RESULTS.org > Issues > U.S. Poverty Campaigns > Early Childhood Development > Early Head Start

Print Share

Early Head Start

RESULTS believes in extending early childhood programs to infants and toddlers age 3 and under. That is why we also support the Early Head Start program, which is funded as a set-aside of Head Start. Because research has shown how critical a child’s earliest years are in terms of brain development, RESULTS supports early childhood development programs that include infants and toddlers.

Early Head Start was created in 1994. The program’s mission is to promote healthy prenatal outcomes for pregnant women, enhance the development of very young children (age 3 and under), and promote healthy family functioning. Comprehensive services provided by Early Head Start include:

  • Quality early education both in and out of the home
  • Parenting education
  • Comprehensive health and mental health services, including services to women before, during, and after pregnancy
  • Nutrition education
  • Family support services

Unfortunately, Early Head Start serves less than 3 percent of all eligible families with babies and toddlers. RESULTS will continue to advocate for funding increases for both programs so that more children and their families can be served.

In February 2009, Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (H.R.1), a bill to revive the slumping economy. This bill includes $2.1 billion in temporary funding for Head Start ($1.1 billion of that is for Early Head Start). RESULTS applauds these smart investments in the program, and urges the president and Congress to work together to ensure that children and families can access the high quality, comprehensive services offered by Head Start long after the temporary stimulus funding period.

The Critical Importance of the Early Years

In January 2007, Jane Knitzer, director of the National Center for Children in Poverty (NCCP), testified before the House Committee on Ways and Means on the economic and societal costs of poverty. In her testimony, she highlighted key facts about child poverty, drawing particular attention to the critical importance of a child’s earliest years. To promote a strengthened focus on young children, she mentioned three core “take home” messages:

  • The earliest experiences shape the “hard-wiring” of the brain
  • The active ingredient in early brain development is relationships
  • Once brain circuits are built, it becomes harder to change them

After stating these facts and referencing the great amount of research that has gone into children’s brain development, she emphasized the need to invest in the expansion of Early Head Start. In her report, she states, “We lose too much time if we wait until four. It is shocking, when juxtaposed against brain science that we have a national Early Head Start program that is serving only 62,000 children, even though we have research that shows that for most of the children enrolled, Early Head Start improved parenting practices and behavioral and cognitive outcomes.”

During the hearing, one of the congressmen asked the panel what they would invest in if they were given a large amount of money to help reduce poverty, and Knitzer responded, saying, “I would invest in Early Head Start.”

The Impacts of Early Head Start

To meet the requirement in the 1994 and 1998 reauthorizations for an evaluation of the Early Head Start program, a national evaluation (pdf) was conducted by Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. in collaboration with the Early Head Start Research Consortium. The report showed that Early Head Start had the following positive impacts on outcomes for low-income families with infants and toddlers:

  • Early Head Start (EHS) children scored higher, on average, on a standardized assessment of cognitive development and a separate assessment on receptive language
  • Programs had favorable impacts on several aspects of social-emotional development at age 3
  • EHS parents were more likely to be more emotionally supportive, were more likely to read to their children daily, and were less likely to engage in negative parenting behaviors
  • EHS programs had some impacts on parents’ progress toward self-sufficiency
  • EHS mothers were less likely to have subsequent births during the first two years after they enrolled
  • Programs had favorable impacts in several areas of fathering and father-child interaction

Additional Resources: