be shared 

with other Head Start and early childhood through providing training, training materials and a handbook for child nutrition. And we are doing this at the same dollar 

cost as any other agency. 

Our health services program was very good, but we knew it could be better. We 

added a second part-time RN to our staff to ensure strong parent support on health 

issues and more horsepower to seeking health services for our enrolled children and 

their families. We deepened our partnership with the County Health Department 

by letting them offer a community health clinic at our site once per month. We deepened our already deep level of mental health services by developing a contract with 

the Children’s Hospital of Wisconsin. Not only does this give us on-site support of 

a child psychologist on a regularly scheduled basis, a requirement for Head Start, 

but it provides ready access to the largest array of child mental and medical health 

services in Wisconsin. We’ve had a long term relationship with Lutheran Social 

Services, which is the largest human services private provider in our state, and is 

the birth through 3 provider in our county. Due to our prominence in the community, they purchased land next to our new world class facility in order to create a 

showcase intergenerational program in partnership with us. A fringe benefit to this 

deepened partnership is the fact that their full staff, including mental health professionals and a full array of child services specialists—dozens of skilled child specialists—will be housed on our expanding ‘‘campus,’’ a huge benefit to our staff and parents. 

Our community partnerships have been very good and are deepening. Two of our 

staff over the years have been president of the Waukesha County Human Services 

Council. We have created a loosely organized group, Partners in Community Service, that arrays itself as the needs evolve in our community. Due to our outreach 

capabilities with low income families in our community, other early childhood family 

service organizations seek us out. We are a strong referral source to others seeking 

to meet the needs of low income families. 

Since Wisconsin was the ‘‘national poster child’’ for rapid welfare reform nationally, we were forced to create new approaches to recruiting and enrolling the neediest young children in our countywho suddenly were very difficult to find and identify—we went from 1,670 families on AFDC to 14 families on full public assistance 

in less than 24 months! Through our leadership into the wonderful world of marketing, we not only achieve full enrollment each year, but have a waiting list of 

nearly 100 children. Excellent programs adapt. Finding 350 eligible children in a 

sea of 350,000 relatively affluent citizens of our county is not easy, but excellent 

programs adapt and succeed tied to fulfilling their vision for themselves. We wrote 

a handbook on the topic and have trained hundreds in how marketing can assist 

the transformational change necessary in recruitment and retention of eligible children. 

We’ve always served a somewhat diverse population of families even though our 

target area is low in full ethnic diversity. As the Hispanic population has grown, 

we have adapted. We’ve recruited top quality Spanish speaking staff. We also are 

committed to the notion that not only is language important, but so is culture. Our 

staff members who were recruited to serve our expanding Hispanic clientele are not 

only bilingual but bi-cultural. As we found these rare and talented staff members, 

including one individual who holds a master’s degree in psychology, we’ve found 

that more families see us as a welcoming place for them to bring their precious and 

so needy young children. It is our county’s experience with ‘‘hire them and they will 

come ! 

Financial controls are a hallmark of a truly excellent Head Start agency. When 

one is trying to do as much as possible with very limited financial resources, careful 

stewardship of dollars is absolutely critical. We have a proud track record of 38 

years of absolutely clean audits. As age impacts us, one of our senior staff, our chief 

60

financial officer, nears retirement, closing out her 35 years with this agency. We 

went out and recruited a new finance person with a bachelor’s degree in business 

and an accounting major. The transition spanned nearly 18 months of orderly development. The discussion upon hiring this new finance person has been ‘‘will she pursue her CPA or her MBA first ? Assuming that she spends the next decade or two 

with us, a fair expectation given our track record, she will achieve both. 

Curriculum, what it is that we do with young children and their families to 

achieve the targeted outcomes that identify success, is critical to excellence. There 

is no published curriculum that fully meets the shifting needs of those we serve, 

so, of course, we developed our own, formalizing it nearly 20 years ago. It is a curriculum based on achieving outcomes, which has been its hallmark since its inception, long before outcomes became the national discussion. Our Child Development 

Profile’’ has always been outcomes achievement based, and undergoes a periodic review by our highly trained and educated staff to determine what is working best 

in our efforts to prepare children for public school and life. We work hard to have 

a knowledge building organization, learning constantly from our practices, a form 

of action research which is most relevant to practitioners. 

We are partners with each of the school districts from whose area we recruit Head 

Start children. The depth of partnership varies with both the number of children 

we feed into their district and the relationships that have been developed over time. 

The most potent partnerships function best at the levels closest to child service delivery. These relationships, formed on behalf of an individual child and family, are 

most effective and most removed from the politics of systems. We continue to explore common ground with one of our prime school districts which is exploring going 

into 4-year-old kindergarten ‘‘because it is profitable.’’ Those closest to the children 

are clear that quality services that will really make a difference in the life of a 

young child at risk are major investments, and that the ‘‘profit’’ that a district might 

experience can come only at the cost of accepting mediocrity and shortfall. 

Excellence is about people and about vision, but it is greatly enhanced by providing the stage for people to express their very best. Facilities are a key to creating 

this platform from which excellence can take flight. We have created the ideal early 

childhood facility. Child development spaces are designed to fully support the efforts 

of the incredibly talented corps of child and family specialists. Every classroom is 

seamlessly connected with an outdoor area since many of our young children have 

little access to play areas in their lives away from us. We have a world class kitchen 

so that the food services staff can create wonderful, nutritious meals. We have professional training space so that we might constantly develop our own staff and provide the training and professional development so needed by other child and family 

service people from our target area, our state and our region. Our facilities subtly 

serve four critically important goals: 

A. Recruitment and retention of the children and families that we seek to serve. 

B. Recruitment and retention of the staff that are the key to our success. Our 

staff members come to us and stay with us for much of their careers because 

we treat them with professionalism and respect. This starts with providing 

them with the tools for excellence. It involves creating a culture of excellence. 

C. Positioning us as a leader in the community. By creating a welcoming environment, we have community partners seeking us out. We transmit the professionalism that leads to being treated with respect. The payoff is increasingly 

impactful services for the children and families that we serve. 

D. Attracting families who are not low income or at high risk. By being able to 

achieve a full socioeconomic mix of families served, we achieve much more 

progress with children who are served by Head Start. We have offered full day 

services year around since we were created in 1966, not because regulations 

required it, but because our families needed it. 

State Efforts. . .The Governor’s Center for Early Childhood Excellence 

Our state, under the administration of Gov. Tommy Thompson, decided to invest 

in excellence for our youngest children. The result was a program entitled The Governor’s Centers for Early Childhood Excellence. An effort to explore how to achieve 

excellence in early childhood services, in a world of mediocrity in early childhood 

programs was about learning more about how to define excellence, to move good 

agencies toward excellence, to make investments and to research the results. As in 

any good investment, there was an immediate commitment to research, in this case 

by the University of Wisconsin. The findings? Deeper investments result in better 

quality programs and better qualified staff. 

Child and Family Centers of Excellence competed for such a grant and were 

pleased to be selected. Given our high level of internal service delivery quality, 

where some Governor’s Excellence Centers grantees directed most of their resources 

61

to internal quality improvement (while meeting the requirement of investing 25% 

of the grant each year into training other early childhood program staff and parents), we directed over 65% to training others. We have leveraged this state investment into a number of highly creative, impactful professional development experiences and have helped others improve their quality of service to children and families. 

Excellence is About Shaping the Future. . .One Child and One Family at a Time 

Excellence is about making a difference in the lives of young children and their 

families. It is about removing barriers to success for the young child that is served 

directly. It is about helping parents learn how to support the learning of their child, 

even when their own school experiences may not have been wonderful. It is about 

capacity building in families so that they can succeed long after they leave their 

early childhood program. 

Early Childhood Excellence CANNOT flourish without involving parents. We believe that the success of Head Start is about the creation of what we have labeled 

as ‘‘Compassionate Partnerships’’ between Head Start staff and the parents of enrolled children on behalf of the young child. When this partnership gets established, 

trust follows. With this trust, open honest communication occurs and the parents’’ 

ability to support learning at home goes up. Parents may choose to work on their 

own lives and thus improve the environment in which they are raising their child. 

When we partner with them, we help them identify resources which facilitate overcoming the barriers to success in their lives and the lives of their children. 

One key belief that we have is that any program which seeks to make a difference 

in the lives of young children, especially those with high risk factors, MUST seek 

to involve the parent in meaningful ways. We are passionate advocates for this as 

schools seek to serve younger and younger children. Parent support is a key to success! 

We would ask that Congress provide high expectations surrounding any program 

that you fund that the parent be an important part of the work with young children. 

Excellence is About Shaping the Future. . .One Organization at a Time 

Excellence is about shaping the environment as well as adapting to the changes 

in it. Excellent Head Start agencies provide leaders to other organizations and associations. They lead early childhood associations. They provide leadership in community efforts. They challenge others to be the best that they can be. They encourage 

excellence in others by their model, their voice and their sharing. 

At Child and Family Centers of Excellence, Inc. a number of us have taken leadership roles in groups and associations. My own dual commitment not only to Head 

Start but to all early childhood programs in our state began nearly a third of a century ago, when I was elected the first president of the Wisconsin Early Childhood 

Association (WECA), which would become the state affiliate of the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). We sit on the Boards of R&R’s, 

Technical College early childhood programs and others. 

We’ve provided ongoing strategic planning consultation services for WECA, the 

Wisconsin Head Start Association, The Registry, the Milwaukee R&R, and another 

27 associations across the U.S. Over 450 Head Start programs nationwide have used 

our strategic planning materials and model. We help others develop their passionate 

vision of their ideal future and work to make that future a reality for children, parents and staff. 

Unique But Not Alone 

We are unique but we are not alone, across the United States there are agencies 

like ours and unlike ours. They are like us in that they are driven by the passion 

of a vision of excellence. They accept nothing as being ‘‘good enough’’ if a better solution might break through to a higher quality of service to children and families, 

achieving better outcomes. They are like us because they reach out to community 

partners, to child development professionals, to family service workers to help them 

improve. They are like us because their locus of control is on achieving their own 

super demanding standards, not on meeting someone else’s minimums. 

They are not like us in that their approach to the future is different. Their look 

through their kaleidoscope is shaped by the needs of the children and families they 

serve, and is shaped by the resources present, and the resources absent in their 

community. Their vision has power because it is their vision. 

Excellence in all of Head Start Should Be Our Aspiration 

One of the opportunities that Head Start Reauthorization offers is to focus not 

only on remediating or replacing poorly performing agencies, but on building on the 

strengths of our best agencies. We must recognize and reward those who excel. We 

62

should develop a monitoring system that gives grades of ‘‘A’’ and ‘‘B’’ as well as C, 

D and F. We must require regional offices of ACF to ensure the improvement of all 

Head Start grantees with which they have been entrusted. As was done in last 

year’s Senate bill, we should make an investment in having the best among the 

Head Start grantees contribute to the improvement of other Head Start programs, 

early childhood programs and public schools serving young children. Excellence is 

a virus we want everyone to catch! 

The opportunity for excellence is ours. We ask that Congress join with us to use 

our nation’s excellent Head Start programs as an asset to help all Head Start programs become the best that they can be. 

Statement of Ann Pagliaro, Executive Director, Head Start of Eastern 

Orange County, Newburgh, NY, Submitted for the Record 

On behalf of the children, families, and staff of Head Start of Eastern Orange 

County, I am extremely pleased to be able to submit this testimony about our efforts 

at becoming a model Head Start program. We are a relatively new grantee, now in 

our third year of providing high quality services to children and families here in 

Newburgh, NY. Currently we serve 227 children and families, in a range of different 

program options, including some full-day, full-year services. We have a wonderful 

school building and office space, purchased in part with federal funds, well-qualified 

teachers (all of our lead teachers have at least a bachelor’s degree), and caring staff. 

Our program is fully enrolled, with a long waitlist, and our child outcome and family outcome data shows children and families make incredible progress through their 

participation in Head Start. We have an active and engaged board of directors and 

policy council, both of whom help ensure we provide high quality services to children 

and families. 

Our path to this point has been a long and winding one. Just five years ago, most 

of our current staff was part of a larger agency that had not filed an audit in several 

years, and where the executive leadership was unable to clearly account for all Head 

Start funds. At the program level, our staff did the best possible job they could considering the circumstances, but we labored in poor facilities, often without the funds 

we needed to fully equip and outfit the classrooms. Through the federal review process, the previous agency was identified as deficient, and, under extreme pressure, 

voted to relinquish the Head Start grant for Newburgh. 

In that dark moment our new agency was born. The programmatic leadership 

staff, parents, and community leaders created Head Start of Eastern Orange County 

to submit the required Head Start RFP to become the replacement grantee. We 

formed new partnerships, worked closely with the community, recruited a diversely 

talented board and were eventually awarded the grant. In short order, we were able 

negotiate a lease for a beautiful new facility that actually provided much better 

classrooms for less cost than we were previously paying. We brought in certified 

trainers to help us implement our research-based curriculum, and we went about 

installing and using a child information system and on-line child outcome tracking 

system so we could electronically manage all aspects of our program. We were able 

to expand our programming to offer summer and after-school services for eligible 

families for the first time. 

As important as these programming changes have been, we are most proud of the 

cultural change we have created throughout our new agency. We have succeeded in 

building a culture focused on performance, feedback, and continuous improvement. 

All staff has clear performance indicators in their job descriptions, are regularly 

evaluated, and are compensated based on their success. Staff also has many opportunities to give management feedback, in terms of upward evaluations of their supervisor, and ideas for how we can improve every aspect of our program. Each year, 

we develop a Balanced Score Card for our program identifying clear targets for improving the quality of services delivered. We work incredibly hard to track all information in our child and family database, and then use this data, in the classroom, 

with family advocates, and with staff, to help us make important and informed program decisions. 

One example of our use of data and focus on management has been home reading 

by parents. This past year, based on our Head Start self-assessment and child outcomes data, we identified increasing reading at home as a key goal for the year. 

We set the goal of working with families to ensure at least 50% read nightly with 

their children and another 30% read at least weekly. We then devised a system to 

monitor this information on our family information database. Our monthly ‘‘Manage 

By Information’’ report shows that we have now met our goal for night and weekly 

reading. Best of all, our Spring child outcome data shows the results of our work: 

63

reading was the item that showed one of the largest gains from the Fall, with more 

than a 20% increase. In short, our focus on management, patterning with parents, 

and using data to make decisions, has led to higher quality services, and, ultimately, changed lives. 

One key way we have been able to reach our goals is through a partnership we 

formed from the first days of our new agency with Acelero Learning. Acelero provides on-site coaching and feedback, technology and tools, and network support for 

all our managers and leaders. Our Acelero partner is an experienced manager and 

has led our efforts at implementing a child information and child outcome system, 

helped devise our performance evaluation system, and helps all our managers develop as effective leaders. Each of our coordinators knows their individual content 

area, where they have worked for years. Acelero has built on that capacity by helping us all develop our skills as effective manager’s that use data to make decisions 

and work to build a culture of feedback and performance improvement. Our partnership works because it is intensive, focused and on going. The work of managing a 

Head Start program never takes a break, and neither does our partnership with 

Acelero. As partners, we have worked through all of the challenges that we have 

faced on a daily and weekly basis. I know we would not be where we are today with 

out them. 

Our entire program believes deeply in the comprehensive nature of the Head 

Start program and its power to change lives. We have seen the power of the Head 

Start performance standards as a guide and beacon for providing high quality services. We have seen them work in practice, every day, in Newburgh. That is why it 

is so difficult for us to have 100 children and families on a waitlist, and more who 

are interested, who we cannot serve. To that end, any effort to make more funds 

available to programs that have a waitlist, and are providing high quality services, 

would be appreciated. I assure you, these funds would be used, immediately, to help 

more children and families get a Head Start on school, and in life. Thank you.

Æ