(CNN) — The Trump administration unveiled Thursday sweeping and controversial proposed changes to the Head Start program, which provides early education and health services to hundreds of thousands of low-income children.
Administration officials contend that the proposed rule would eliminate many of the program’s federal regulations in favor of state standards, which officials say would strengthen the program by giving providers more flexibility, could create up to 236,000 more slots and could save $2.2 billion annually that would be reinvested into Head Start.
But critics blasted the effort, saying that getting rid of Head Start’s rigorous child development, health and safety standards is a backdoor way of dismantling the program. They argue that children will get less attention and fewer health screenings and disability services, while families will get less support.
“These are not bureaucratic requirements of red tape. They are the reason Head Start has changed millions of lives,” said Joel Ryan, executive director of the Washington State Association of Head Start. “This proposal would weaken those protections for hundreds of thousands of children.”
Head Start has faced tumultuous times during President Donald Trump’s second term.
A draft White House budget proposed ending federal funding for the program, which has served more than 40 million children and their families since 1965. The move raised many red flags among supporters, who noted that Project 2025, a massive policy playbook compiled by the conservative Heritage Foundation, called for Head Start’s elimination.
Ultimately, Trump requested essentially level funding for the program, which receives more than $12 billion annually.
Also, some providers temporarily lost access to their funding during the federal government shutdown last fall and after the Trump administration ordered a freeze on all federal funding shortly after the president took office in January 2025.
More flexibility
The rule aims to give providers more flexibility and control by having them align with state standards governing class sizes, staffing ratios, education requirements and background checks, among other practices, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.
“We built this rule around trusting local leaders to make the decisions that are best for their local communities,” Alex Adams, who leads HHS’ Administration for Children and Families, told reporters. “Federal mandates can certainly hinder local decision-making, drive up costs and limit the program’s reach.”
It would add new nutrition and physical activity requirements, in keeping with HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s priorities.
Notably, it would also tighten the cap on administrative expenses to 5%, down from 15%. It would also require that education be taught in English, rather than the current regulations, which support bilingualism.
However, the proposed rule would maintain all the requirements in the Head Start Act, including the law’s framework for comprehensive services, eligibility, parental participation and civil rights protections, Adams said. It would also continue to require the program to focus on families with the greatest need and to emphasize school readiness and healthy development.
The public has 60 days to submit comments on the proposed rule.
Weakening standards
Critics warn that many states have less rigorous early childhood standards, which would harm the program’s effectiveness.
Head Start’s performance standards serve as the foundation to ensure that programs nationwide are supporting children, families and communities, Yvette Sanchez Fuentes, senior vice president for government relations at the advocacy group Start Early, told reporters. Flexibility was already built in.
Several states have staffing ratios that are much higher than Head Start’s mandate, which could mean that children get less individualized attention, Aaron Loewenberg, a senior policy analyst at the left-leaning New America, wrote in a report last month. Also, most states don’t have the same requirements for health screenings, vision and hearing assessments and family support.
“This forthcoming proposed rule seems designed to hollow out the program from within, leaving the Head Start name intact while gutting the federal standards that have long defined its quality and scope,” he wrote.
Also, parents’ involvement would be reduced to an advisory role, Lori Pittman, chief strategist at the Washington Head Start Association and a former Head Start parent, told reporters. Currently, parents serve on Policy Councils, which participate in decision making with Head Start providers’ management and boards.
Advocates also pointed out that the savings in the proposed rule stem from allowing providers to increase classes sizes so fewer teachers would be needed. Plus, providers could shorten the hours that the programs operate, which the rule notes could create a financial burden for families.
“To the extent that programs choose to reduce duration — annual hours or days of service — families may need to secure alternative child care arrangements, which could impose additional financial costs or lost work time for families,” the rule states.
This article has been updated with additional developments.
The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.