Home/Federal/Federal Register/2026-16134

Proposed Rule2026-16134

Reducing Federal Burden for Head Start Programs

Primary source

Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.

Published

August 7, 2026

Issuing agencies

Health and Human Services DepartmentChildren and Families Administration

Abstract

This NPRM proposes to rescind and replace the Head Start Program Performance Standards (Performance Standards), last revised in 2024. The proposed Performance Standards would significantly reduce Federal bureaucratic burden on programs; defer to State policies wherever possible; return substantial local control to Head Start agencies delivering the services and to parents as the primary caregivers and decision-makers for their children; reduce unnecessary duplication of Head Start regulations with Federal statute and other regulations; and emphasize the critical role of health, nutrition, and physical exercise for young children.

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 151 (Friday, August 7, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 151 (Friday, August 7, 2026)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51248-51322]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-16134]

[[Page 51247]]

Vol. 91

Friday,

No. 151

August 7, 2026

Part III

Department of Health and Human Services

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Administration for Children and Families

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

45 CFR Part 1301, 1302, et al.

Reducing Federal Burden for Head Start Programs; Proposed Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 151 / Friday, August 7, 2026 /
Proposed Rules

[[Page 51248]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Administration for Children and Families

45 CFR Part 1301, 1302, 1303, 1304, and 1305

RIN 0970-AD30

Reducing Federal Burden for Head Start Programs

AGENCY: Office of Head Start (OHS), Administration for Children and
Families (ACF), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This NPRM proposes to rescind and replace the Head Start
Program Performance Standards (Performance Standards), last revised in
2024. The proposed Performance Standards would significantly reduce
Federal bureaucratic burden on programs; defer to State policies
wherever possible; return substantial local control to Head Start
agencies delivering the services and to parents as the primary
caregivers and decision-makers for their children; reduce unnecessary
duplication of Head Start regulations with Federal statute and other
regulations; and emphasize the critical role of health, nutrition, and
physical exercise for young children.

DATES: Please submit comments on this NPRM by October 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES: You may submit written comments, identified by docket number
ACF-2026-0595 and/or RIN number 0970-AD30, by one of the following
methods:
<bullet> Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
<bullet> Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#bffbdacddad8cad3decbd6d0d1ffdedcd991d7d7cc91d8d0c9">[email&#160;protected]</a>. Include the docket number
ACF-2026-0595 and/or RIN number 0970-AD30 in the subject line of the
message.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket number or RIN number for this rulemaking. All comments
received are a part of the public record and will be posted for public
viewing on <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>, without change. Please be advised that
the substance of the comments and the identity of individuals or
entities submitting the comments will be subject to public disclosure.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adam N. Jones, Deputy Chief of Staff,
Immediate Office of the Assistant Secretary, Administration for
Children and Families, Department of Health and Human Services,
Washington, DC 202-417-0115 or <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d793b2a5b2b0a2bbb6a3beb8b997b6b4b1f9bfbfa4f9b0b8a1">[email&#160;protected]</a>. The docket on
<a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> will include a plain language summary of
the NPRM.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Statutory Authority and Requirements

This NPRM is published under the authority granted to the Secretary
of the Department of Health and Human Services under sections 641,
641A, 644, 645, 645A, and 646 of the Head Start Act (Act) (42 U.S.C.
9836, 9836a, 9839(c), 9840, 9840a, and 9841), as amended by the
Improving Head Start for School Readiness Act of 2007. In these
sections, the Secretary is required to establish performance standards
for Head Start and Early Head Start programs, as well as Federal
administrative procedures. Specifically, the Act requires the Secretary
to ``modify, as necessary, program performance standards by regulation
applicable to Head Start agencies and programs. . . .'' (Sec.
641A(a)(1)). Further the Act specifies that, ``in developing any
modifications to standards . . . the Secretary shall--take into
consideration . . . projected needs of an expanding Head Start program
. . . [and] guidelines and standards that promote child health services
and physical development, including participation in outdoor activity
that supports children's motor development and overall health and
nutrition'' (Sec. 641A(a)(2)). In order to meet requirements mandated
by the Act, give more authority to states and parents, reduce
unnecessary burden and regulatory duplication, and promote health,
nutrition and physical exercise, this NPRM would reorganize and
substantially amend the existing Federal regulations for Head Start
programs.

II. Background

Initiated under President John F. Kennedy's efforts and formally
launched in 1965 as part of President Lyndon Johnson's ``War on
Poverty,'' Head Start was created out of concern for the well-being of
children in low-income families based on evidence that they were less
likely to succeed in school than their more well-positioned peers. As
its name implies, the Head Start program was developed to enhance the
experiences of children in low-income families prior to school entry,
with the goal of alleviating the negative effects of growing up in
poverty.
When Project Head Start was first started in the summer of 1965,
over 560,000 children and families across the United States were served
in an 8-week program. As the program grew, it expanded opportunities
for children to receive services in a number of ways. In 1995, Head
Start expanded to include pregnant women and children from birth to 3
years of age through the Early Head Start program, which emphasized the
importance of children's earliest years for lifelong development.
The Head Start Program Performance Standards (Performance
Standards) are the foundation on which programs design and deliver
services to support the school readiness of children from low-income
families. The first set of Standards was published in the 1970s. The
first major revisions to the Performance Standards were issued in 1996.
The 2007 reauthorization of the Head Start Act placed an emphasis on
involving parents in the design of the program and placed a stronger
focus on the educational outcomes of Head Start children. The proposed
landmark 2026 revision would fundamentally transform the landscape,
empowering states and local authorities to meet the unique needs of
children and families in their communities--free from burdensome
Federal regulations that have long constrained progress. With the
freedom to create local solutions for local challenges, these changes
would ultimately strengthen and revitalize the family unit.
Over time, the delivery of these crucial services became
unnecessarily encumbered by onerous regulations. Eliminating these
restrictive Federal regulations would also empower small and local
businesses, freeing them to focus on excellence in service delivery
rather than bureaucratic compliance. This proposed sweeping reform
would deliver tangible benefits to children, families, and the broader
community, fueling prosperity and opportunity at every level. This NPRM
would modernize the Performance Standards; reduce Federal regulation
and duplication; empower states, local programs, and families with
greater authority and flexibility; advance the health and well-being of
children and communities; and reinforce evidence-based standards for
health, nutrition, and physical activity.

Expert and Stakeholder Consultation

Throughout the years, ACF has received feedback that the
Performance Standards are overly prescriptive, constrain flexibility,
and impede coordination with State and local requirements. This input
comes from Head Start program leadership staff, including Tribal
leaders, and national organizations that represent Head Start programs.
Additionally, program

[[Page 51249]]

monitoring has provided insight into the strengths and weaknesses of
the current Performance Standards. The proposed changes in this NPRM
give programs more flexibility and discretion in a way that matches
local content. Additionally, the publication of this NPRM initiates a
public comment period during which ACF will receive comment from all
interested parties. In particular, ACF is interested in hearing from
experts in the fields of child development, early childhood education,
child health care, family services, administration, and financial
management and others with Head Start operations experience.

III. Executive Summary

Purpose of the Proposed Rule

This NPRM proposes to comprehensively rescind and replace the Head
Start Program Performance Standards at 45 CFR Chapter XIII to restore
flexibility to Head Start programs and families, reduce regulatory
burden, eliminate duplication with statutory requirements, reinforce
state and local authority, and refocus Federal oversight on core
statutory priorities, particularly school readiness and child outcomes,
child development and health, and parental engagement. This
modernization would ultimately empower states to actively lead the
advancement of early childhood education, ensuring meaningful impact
for children and families. Its purpose is to drive lasting improvements
in early childhood educational outcomes and to foster change by
preparing our youngest learners to succeed in their educational
journey, and seeking to end generational poverty.
The Performance Standards have grown increasingly detailed and
prescriptive, often duplicating or elaborating upon requirements
already established in the Head Start Act or other Federal statutes and
regulations. This accumulation of regulatory complexity has shifted
program focus towards procedural compliance rather than direct service
delivery. This expansion has constrained program flexibility, increased
administrative workload, and limited the ability of grant recipients to
tailor services to the unique needs of their communities.
This proposed rule would rescind Parts 1301 through 1305 of the
current Performance Standards in their entirety and replace them with a
streamlined Part 1301 that maintains statutory accountability while
reducing unnecessary Federal burden and overreach.
Reduce Regulations and Restore Authority to States
The proposed rule would substantially reduce the scope and
prescriptiveness of Federal regulatory requirements and return primary
authority over areas traditionally within state and local purview. For
instance, the proposed rule would give authority to the States to
govern group size and ratios, background checks, and transportation
practices while eliminating duplicative Federal requirements. By
restoring flexibility in these areas, the rule would allow states and
local programs to align more effectively with state early childhood
systems and community conditions. This approach reflects principles of
cooperative federalism and recognizes that state and local entities are
best positioned to design and administer services responsive to their
populations.
Returning Authority Back to Parents
Consistent with the Head Start Act, this proposed rule specifically
recognizes parents as children's primary teachers and essential
partners in program governance. Furthermore, the proposed rule would
reduce prescriptive Federal requirements governing curriculum
implementation, parent committees, family engagement procedures, and
service delivery structures. By eliminating detailed procedural
mandates not required by statute, the rule reaffirms parental authority
and strengthens opportunities for families to make meaningful decisions
regarding their children's education and development. This shift
ensures that family engagement is grounded in partnership and shared
responsibility rather than compliance-driven process requirements.
Reducing Unnecessary Burden
The proposed rule would rescind more than 1,400 highly detailed
regulatory provisions and replace them with a consolidated and
streamlined framework. It simplifies eligibility, recruitment,
selection, enrollment, and attendance (ERSEA) requirements; removes
duplicative documentation and procedural mandates; and reduces
reporting obligations not required by statute. The rule would also
broaden waiver authority, excluding core protections related to
nutrition, physical activity, and eligibility, to provide programs
greater operational flexibility. Facilities requirements would be
simplified, reporting timelines made less prescriptive, and designation
renewal processes streamlined to focus on measurable outcomes and
fiscal integrity and remain in line with statute. Collectively, these
revisions would shift resources from administrative overhead to direct
services, reduce compliance-driven operational constraints, and improve
program efficiency without altering statutory protections.
Furthers Emphasis on Health, Nutrition, and Physical Exercise
While reducing regulatory burden in many areas, the proposed rule
strengthens emphasis on core statutory priorities related to child
health and physical development. The proposed regulatory framework
would encourage programs to provide nutrient-dense, whole foods
compatible with healthy dietary practices within the framework of the
USDA Child and Adult Care Food Program meal standards and continue to
structure meal times in ways that support both development and
learning. In addition, programs would be required to provide a minimum
of 30 minutes of physical activity for every three and a half hours
that the child participates in the program, with outdoor activity
required when weather permits.
Reduce Duplication
The proposed rule would eliminate regulatory provisions that
restate requirements already codified in the Head Start Act or other
Federal laws and regulations. By removing redundant language and
compliance layers, the rule clarifies that statutory requirements
remain fully binding while avoiding unnecessary repetition in
regulation. This approach reduces confusion, improves regulatory
clarity and focus, and ensures that Federal oversight is focused on
statutory requirements and areas where regulatory implementation is
necessary rather than duplicative of existing law. This clarification
is intended to improve regulatory transparency, reduce confusion among
grant recipients, and ensure that Federal oversight is grounded in
statutory authority rather than duplicative rule text.
Maintain Statutory Accountability
Although many regulatory provisions would be rescinded, all
statutory requirements contained in the Head Start Act remain fully in
effect. Programs must continue to comply with statutory mandates
concerning eligibility, governance, school readiness goals, services
for children with disabilities, fiscal controls, monitoring, background
checks, civil rights protections, and parent involvement. Federal
oversight mechanisms required by statute, including monitoring, audit
requirements, and child safety

[[Page 51250]]

protections, would remain unchanged. Nothing in this proposed rule
alters or waives statutory obligations; rather, it aligns regulatory
text more closely with governing law. The proposed regulatory framework
is designed not to diminish accountability, but to ensure that
accountability flows directly from statutory requirements rather than
layered procedural mandates.
Anticipated Impact
If finalized, this rule would substantially reduce Federal
regulatory complexity while preserving statutory safeguards and
accountability mechanisms. Head Start grant recipients would have
increased flexibility to design services responsive to local
conditions, align more effectively with state systems, develop child
outcome and school readiness goals that mirror state requirements, and
prioritize direct services to children and families.
The proposed rule would improve operational efficiency, strengthen
fiscal stewardship, increase transparency for parents, reinforce health
and physical development priorities, and clarify the appropriate
balance between Federal oversight and state and local program
administration. These outcomes would support long-term program
sustainability while preserving core statutory protections. ACF
recognizes there are a range of possible options regarding the
effective dates for the proposed rescission and replacement of
standards and requests public comment on implementation timing of these
changes to maximizing the goals outlined above.

Costs, Benefits, and Transfer Impacts

By removing multiple regulatory requirements in the Performance
Standards, this NPRM is expected to reduce compliance costs and create
efficiencies in the distribution of resources within the program. The
primary quantified effects of this rule are reductions in program
expenditures associated with changes in staffing, service delivery, and
administrative requirements, as well as program reinvestment effects
associated with the proposed administrative cost cap, as described in
the Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA). Because Head Start is a grant-
funded program, these reductions may be reallocated by grant recipients
to support additional funded slots.
Over a five-year time horizon covering 2027 through 2031, ACF
estimates total quantified impacts of approximately $1,476,881,912 to
$2,959,495,914 annually at full implementation, with a primary estimate
of approximately $2,218,188,913. These estimates reflect the combined
effects of scenario-based reductions in personnel expenditures and
fixed reductions associated with structural policy changes, and program
reinvestment effects associated with the administrative cost cap.
Consistent with the phased implementation described in this RIA, these
impacts increase over time starting in 2027 and reach full effect in
2031.
For purposes of presenting annualized impacts, ACF calculates
annualized cost reductions and transfers over the five-year period
using standard discount rates of 3 percent and 7 percent, consistent
with OMB Circular A-4. Based on the phased implementation schedule
described above, the estimated annualized cost reductions are
approximately $1,304,696,469at a 3 percent discount rate and
$1,271,000,241 at a 7 percent discount rate under the primary scenario.
Consistent with prior analyses of Head Start policy changes,
reductions in program expenditures may translate into increases in
funded slots, including approximately 116,516 new Head Start Preschool
slots and 45,578 Early Head Start slots in 2031. These estimates
represent the number of funded slots that could be supported in that
year and are not cumulative across years. These effects are reflected
in the funded slot estimates presented in the RIA and are based on
nominal cost reductions and program reinvestment effects and
incorporate a phased implementation approach.
To produce an estimate of the quantified annual cost savings
associated with the proposed rule for purposes of Executive Order
14192, ACF assumes that the impacts of the proposed changes on costs at
full implementation in 2031 extend in perpetuity. Under this
assumption, ACF calculates annualized cost savings at a 7 percent
discount rate relative to the baseline year, excluding transfers and
adjusting the estimate to 2024 dollars consistent with OMB guidance for
Executive Order 14192 accounting. The annualized cost savings at a 7
percent discount rate are approximately $0.94 billion. This amount
reflects quantified reductions in regulatory compliance costs and
program expenditures and does not include the administrative cost cap
effect, for which the quantified effect is treated as a transfer
because it reallocates Head Start resources within the program.
Separately, ACF estimates potential funded slot capacity using the
broader set of ongoing quantified impacts, including cost reductions
and program reinvestment effects, under the funded slots methodology
described above. That funded slot estimate is not used as the Executive
Order 14192 accounting value. This estimate is based on 2031 costs and
does not assume future appropriations increases, cost-of-living
adjustments (COLAs) needed to keep pace with increasing costs, or other
funding changes that would affect the number of slots that could be
supported in subsequent years.
These estimates represent potential changes in regulatory burden,
program reinvestments and reallocations within the Head Start program,
and associated impacts on funded slots. Actual realized impacts may
differ depending on program-level decisions, state and local
requirements, labor market conditions, and the extent to which programs
choose to maintain existing practices even when they are no longer
required by the Performance Standards.
Severability
The purpose of this Section is to clarify ACF's intent with respect
to the severability of the provisions of this NPRM. As explained above,
ACF proposes removing Sections of the Head Start regulations because we
determined that doing so would make the regulations clearer, less
burdensome, and more accessible to the public. To the extent that any
portion of the proposed removals are declared invalid by a court, ACF
intends for all other provisions of this proposed rule to remain in
effect to the greatest extent possible to ensure that Head Start
regulations remain as concise and accessible as possible. For example,
if section 1301.01 Committees is deemed invalid by a court, all other
provisions in 1301 can function independently of 1301.01. As another
example, if section 1301.14 on the 5 percent administrative cap is
invalidated by a court, all other provisions in 1301 can function
independently of 1301.14. None of the provisions contained herein are
central to an overall intent of the proposed rule, nor are any
provisions dependent on the validity of other, separate provisions.

IV. Table

In this NPRM, we propose rescinding the Performance Standards as
they currently exist and replacing them with a streamlined set of
requirements that are not duplicative of the Head Start Act and other
Federal statutes and regulations. We include the following table to
help the public identify which current regulations we propose to remove
entirely and which we propose to replace. We also indicate which
current regulations will still be required by the Head Start Act,
despite being removed or replaced in the proposed

[[Page 51251]]

regulations. The table is not an exhaustive list of all other
applicable Federal statute or regulations such as the Uniform
Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements
for Federal Awards that still govern aspects of program operation.
To understand the proposed requirements, it is essential to read
them in full and reference the requirements in the Head Start Act,
however, the table below is a tool to help reflect the relationship
between the current regulations, proposed regulations, and the Head
Start Act, at a high level.
BILLING CODE 4814-87-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07AU26.003

[[Page 51252]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07AU26.004

[[Page 51253]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07AU26.005

[[Page 51254]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07AU26.006

[[Page 51255]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07AU26.007

[[Page 51256]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07AU26.008

[[Page 51257]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07AU26.009

[[Page 51258]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07AU26.010

[[Page 51259]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07AU26.011

[[Page 51260]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07AU26.012

[[Page 51261]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07AU26.013

BILLING CODE 4814-87-C
Similar to all sections of this NPRM, ACF requests public comment
on how to support states in complying with statute in the absence of
the proposed rescinded regulations found to be duplicative with
statute, including what challenges states may face in interpreting and
complying with statute.

V. Discussion of Proposed Rule

ACF proposes to rescind parts 1301 through 1305 in the current
regulation and either completely rewrite or restructure them under
subchapter B at 45 CFR Chapter XIII. The order proposed here removes
parts 1302 through 1305 in the current regulation and redesignates new
and remaining requirements in a new part 1301. The table provided in
section IV., above, is intended to help the public readily locate
current sections and provisions proposed for revision, removal, and
renumbering.

[[Page 51262]]

Program Governance

The proposed new Sec. 1301.01 reflects a revision to parent
committee requirements by making parent committees optional and
eliminating Federal prescriptions regarding committee structure and
function. In current Sec. 1301.4, programs must establish parent
committees at each center and comply with specific requirements
governing their structure and purpose. The proposed regulations at
Sec. 1301.01 would allow, but not require, programs to establish a
parent committee comprised exclusively of parents of currently enrolled
children to advise staff in developing and implementing local program
policies, activities, and services to ensure they meet the needs of
children and families. Programs would have the flexibility to determine
the bylaws of any committee including but not limited to length of a
committee member's term and election procedures.
These proposed changes at Sec. 1301.01 seek to reduce
administrative burden and duplication of requirements that already
exist in the Act. The Act's governance provisions remain in effect
regardless of these proposed regulatory changes (Sec. 642(c-d)). The
statute requires the establishment of a governing body, a Policy
Council and in instances when the recipient has subrecipients, Policy
Committees. The Act specifies the roles and responsibilities of each
body, the reports that must be shared with these governance groups and
the composition requirements of each body (Sec. 642(c)). Under the
proposed regulations, Head Start programs would continue to be required
to have a Governing Body, Policy Council, and for recipients that have
subrecipients, Policy Committees.
These proposed changes do not represent a departure from empowering
parents as the lead decision makers for their children's education as
the proposed regulation is simply returning to the statutory
requirements, which include in Sec. 642(c) that membership of a
program's governing body shall ``reflect the community to be served and
include parents of children who are currently, or were formerly,
enrolled in Head Start programs.'' This proposed rule continues to
value and prioritize parental engagement.

Eligibility, Recruitment, Enrollment and Attendance

If finalized, this NPRM would rescind Part 1302 Subpart A of the
current Performance Standards, often referred to as Eligibility,
Recruitment, Selection, Enrollment, and Attendance (or ERSEA). This
NPRM proposes requirements for Eligibility, Enrollment, and Attendance
in Sec. Sec. 1301.02 and 1301.03. The proposed changes in Sec. Sec.
1301.02 and 1301.03 reflect multiple ACF priorities, including
restoring flexibility to local Head Start programs; reducing burden for
programs and families; and reducing duplication with relevant statutory
requirements. Each of the proposed changes are explained in more detail
in the paragraphs that follow.
Proposed Eligibility Requirements Aligned With Current Regulation
Multiple new proposed regulations under Sec. 1301.02 align with
current regulations. These represent important policies to maintain
that, for the most part, are not separately detailed in statute.
New proposed Sec. 1301.02(a) outlines that a pregnant woman or
child is eligible for Head Start if they meet the eligibility
requirements in Section 645(a)(1) of the Act. This provision is
intended to address the requirement in Section 645(a)(1)(A) that the
Secretary prescribes by regulation eligibility for participation in
Head Start programs. It is ACF's position that the newly proposed
language is sufficient to meet that statutory requirement.
New proposed Sec. 1301.02(b) continues to specify that children in
foster care are categorically eligible for Head Start services. New
proposed Sec. 1301.02(c)(3) specifies the type of documentation a
program must secure to verify that a child is in foster care. Both
proposed standards align with the current Performance Standards and do
not represent a proposed change in policy (see current Sec.
1302.12(c)(1)(iv) and (i)(4)).
New proposed Sec. 1301.02(c)(1) clarifies the types of
documentation programs must gather and use to determine family income
for the relevant time period and whether such income meets requirements
for eligibility. New proposed Sec. 1301.02(c)(2) describes
documentation requirements when a family is found eligible for Head
Start due to receipt of or eligibility for public assistance. These
standards are consistent with the current Performance Standards and do
not represent proposed changes in policy (see current Sec. Sec.
1302.12(i)(1) and (i)(2) and 1305.2).
Consistent with the current Performance Standards, new proposed
Sec. 1301.02(d) describes requirements to reverify a child's
eligibility when they move from Early Head Start to Head Start
Preschool (see current Sec. 1302.12(j)(3)).
Proposed Eligibility Requirements Rescinded and Replaced From Current
Regulation
Proposed Sec. 1301.02(c)(4) specifies that self-attestation would
no longer satisfy eligibility requirements. If finalized, this change
would strengthen risk reduction strategies and mitigate the misuse of
funds. Similar to all sections of this NPRM, ACF requests public
comment on this proposed change.
Proposed Sec. 1301.02(e) specifies requirements for eligibility
determination records. Aligned with current regulation, the proposed
paragraph would require programs to maintain such records for each
participant while enrolled and for one year after they are no longer
enrolled (see current Sec. 1302.12(k)(1) and (k)(3)). Finally, in line
with efforts to safeguard Federal funds, proposed Sec. 1301.02(f)
would require Head Start programs to make such records available to HHS
upon request. Sharing such records must be done in accordance with
relevant laws and regulations on protecting the confidentiality of
personally identifiable information (PII). Note that Family Educational
Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) has exceptions, including for Federal
audits/monitoring as well as law enforcement activities. Presumably, if
agencies are adopting policies equivalent to FERPA, then similar
exceptions would need to be included in those policies.
To further guard against fraud and misuse of limited Federal funds
and to ensure the neediest children are served by Head Start programs,
proposed Sec. 1301.02(f) would require programs to report staff who
violate eligibility determination regulations to their Office of Head
Start Regional Office point of contact. This represents a proposed
change in policy from the current requirement at Sec. 1302.12(l) that
gives programs the flexibility to determine policies and procedures for
violating eligibility determination regulations.
To streamline Federal requirements and reduce duplication across
regulations and statute, proposed Sec. 1301.02(g) clarifies that
children experiencing homelessness qualify for program eligibility
(consistent with current regulations at Sec. 1302.12(c)(1)(iii)) and
that programs should address eligibility determinations for this
population in accordance with the Act. If finalized, the proposed
regulations would allow programs flexibility in documenting
homelessness, but self-attestation would no longer meet eligibility
requirements.
Programs are reminded that statute specifies that the Secretary
shall issue

[[Page 51263]]

rules to remove barriers to enrollment and participation of children
experiencing homelessness, including allowing such children to apply,
enroll in, and attend Head Start while required documentation is
gathered within a reasonable time frame (see Sec. 640(m)). In other
words, under the proposed regulations, programs must still comply with
the statutory requirement to support enrollment of children
experiencing homelessness.
Eligibility Requirements Proposed for Removal From Current Regulation
The proposed regulations for eligibility under Sec. 1301.02 would
reduce duplication in Federal regulatory requirements for Head Start
eligibility and remove provisions that currently allow programs to go
beyond statutory authority. While programs would still need to comply
with all eligibility requirements specified in the Act, their proposed
removal from the Performance Standards would reduce duplicative Federal
regulatory requirements and ensure these requirements more closely
align with statutory requirements and limitations on eligibility for
Head Start services.
This NPRM proposes to remove the following requirements from
current Sec. 1302.12 because they are already detailed in statute: age
requirements for eligibility for both Head Start Preschool and Early
Head Start (described in Sec. 638 and 645A(c) of the Act); eligibility
for a pregnant woman or child whose family income is equal to or below
the Federal poverty line (see Sec. 645(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act);
eligibility for a pregnant woman or child whose family is eligible for
public assistance, or would be in the absence of child care (see Sec.
645(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act); flexibility to enroll up to 10 percent of
children whose family income is over the income threshold (see Sec.
645(a)(1)(B)(iii)(I) of the Act); flexibility to enroll up to 35
percent of children whose family income is between 100 and 130 percent
of the Federal poverty line (see Sec. 645(a)(1)(B)(iii)(II)), including
requirements to justify such enrollment (see Sec. 645(a)(1)(B)(iv));
flexibilities in eligibility requirements for Migrant or Seasonal
programs and for Indian Tribes (see Further Consolidated Appropriations
Act, 2024; Pub. L. 118-47); eligibility requirements for communities
with less than 1,000 individuals (see Sec. 645(a)(2)); eligibility
duration for Head Start Preschool (see Sec. 645(a)(1)(B)(v)), including
Migrant and Seasonal Head Start; and ensuring children in Early Head
Start who are eligible for Head Start Preschool can receive those
services if the family desires (see Sec. 645A(b)(10)). Regarding the
requirements for those eligible for public assistance, programs are
reminded that at the time of this publication, ``public assistance''
for Head Start eligibility is inclusive of Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families (TANF), Supplemental Security Income (SSI), and
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) (ACF-IM-HS-22-03).
A few eligibility-related standards are proposed for removal
because they go beyond statutory authorization regarding eligibility.
Specifically, the NPRM proposes to reserve eligibility for those who
meet the stated income threshold, without incorporating a further
expansion of eligibility by applying housing costs for eligibility
determination purposes (current 1302.12(i)(1)(ii), (ii)(A), and
(ii)(B)). The NPRM also strengthens program integrity by proposing to
remove a provision in current Sec. 1302.12(h) that permits programs to
enroll a child without documentation of child age, if such
documentation could not be provided by the family. We specifically
request public comment on the proposed removal of this provision.
Removal of these policies ensures programs are more closely aligning
with statutory requirements and limitations on eligibility for Head
Start services.
Enrollment and Attendance
The requirements proposed in Sec. 1301.03 focus specifically on
attendance and enrollment. Section 1301.03(a), which proposes to
require programs to track attendance for each child, aligns with Sec.
1302.16(a) of the current Performance Standards. Section 1301.03(b)
specifies that all applicable Federal and state statutes and state
regulations apply to attendance procedures regarding child safety
concerns due to absence(s). This means programs must align their
attendance procedures with a broader legal framework on attendance,
such as the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, the Civil Rights
Act of 1964, and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)/Section 504
of Rehabilitation Act, which are examples but not an exhaustive list.
Section 1301.03(c), which proposes to require that a program maintain
its funded enrollment level and fill any vacancy as soon as possible,
but not to exceed 30 days, aligns with Sec. 1302.15(a) of the current
Performance Standards.
The requirements proposed in Sec. 1301.03 would reduce the current
burden on enrollment and attendance. Programs would continue to comply
with requirements in the Act. The Act specifies that programs must
enroll 100 percent of their funded enrollment, maintain an active
waitlist, and engage in ongoing outreach to the community and
activities to identify underserved populations (Sec. 642(g)); are
permitted to provide more than one year of Head Start services to
eligible children and can recruit and accept applications throughout
the year (Sec. 645(c)); and must comply with enrollment-related
reporting requirements if serving children under the 130 percent
poverty line provision (Sec 645(a)(1)(B)(iv)). Lastly, the Act requires
programs to ensure the sharing of accurate and regular information for
the governing body and policy councils to use, specifically noting
program enrollment reports, including attendance reports for children
whose care is partially subsidized by another public agency (Sec.
642(d)(2)(C)).
The proposed changes to enrollment and attendance requirements in
Sec. 1301.03 produce significantly fewer Federal requirements for
enrollment and attendance, because many of the requirements are not in
the Act and they are proposed for removal in the NPRM.
These changes, if finalized, would greatly reduce administrative
burden and increase program flexibility. Recipients are reminded that
they are and will continue to be required to comply with all applicable
state and local requirements that have a bearing on enrollment and
attendance.
Other ERSEA-Related Requirements in Current Performance Standards
This NPRM also proposes to remove other Federal ERSEA-related
requirements in current Part 1302, Subpart A. The following sections
discuss in more detail these requirements in the current Performance
Standards and how they would be impacted when these proposed changes
are finalized.
Determining Community Strengths, Needs, and Resources
This NPRM proposes to remove the requirements in Sec. 1302.11 of
the current Performance Standards to avoid duplication with the Act's
requirements and to reduce burden for programs. If these proposed
changes are finalized, there would be significantly fewer Federal
requirements related to determining community strengths, needs, and
resources. Under the proposed regulations, programs would not be
required to propose a service area, as this requirement is duplicative
of the Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) process. When applying for

[[Page 51264]]

funding, a NOFO is posted by service area, and entities apply for the
service area(s) outlined in the NOFO. The recipient's Notice of Award
also specifies the service area the Federal funding supports, thus
providing documentation of the agreement between the recipient and OHS.
The proposed regulations would no longer require programs to
produce a complicated community needs assessment that meets current
overly prescriptive standards, including how often programs must
conduct the community assessment, what data elements must be included,
and the timelines for review and updates of the community assessment.
However, the Act clearly requires use of a community needs
assessment, and the Act addresses both how programs and the Secretary
should use it. First, the Act requires programs to consider the
community needs assessment for purposes of program design and
designation as a Head Start program. A program must use their community
assessment when applying to convert part-day slots to full-working-day
sessions and if applying to convert Head Start preschool slots to Early
Head Start slots (Sec 645(a)(4) and (5)(A)(ii)) to demonstrate that a
shift in the use of funds is responsive to community need.
Additionally, the Secretary must consider whether programs have
undertaken a communitywide needs assessment when expanding Head Start
and have reflected in their application a need to provide full-working-
day or full-calendar-year services and collaborate with other child
care providers (Sec. 640(g)(1)(C)).
Second, the Act also has several requirements related to the
community assessment in the context of monitoring. Reviews must include
an assessment of whether programs have addressed the communitywide
strategic planning and needs assessment (Sec. 641A(c)(2)(D)) and
programs may receive a corrective action if the program fails to
address the communitywide needs assessment (Sec. 641A(e)(1)).
Third, the Act requires the use of the communitywide needs
assessment for technical assistance, including programs developing an
annual technical assistance and training plan based on their self-
assessment and their communitywide strategic planning and needs
assessment (Sec 642(h)). The Act also requires the Secretary, in
providing Training and Technical Assistance (TTA), to assist programs
in conducting and participating in communitywide strategic planning and
needs assessment, including the needs of children experiencing
homelessness and their families (Sec. 648(a)(3)(B)(iii)).
Lastly, programs must share information about program planning,
policies, and operations with the governing body and policy council.
One source of information is the communitywide strategic planning and
needs assessment, including applicable updates (Sec 642(d)(2)(G)).
Selection Process
ACF proposes to remove the requirements in Sec. 1302.12 of the
current Performance Standards related to the selection process to allow
programs greater flexibility in determining how to enroll children in
their funded slots. Under these proposed changes, programs would still
be required to have selection criteria, but not at the level of
overprescription in the current Performance Standards. Note that
programs could continue to consider the enrollment of children of staff
members as part of their selection criteria, even though this standard
is proposed for removal in this NPRM. The intent with the proposed
removal of these requirements is not to take away a guidepost for
meeting the Act's requirement for selection criteria and then find
programs out of compliance; rather it is to be clear that programs have
flexibility to develop criteria for filling their enrollment slots that
is grounded in community need and best meets the needs of underserved
populations.
As noted, the Act requires programs to have selection criteria and
references selection criteria in several ways. First, in outlining the
responsibilities of the governing body, the Act includes establishing
procedures and criteria for recruitment, selection, and enrollment of
children (Sec. 642(c)(1)(E)(iv)(II)). This means the establishment of
selection criteria fall within the formal responsibilities of the
agency's governing body. Second, the Act requires that monitoring
reviews include a review and assessment of whether programs comply with
eligibility requirements under section 645(a)(1) and whether programs
have met the requirements for outreach and enrollment policies and
procedures, and selection criteria (Sec. 641A(c)(2)(J)). Third, the Act
requires the Secretary to issue regulations that prescribe eligibility
for participation in Head Start, including that programs may (1)
implement outreach and recruitment policies and procedures and (2)
establish selection criteria that ensure programs serve children who
are low-income and experiencing homelessness before serving children
whose families have incomes below 130 percent of the poverty line or
are over-income.
Lastly, the proposed removal of several provisions in Sec. 1302.14
of the current Performance Standards reduces duplication with
requirements included in the Act. The NPRM proposes to remove Sec.
1302.14(b) related to the children eligible for services under IDEA,
but the Act requires the Secretary to establish policies and procedures
to assure that programs fill at least 10 percent of their actual
enrollment slots with children eligible for IDEA (Sec. 640(d)(1)). As
such, prior to a final rule taking effect, programs should expect
guidance around the 10 percent enrollment requirement.
The NPRM also proposes to remove Sec. 1302.14(c) related to
waiting lists, but this base requirement does not change as the Act
requires that programs maintain an active waiting list at all times
with ongoing outreach to the community and activities to identify
underserved populations (Sec. 642(g)). As noted, recipients are
required to abide by Federal and state laws that apply to the selection
and enrollment of participants in Federally-funded programs.
Recruitment of Children
This NPRM proposes to remove Sec. 1302.13 of the current
Performance Standards, which addresses the recruitment of children, to
avoid duplication with requirements in the Act and to allow programs
more flexibility in how they recruit children and families to
participate in Head Start programs. If the proposed changes are
finalized, decisions on how best to engage eligible children and
families would be at the discretion of local programs. Programs can
continue to use the current practices when recruiting children and
families and would be compliant with requirements if they do, but
programs will no longer be required.
However, the Act includes several provisions that establish
recruitment-related requirements and responsibilities, and programs
will need to comply with these requirements even if the proposed
changes are finalized. First, as noted in the discussion of current
Sec. 1302.12: Selection process, the Act requires the governing body
to establish procedures and criteria for recruitment, selection, and
enrollment of children (Sec. 642(c)(1)(E)(iv)(II)). Second, the Act
states that programs should be permitted to recruit and accept
applications for enrollment throughout the year (Sec. 645(c)). Lastly,
in clarifying expectations related to full enrollment, the Act requires
that a program enroll 100 percent of its funded

[[Page 51265]]

enrollment and maintain an active waiting list at all times with
ongoing outreach to the community and activities to identify
underserved populations (Sec. 642(g)). The Act is clear that it is the
responsibility of the governing body to establish selection criteria,
that programs can recruit and accept children for enrollment throughout
the year, and that programs must have ongoing outreach to the
community, but the proposed removal of the requirements in current
Sec. 1302.13 gives programs more discretion in how they meet the
requirements in the Act.
Suspension and Expulsion
This NPRM proposes to remove Sec. 1302.17 of the current
Performance Standards, which outlines the limitations on suspension and
the prohibition on expulsion. The Act requires that Early Head Start
programs ensure that children with documented behavioral problems,
including problems related to prior or existing trauma, receive
appropriate screening and referral (Sec. 645A(b)(6)), thus programs
serving infants and toddlers must comply with this statutory
requirement. The removal of these regulatory requirements would apply
to both Head Start Preschool and Early Head Start programs and would
allow them to determine their own disciplinary policies within the
context of state and local licensing requirements.
The rationale for ACF's proposed removal of these requirements is
twofold. First, when ACF included these requirements limiting
suspension and prohibiting expulsion in its 2016 final rule revising
the Performance Standards, many state child care licensing regulations
either did not address suspension and expulsion explicitly or addressed
them only indirectly through discipline policies. The landscape has
changed, and a growing number of states have incorporated suspension
and expulsion requirements directly into licensing regulations, quality
standards, or state law. Second, the proposed removal of these Federal
requirements restores state and local authority in recognition that
effective Head Start programs can and do operate under varying
approaches based on state and local contexts. These proposed changes
are not an endorsement of suspension and expulsion as approaches to
address persistent and serious behavioral concerns; rather, the intent
is to allow programs to determine their own discipline policies, within
the context of state and local licensing requirements. Recipients are
reminded that they will continue to be required to comply with all
applicable state and local requirements that have a bearing on
suspension and expulsion.
Fees
This NPRM proposes to remove Sec. 1302.18 of the current
Performance Standards, which outlines the policy on fees, because it is
duplicative of requirements in the Act. Section 645(b) of the Act,
which aligns with Sec. 1302.18, prohibits the Secretary from
prescribing any fee schedule or otherwise provide for the charging of
any fees for participation in Head Start programs. The Act notes that
this prohibition does not prevent (1) families who participate in Head
Start programs and who are willing and able to pay the full cost of
participation from doing so, and (2) programs that provide full-
working-day services in collaboration with other agencies from
collecting a family co-payment to support extended day services, as
long as the co-payment does not exceed the copayment charged to
families with similar incomes and circumstances.

Education and the Learning Environment

The proposed regulations on education and the learning environment
reflect ACF's commitment to providing flexibility to Head Start
programs in how they implement services in the classroom context. The
proposed regulations address teaching and learning environment
(proposed Sec. 1301.04), group size and ratio (proposed Sec.
1301.05), and parent and engagement in education and child development
services (proposed Sec. 1301.06).
Teaching and Learning Environment
The proposed regulations for Teaching and learning environment
(Sec. 1301.04) address requirements pertaining to language, nutrition
and physical activity.
Language
The proposed regulation regarding language in Sec. 1301.04(a) will
require programs to conduct all education to children in English.
Further, Sec. 1301.04(a)(1) specifies that if a child's native
language is not English, and the child does not speak English, a
program must prioritize teaching English to the child. Under the
proposed regulations in Sec. 1301.17(d), an Indian Head Start agency
will not be subject to Sec. 1301.04(a) so long as the language being
spoken relates to the furtherance of tribal heritage.
If finalized, these proposed changes would represent a shift from
current Head Start regulations which require programs to support
bilingualism, including both English and the home language for children
who are dual language learners (see current Sec. 1302.31(b)(2)) as the
current requirements are at odds with E.O. 14224, Designating English
as the Official Language of the United States. As discussed in the
E.O., learning English opens doors economically for families and helps
individuals better engage with their communities. The changes proposed
in this NPRM help achieve these goals as a key part of a young child's
education.
The Act includes several requirements aimed at supporting children
and families with limited English proficiency (LEP), a term defined in
the Act under Sec. 637 which includes children whose native language is
not English or who come from an environment where another language
affects English proficiency, and whose English difficulties may deny
them success in an English-instruction classroom or full participation
in society. Under Sec. 641A(a)(1)(B)(x), the Act requires the Secretary
to modify, as necessary, standards for LEP children that must include
progress toward the acquisition of the English language while also
making meaningful progress in the broader domains (language, literacy,
math, etc.). The Act requires programs to ensure that assessments are
valid, reliable, and appropriately administered for LEP children, with
necessary accommodations (Sec. 641A(b)(2)), provide outreach and
information to parents of LEP children in a language they can
understand, to the extent practicable, and establish procedures to
identify LEP children and inform parents about instructional services,
including English acquisition (Sec. 642(11) and Sec. 642(f)(10)), and
build workforce capacity through training and technical assistance. In
addition, the Act requires all recipients to establish goals and
measurable objectives for educational services (Sec. 642(f)(9)).
In summary, if these proposed regulations are finalized, programs
would be required to conduct all education to children in English
(except for Tribal programs, so long as the language being spoken
relates to the furtherance of Tribal heritage). However, Head Start
programs will continue to be required to continue to comply with all
language requirements, for LEP children and their parents, as detailed
in the Act. In addition to alignment with E.O. 14224, these

[[Page 51266]]

proposed changes would minimize non-essential multilingual services and
redirect resources toward English-language education and assimilation.
Nutrition
The proposed regulation regarding nutrition in section Sec.
1301.04(b) requires snack and meal times to be structured and used as
learning opportunities that support teaching staff-child interactions
and foster communication and conversations that contribute to a child's
learning, development, and socialization. Additionally, the proposed
regulation encourages programs to meet this requirement with family
style meals when developmentally appropriate. These proposed nutrition
regulations under the teaching and learning environment align to
current Sec. 1302.31(e)(2) and clarify and elevate key aspects of
nutrition services and how they strengthen and reinforce education
services. This emphasizes ACF's commitment to the Make America Healthy
Again (MAHA) agenda through Head Start program services and places a
spotlight on the role nutrition plays in promoting children's growth,
development, and lifelong healthy habits.
In summary, if the proposed regulations are finalized, programs
would continue to be required to use snack and meal times as learning
opportunities that support teaching staff-child interactions and foster
communication and conversations that contribute to a child's learning,
development, and socialization. Additionally, the proposed regulation
continues to encourage programs to meet this requirement with family
style meals when developmentally appropriate.
Physical Activity
The proposed regulation regarding physical activity in section
Sec. 1301.04(c) requires programs to recognize physical activity as
important to learning and integrate intentional movement and physical
activity into curricular activities and daily routines in ways that
support health and learning. A program must provide a minimum of 30
minutes of physical activity for every three and a half hours that t
the child participates in the program. The proposed regulation also
states that, weather permitting, the activity should take place
outside. While the proposed policy aligns with existing requirements to
``integrate intentional movement and physical activity into curricular
activities and daily routines'' it goes a step further by setting a
minimum baseline for the duration that such activity must take place.
Programs that exceed this baseline would still be within compliance
with these proposed requirements.
For infants, physical activity may include a range of
developmentally appropriate movements beyond prone positioning, such as
supervised floor play and interactive movement. While ``tummy time'' is
an important component of development, it is typically recommended in
shorter intervals and does not represent the full scope of physical
activity for infants. The proposed changes emphasize the importance of
physical activity in young children's healthy development. Higher
amounts of physical activity are associated with better indicators of
bone health and reduced risk for excessive increases in weight in
children 3 to 6 years of age.\1\ Regular physical activity is crucial
for physical, metabolic, and mental health, as well as for the proper
development of the musculoskeletal system in children.\2\ The proposed
policy would ensure children receive a baseline amount of physical
activity while attending Head Start programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ Pate, R. R., Hillman, C. H., Janz, K. F., Katzmarzyk, P. T.,
Powell, K. E., Torres, A., & Whitt-Glover, M. C. (2019). Physical
activity and health in children younger than 6 years: A systematic
review. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 51(6), 1282-1291.
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000001940">https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000001940</a>.
\2\ Veldman, S. L. C., Chin A Paw, M. J. M., & Altenburg, T. M.
(2021). Physical activity and prospective associations with
indicators of health and development in children aged <5 years: A
systematic review. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and
Physical Activity, 18, Article 6. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-020-01072-w">https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-020-01072-w</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Group Size and Ratio
The proposed regulations for group size and ratio (Sec. 1301.05)
would require Head Start programs to establish and publish both a
maximum group size and a ratio of children to staff that is consistent
with applicable state and local laws and Child Care and Development
Fund regulations. The published group size and ratio must be in a
location and format visible to parents. Research indicates that staff-
child ratios in early care and education settings demonstrates that
state child care licensing regulations provide adequate supervision to
protect children's health and safety while supporting normal
developmental progress. Research has found few, if any consistent or
statistically significant associations between child-staff ratios
(within the ranges permitted under state licensing standards) and
children's cognitive, language, or social emotional outcomes.\3\
Therefore, the proposed regulations would replace Federally mandated
staff-to-child ratios and group-size limits with state-established
minimum standards that programs have the flexibility to either follow
or remain more stringent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\3\ Perlman, M., Fletcher, B., Falenchuk, O., Brunsek, A.,
McMullen, E., & Shah, P. S. (2017). Child-staff ratios in early
childhood education and care settings and child outcomes: A
systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One, 12(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Group size and ratio requirements are currently established only in
regulation. The Performance Standards establish different group size
and teacher-child ratio requirements for center-based Head Start
Preschool (current Sec. 1302.21(b)(3) and (b)(4)), center-based Early
Head Start (current Sec. 1302.21(b)(2)), and family child care
(current Sec. 1302.23(b)). Ratios and group sizes are currently
differentiated within program option type depending on the age of
children served.
Because the Act does not prescribe specific group size or staff-to-
child ratios, the proposed regulations would effectively rescind the
current requirements in the Performance Standards, and Head Start
programs would no longer be required to adhere to these requirements.
Rather, they would be required to maintain a group size and a ratio of
children to staff that is consistent with applicable state and local
licensing laws and Child Care and Development Fund regulations.
Currently, the Head Start ratio requirements are more restrictive
than any state in the nation for three of the four categories of ratio
requirements specified in the current performance standards, and in the
remaining category, the ratio is more restrictive than every state
other than Vermont and Massachusetts. Requirements are similarly more
restrictive for group size, where the current Head Start regulations
are more restrictive than every state in the nation for three of the
four specified group size categories. The remaining category has a more
stringent requirement for group size than every state other than
Vermont. Thus, programs in all 50 states would be given the opportunity
to serve more children if the program chose to do so, but programs
would still have the right to remain at the current thresholds.
Additionally, programs would be required to publish the group size
and ratio in a location and format visible to parents. Collectively,
these proposed changes would allow programs to defer to state licensing
laws for group size and ratios. This proposed change allows programs to
align with the state and local requirements on ratios and groups

[[Page 51267]]

sizes that are best for their communities. Public posting of this
information would support transparency for parents in their selection
of the best early education arrangement for their child.
HHS acknowledges that the current ratio and group size requirements
were adopted to promote child safety, support effective supervision and
teacher-child interactions, and foster high-quality early learning
environments. HHS continues to recognize the importance of these
objectives and the research supporting them. However, the specific
numerical thresholds currently prescribed in the Performance Standards
were established decades ago based on the research and policy
considerations available at that time. Since then, state early
childhood systems have evolved significantly, including through more
robust licensing and oversight requirements.
HHS has therefore reconsidered whether a single set of Federally
prescribed ratio and group size thresholds is necessary to achieve
these objectives in all program settings across the country. While HHS
continues to recognize the benefits associated with smaller group sizes
and lower staff-child ratios, HHS has determined that a single
Federally mandated approach may unnecessarily limit program capacity
and local flexibility. HHS notes that the current requirements are more
restrictive than those applicable in nearly all state early childhood
systems, and programs remain subject to applicable state and local
requirements.
This proposal is also consistent with prior efforts to simplify
requirements and provide greater flexibility to programs. In ACF's 2015
NPRM and 2016 final rule on Head Start, HHS retained the existing ratio
and group size thresholds while modifying related requirements to
simplify implementation and increase flexibility. HHS believes this
proposal continues that approach by allowing programs to make staffing
and classroom organization decisions based on local needs and
circumstances while maintaining responsibility for providing safe,
high-quality services.
Parent and Family Engagement in Education and Child Development
Services
Proposed Sec. 1301.06(a) would require center-based and family
child care programs to structure education and child development
services to recognize parents' roles as children's primary teachers and
nurturers. This proposed regulation aligns to current Sec. 1302.34(a)
and demonstrates ACF's commitment to supporting families and ensuring
programs prioritize the role of parents in the delivery of their
education services. The strong emphasis on engaging parents in the
context of the proposed streamlined regulatory framework spotlights the
important role parents play in their child's development and growth and
the partnership that programs need to forge to honor parents' decision
making in regards to their child's education.
Next, proposed Sec. 1301.06(b) would require programs to implement
strategies to engage parents and family members in their children's
learning and development and support parent-child relationships,
including specific strategies for father engagement, and provide
educational material and instruction that demonstrates healthy marriage
as a positive good. Notably, the proposed regulations would add a new
requirement to provide educational material and instruction that
demonstrates the value of healthy marriage. This proposed change to
current requirements reflects ACF's commitment to supporting strong
families as the cornerstone of a healthy society.
The Act authorizes and encourages programs to provide family
support and family strengthening services, which can include activities
that support healthy relationships and marriage. Under the Act, Head
Start programs must provide family and community partnership services
designed to support parents in improving family well-being and
achieving family goals (Sec. 642(b)). The Act permits programs to offer
services that support family stability, including activities related to
relationship-building and father involvement. This includes education
on marriage and healthy relationships. The Act also emphasizes
responsible father engagement and family strengthening as part of
comprehensive services to families (Sec. 641(d)(2)(J)(vii)).
In summary, this NPRM promotes healthy marriage as a positive good
and emphasizes the critical role of fathers. Under the proposed
regulation, Head Start programs would be required to implement
strategies to engage parents and family members in their children's
learning and development and support parent child relationships,
including specific strategies for father engagement, and have increased
flexibility to so do. Additionally, if finalized, Head Start programs
would newly be required to provide educational material and instruction
that demonstrates healthy marriage as a positive good. These proposed
changes would empower parents as their children's primary decision-
makers and help to show how healthy married households often have
better economic and social outcomes for children and adults.
Determining Program Structure
The proposed regulations remove existing limiting regulations
regarding program options. As such, given that center-based, family day
care (family child care), home-based services and locally-designed
program options are outlined or defined in the Act programs will
continue to be able to operate under these models with greater
flexibility due to the removal of specific regulatory requirements.
The conversion process from Head Start Preschool to Early Head
Start is not impacted as the statutory authority for conversion is
maintained in the Act (Sec. 645(a)(5)(A)).
Center-Based Service Duration
Under the proposed regulations, the Performance Standards would no
longer require programs to adhere to current center-based, Head Start
Preschool service duration requirements (current Sec. 1302.21(c)(2)).
Instead, programs are still required to abide by the Act which sets a
floor whereby the Secretary must allow such programs to align with the
hours of service in regulation in 1994, as long as programs do not
provide less than 3 hours of service per day and do not reduce the
number of service days per week or per year required in 1994 (Sec.
640(k)(1)). When the current service duration requirements were
finalized in 2016, ACF recognized that research generally supported the
value of longer early education services for children, while also
acknowledging that the evidence did not identify a clear threshold or
specific combination of hours and days necessary to achieve positive
child outcomes. Upon further consideration, ACF believes that
prescribing a minimum annual number of service hours is not the most
appropriate means of promoting positive outcomes for children. ACF
believes that grant recipients, in partnership with their Policy
Councils, are better positioned to determine service schedules that
reflect the needs of their communities and families. Removing the
service duration requirements as proposed in this NPRM will provide
greater flexibility to design program schedules that reflect local
family and community needs. To the extent that programs choose to
reduce duration, ACF acknowledges that families may need to secure
alternative child care arrangements, which could impose additional
financial costs or lost work time for families. However,

[[Page 51268]]

programs will also have the flexibility to develop operational hours
that align with the needs of parents' work schedules, including
maintaining their current hours of operation if desired.
Specifically, if the proposed regulations are finalized, the
center-based, Head Start service duration requirements from 1994 would
remain in place and stipulate that center-based preschool programs that
operate four days per week must provide at least 128 days per year of
planned class operations. Under the 1994 requirements, Center-based
preschool programs that operate five days per week must provide at
least 160 days per year of planned class operations. Those programs
implementing a combination of four and five days per week must plan to
operate between 128 and 160 days per year. All center-based preschool
programs must provide a minimum of 32 weeks of scheduled days of class
operations over an eight- or nine-month period. Every effort should be
made to schedule makeup classes using existing resources if planned
class days fall below the number required per year.
With respect to center-based EHS service duration, the proposed
regulations would return to the requirements found in the Act, which
specifies that EHS programs must provide ``continuous'' comprehensive
child development and family support services (Sec. 645A(b)(1)). Even
prior to the establishment of 1,380 hours policy in regulation in 2016,
ACF has long interpreted this statutory requirement to mean the
provision of full-day, year-round services for infants and toddlers in
EHS programs. This interpretation better supports working parents,
children, and families as a whole, aligning with Head Start's core
mission of fostering healthy child development, strengthening the
family unit and helping families rise out of poverty into sustained
economic self-sufficiency. Under these proposed regulations, recipients
would still have to comply with the requirement for continuous EHS
service duration and any other applicable state and local requirements.
Center-Based Licensing and Facility Square Footage
Under the proposed regulations, the Performance Standards would no
longer establish Head Start specific square footage and space
arrangement requirements (see current Sec. 1302.21(d)(2) and (3)).
These requirements are not specified in the Act. Therefore, these
changes, if finalized, would reduce administrative burden and increase
program flexibility to determine whether and how to continue these
practices. Recipients are reminded that they still will be required to
comply with all applicable state and local requirements, including
continuing any of these practices if mandated by state or local law or
regulations.
Home-Based Option
With the exception of the proposed regulation at Sec. 1301.05(a)
already discussed previously, the proposed regulations remove
regulatory requirements with respect to how to conduct the home-based
program option as currently described in Sec. 1302.22. As in other
areas of the proposed regulations, this represents ACF's commitment to
reducing regulatory burden and returning control to local programs.
Under the proposed rules, hyper specific requirements regarding home
visitor caseloads (current Sec. 1302.22(b)), service duration (current
Sec. 1302.22(c)), and make-up requirements (current Sec. 1302.22
(c)(3)) would be removed and those determinations will instead be made
by local and state decisionmakers.
Furthermore, the proposed rule removes all of the Federal
regulations found at Sec. 1302.35 regarding home--based program
design, instructional activities for home visits, curriculum, staff
support, adapting curriculum, and group socialization structure. As the
Act does not specify these requirements, the removal of these
regulations would give programs greater flexibility in implementation.
Family Child Care Option
With the exception of the proposed regulation at Sec. 1301.05(a)
already discussed previously, the proposed regulations remove other
requirements regarding the family child care program option as
currently described in Sec. 1302.23. The Act does recognize and define
the program option ``Head Start family day care'' as ``Head Start
services provided in a private residence other than the residence of
the child receiving such services'' (Sec. 637). Therefore, Head Start
recipients would still be authorized to provide services through the
family child care program option; this is not a change from current
policy.
Under the proposed rule family child care homes would still be
required to accommodate children and families with disabilities
(proposed Sec. 1301.10 and current Sec. 1302.23(a)(2)), as required
by applicable Federal and state statutes and regulations regarding
providing services for children with disabilities. Additionally, under
the proposed rule, programs operating the family child care option
would not be required to adhere to service duration requirements that
specify a minimum of at least 1,380 hours of operations per year
(current Sec. 1302.23(c)) or have a child development specialist
(current Sec. 1302.23(e)). The requirement for 1,380 hours of service
duration for family child care was added to the Performance Standards
through a 2016 final rule. That final rule noted that, prior to this
requirement being developed, nearly all Head Start family child care
providers already provided longer service duration to families.
Therefore, ACF believes that this regulation is unnecessary, as it is
clear that family child care providers adapt well to the needs of
working families without an overly prescriptive regulatory requirement.
This NPRM will provide family child care programs the flexibility they
need to design schedules that reflect local family and community needs,
and ACF anticipates that many will choose to continue to offer longer
hours of operation. If programs do choose to reduce duration, ACF
acknowledges that families may need to secure alternative child care
arrangements or may miss work time. However, programs will have the
flexibility to develop operational hours that align with the needs of
parents' work schedules, including maintaining their current hours of
operation if desired.
Overall, the proposed removal of regulatory requirements under the
family child care option aligns with ACF's efforts to reduce
prescriptive Federal oversight on local programs and provide more
autonomy to local programs to operate as they see fit, within the
bounds of Federal and state statutes.
Locally-Designed Program Option Variations
The proposed regulations under Sec. 1301.18(c) related to locally-
designed program option variations are discussed in greater detail in
the section of this preamble titled, Program Flexibility.
Curricula
The proposed regulations do not restate curricula expectations
which are currently specified under Sec. 1302.32, as the Act maintains
that each Head Start agency must implement a standardized, research-
based early childhood curriculum that promotes school readiness in
language, literacy, mathematics, science, cognitive, social and
emotional development, and physical development, and that is aligned
with ongoing assessment, learning goals, and the Head Start Birth

[[Page 51269]]

to 5 Early Learning Outcomes Framework (Sec. 642(f)(3)). Therefore
under these proposed rules, programs would only be required to comply
with the applicable curricula requirements as detailed in the Act.
Child Screenings and Assessments
This NPRM proposes to rescind current Sec. 1302.33 Child
screenings and assessments to remove duplication with the Act, reduce
administrative burden, and restore more flexibility to local Head Start
agencies to make decisions on how best to implement screening and
assessment practices in their programs.
The Act requires that programs use research-based assessment
methods to support the educational instruction and school readiness of
children in the program (Sec. 642(f)(5)). The Act includes further
specification that assessment methods should be developmentally
appropriate, consistent with nationally recognized professional
standards, administered by staff with appropriate training for such
administration, and high-quality research-based measures (see Sec.
641A(b)(2)).
In addition, the Act requires programs to use research-based
developmental screening tools that have been demonstrated to be
standardized, reliable, valid, and accurate for the child being
assessed, to the maximum extent practicable, and aligned to the Head
Start Early Learning Outcomes Framework (Sec. 642(f)(6)). In addition,
some requirements related to the referral and support of children who
may be or are eligible for services under IDEA still apply (see
Services for Children with Disabilities for more details). Based on the
requirements included in the Act, under the proposed regulations
programs will continue to be required to conduct screenings and
assessments for enrolled children.
In summary, under the proposed regulation programs would continue
to be responsible for conducting screenings and assessments but will
have additional flexibility in how these are implemented as long as
they continue to meet the requirements specified in the Act.
Parent and Family Engagement in Education and Child Development
Services
The proposed regulation in Sec. 1301.6 would substantially reduce
the hyper specificity currently required of programs with respect to
parent and family engagement in education and child development
services currently found at Sec. 1302.34. This proposed change grants
programs the flexibility to engage parents and families in ways that
are best suited to individual needs and seeks to strike an appropriate
balance between reducing regulatory burden on programs, while still
recognizing the critical role of parents as children's first and
lifelong educators and nurturers.
Programs will still be required to comply with relevant provisions
of the Act. These include the statutory requirement that parents
participate in the governance of Head Start programs, including through
policy councils responsible for program direction (Sec. 642(c) and
(d)), and are involved in the development, conduct, and overall program
direction at the local level (Sec. 642(b)). Accordingly, while the
proposed rule would remove hyper specific regulations (such as the
group size requirement that the number of family members to staff that
conduct the family partnership process and work on family, health and
community engagement is no more than 40:1(current Sec.
1305.52(d)(2))), core statutory requirements concerning parent
involvement and governance under the Act will remain, but with much
greater discretion and control on the part of local programs to
implement the requirements as they and the families they serve see fit.

Health and Nutrition

The proposed regulatory changes related to Child Health and
Nutrition reflect ACF's commitment to supporting the healthy
development and nutrition of children served in Head Start programs.
The proposed regulations address Child Nutrition (Sec. 1301.07) and
Family Support Services for Health and Nutrition (Sec. 1301.08). The
proposed regulations would require programs to have staff or
consultants to support nutrition services, in alignment with current
Sec. 1302.91(e)(8)(iii), that promote development and learning and
ensure that infants are held during bottle feeding. The proposed
changes in this NPRM will would require programs to serve nutrient-
dense, whole foods consistent with a healthy and nutritious diet,
aligned to the program requirements of the Child and Adult Food Care
Program (CACFP) or, where applicable, provide an opportunity for
infants to be served breastmilk during the day. Similar to all sections
of this NPRM, ACF requests public comment on the proposed changes,
including whether any additional, and if so, what, supports programs
may require to implement the proposed changes.
In addition, programs would need to collaborate with parents to
promote children's health and well-being through nutrition and physical
activity support services. Under the proposed regulations, this
collaboration would include discussions regarding: the child's
nutritional status; the importance of physical activity and healthy
eating; the negative health consequences of sugar-sweetened beverages
and grain-based desserts; and selecting and preparing nutritious foods
within family budgets. This proposed regulation retains the core
principles of Head Start to engage families and provide for the health,
nutrition and well-being of children and families. Prescriptive
requirements pertaining to nutrition are proposed in contrast to the
otherwise de-regulatory approach of this NPRM to highlight the
importance associated with healthy eating. Other nutrition-related
provisions affecting the learning environment and program goals are
addressed elsewhere in this preamble (see Sec. Sec. 1301.04 and
1301.13).
The Act contains additional requirements that programs will
continue to be required to comply with under the proposed regulations.
The Act requires all recipients to establish goals and measurable
objectives for health and nutritional services (Sec. 642(f)(9)).
Statute requires programs to conduct screenings (Sec. 642(f)(6)); so,
while the proposed regulations would no longer specify that programs
must conduct hearing and vision screenings, this requirement will still
apply due to statutory requirements. However, programs would have more
flexibility on timeline and process for ensuring screenings are
completed. Early Head Start programs must coordinate with other state
and local entities to ensure a comprehensive array of services,
including health and mental health services (Sec. 645A(b)(5)).
In addition, Section 657A of the Act outlines requirements for
parental consent for nonemergency intrusive physical examinations. ACF
recognizes that USDA's CACFP is an important source of Federal funding
to support access to nutritious foods in Head Start programs. Programs
must continue to use USDA as a funding source for meals and snacks and
programs must comply with applicable regulations regarding nutrition
and food safety.
While the Act establishes high-level requirements for these
services, the proposed removal of multiple prescriptive requirements,
including requirements to maintain a Health and Mental Health Services
Advisory Committee, to obtain advance authorization for health, mental
health, and developmental procedures, to have monthly mental health
consultation, to assist children with daily teeth brushing, to conduct
health

[[Page 51270]]

determinations, to assist families in navigating health systems, and to
facilitate access to health care and insurance, would provide
recipients more flexibility to design and implement health, nutrition,
and mental health services that best meet their communities' needs.
Many mental Health regulations were introduced in a 2024 final rule to
reinforce that mental health should be integrated into all aspects of
the Head Start program, but upon further consideration, ACF believes
these requirements were overly prescriptive and limit programs' ability
to tailor services to the needs of their communities.

Safety and Transportation Practices

Licensing
This NPRM proposes to streamline safety and transportation
requirements in the Performance Standards by removing regulations that
duplicate state and local requirements. In proposed Sec. 1301.09(a),
programs would be required to be licensed by the state, tribal, or
local entity and comply with all Federal and State statutes, and
regulations regarding safety and transportation practices for children.
If exempt, programs must meet CCDF basic health and safety
requirements. While some states narrowly define ``licensing exempt'',
for the purposes of this proposed rule, ACF considers all programs that
are not required by the state to be licensed ``exempt'', including
school-based and tribal programs that do not have an applicable
licensing mechanism. Based on administrative data on service locations
and licensing, ACF estimates that approximately 26 percent of Head
Start service locations are not licensed under state child care
licensing requirements. These locations commonly include programs that
are license-exempt, operating under public school or local education
agency authority; home-based or other non-center-based service models;
and sites licensed, permitted, or overseen through another authority or
partner rather than through the state child care licensing process.
Smaller shares reflect sites that are closed or not yet operational,
and locations in the process of obtaining or renewing licensure.
Preventing Lead Exposure
In proposed Sec. 1301.09(b), programs would be required to prevent
children from being exposed to lead in the water and paint of Head
Start facilities. Research has indicated there are higher than
acceptable rates of lead in the water of child care facilities,\4\ and
exposure to any amount of lead in early childhood is particularly
detrimental for development.\5\ This proposed requirement is not new
for programs; it would replace current Sec. 1302.47(b)(9), while
giving programs and states greater flexibility on the specific pathways
to prevent children from being exposed to lead.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\4\ Triantafyllidou, S., Gallagher, D., & Edwards, M. (2020).
Assessing risk and mitigation options for lead in drinking water in
U.S. child care facilities. Environmental Research, 181, 108907;
Redmon, J. H., et al. (2022). Lead levels in tap water at licensed
North Carolina child care facilities, 2020-2021.
\5\ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2024).
Lead exposure and health effects in children; Wehby, G. L. (2025).
Early-life low lead levels and academic achievement in childhood and
adolescence.; Lanphear, B. P., Hornung, R., Khoury, J., et al.
(2005). Low-level environmental lead exposure and children's
intellectual function: An international pooled analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reducing Duplication With State and Local Systems
While the proposed rule would remove Federal requirements currently
found in Sec. 1302.47 (safety practices) and Sec. Sec. 1303.70-
1303.75 (transportation) because they are duplicative with state and
local requirements. The Act requires programs to collaborate on the
shared use of transportation and facilities with the Local Education
Agency, in appropriate cases (Sec. (642(e)(4)(A)).
Under the proposed rule, programs continue to be required to meet
all applicable state and local licensing and regulatory requirements
pertaining to safety and transportation. These requirements include,
but are not limited to, state transportation laws and vehicle safety
standards, local building and fire codes, state child abuse and neglect
reporting laws, state and local emergency preparedness requirements,
and state requirements for use of child safety restraints in moving
vehicles. Licensing exempt and programs that are not required to be
licensed such as school-based or Tribal programs must meet CCDF's basic
health and safety requirements. These include but are not limited to
core safety requirements such as building safety, child protection and
emergency preparedness. This proposal would return primary licensing
and regulatory authority to states and eliminate regulations where
Federal duplication of state and local standards exists.
While the proposed rule would remove overly specific and detailed
Federal requirements for transportation services in current Part 1303
Subpart F, such as the requirement to have at least one bus monitor
while transporting children, programs would remain permitted and
encouraged to offer transportation services under the proposed rule.
The proposed rule would also remove overly prescriptive safety
requirements related to facilities, equipment and materials, safety
training, hygiene practices, administrative safety procedures, and
disaster preparedness in current Sec. 1302.47.
Programs must continue to meet applicable state and local licensing
and other regulatory standards including USDA food safety standards.
Programs may voluntarily continue any practices from the current
Performance Standards that support child safety, even if not required
by state or local regulation, and programs retain discretion to
implement safety practices that exceed minimum state and local
requirements. Head Start programs will remain accountable for ensuring
the safety of enrolled children. The Act requires the Secretary to
monitor programs (Sec. 641A(c)), and HHS retains authority to issue
deficiencies when monitoring reveals a systemic or substantial material
failure that poses a threat to the health or safety of children or
staff (Sec. 637(2)(A)(i)).

Services for Children With Disabilities

The proposed Sec. 1301.10 ``Services for children with
disabilities'' would require programs to comply with all applicable
Federal and state statutes and regulations regarding providing services
for children with disabilities. This Section is proposed to replace
Part 1302 Subpart F of the current Performance Standards. This proposal
is intended to reduce duplication of regulations while still
maintaining the protection required for children with disabilities in
statute.
Additionally, the Act has multiple requirements that pertain to
services with children with disabilities that will still apply to
programs. The Act requires Head Start programs to establish effective
procedures for timely referral of children with disabilities to the
State or local agency providing services under IDEA and collaborate
with that agency (Sec. 642(b)(14)). It also requires that programs
establish effective procedures for providing necessary early
intervening services to children with disabilities prior to an
eligibility determination by the State or local agency responsible for
providing services (Sec. 642(b)(15)). The Act also requires Head Start
agencies to coordinate with the local education agency and programs
offering services under Part C of IDEA and Early Head Start programs
must ensure formal linkages with providers of early intervention
services for infants and

[[Page 51271]]

toddlers with disabilities (Sec. 642(e)(3)). Lastly, the Act specifies
that programs must work with schools to support children's entry into
Kindergarten and to facilitate and seek the involvement of parents of
participating children in activities designed to help such parents
become full partners in the education of their children--these
requirements are not specific to children with disabilities but apply
to them and all other children enrolled in the program (Sec. 642)(b)).
Furthermore, the Act requires the Secretary to establish policies
and procedures that will ensure recipients provide early support
services (educational and behavioral) to children who may have
disabilities, before a formal IDEA eligibility determination is made
and promptly refer children to the appropriate state or local IDEA
agency and collaborate to coordinate services for children with special
needs (Sec. 640(d)). While these requirements are no longer specified
in the proposed regulations, if this proposed rule becomes final, the
Secretary would issue policies and procedures to ensure these
requirements are met.
Under proposed Sec. 1301.10 programs would continue to be held to
all Federal and state requirements to support children with
disabilities and the core requirements of those services do not change
under the proposed regulations. That said, the proposed changes would
provide programs with additional flexibility to carry out these
requirements. For example, the Act requires programs to help parents
become full partners in the education of their children and create
linkages to other agencies, the program will have flexibility with
these proposed changes to do that in a way that best meets the needs of
enrolled families as long as they are compliant with all other state
and Federal laws and regulations.

Family Engagement and Program Transitions

Family Engagement
The proposed rule includes requirements for family engagement as
they pertain to education services (proposed Sec. 1301.06) and health
and nutrition (proposed Sec. 1301.08). These proposed regulations are
discussed in more detail in Education and the Learning Environment and
Health and Nutrition, respectively.
In addition, this NPRM proposes to rescind current 1302 Subpart E--
Family and Community Engagement Program Services to reduce duplication
with the Act and increase program flexibility. The Act establishes as a
central obligation for Head Start agencies that they actively involve
families and members of the community in the life of the program. To
meet this requirement, Head Start programs must actively engage parents
and community members as meaningful partners in shaping and carrying
out the program, ensuring they have a direct role in decisions and
program design (Sec. 642(b)(1-2)). Programs are expected to establish
strong, accessible processes that support parents as full participants
in their children's education, including offering transportation when
appropriate (Sec. 642(b)(3)). They must provide family-focused supports
such as literacy services, parenting education, and substance abuse
counseling, and conduct individualized family needs assessments in
clear, understandable language. Programs are also required to conduct
community outreach to attract new volunteers, ensure information is
accessible to offer family literacy services and parenting skills
training families (Sec. 642(b)(4-5)). The Act also requires programs to
provide a family needs assessment (Sec. 642(b)(7)) and support to help
parents secure assistance from public and private sources (Sec.
642(b)(12)).
Per the Act, Head Start agencies may also provide additional
supports to parents, including training in basic child development,
assistance in developing literacy and communication skills,
opportunities for parents to share experiences with other parents,
health services information, including maternal depression, regular in-
home visitation, and other activities designed to help parents become
full partners in their children's education (Sec. 642(b)(6)).
Under this NPRM many of the requirements in current 1302 Subpart E
would still apply either through the proposed regulations or because
they are required by the Act as summarized above. Other hyper specific
requirements are proposed for removal and would no longer be Federal
Head Start requirements which would increase program flexibility to
better meet the needs specific to the families that are being served.
While the Act requires family needs assessments (Sec. 642(b)(7))
the specific requirements in current regulation would no longer apply
(current Sec. 1302.52) and programs would have flexibility to
implement family needs assessments in ways that best meet the needs of
their community. Overall, these changes seek to reduce duplication
between program regulations and the Act and increase program
flexibility.
Community Engagement
This NPRM proposes to rescind current 1302 Subpart E--Family and
Community Engagement Program Services to reduce duplication with the
Act and increase program flexibility.
The Act requires Head Start programs to actively collaborate and
coordinate with public and private organizations in its community to
improve the availability and quality of services for children and
families (see Sec. 642(e)). This means working closely with the local
schools, which children will attend after Head Start, school districts,
businesses, community-based and faith-based organizations, museums, and
libraries to build community support and strengthen school readiness
efforts. In communities where both Head Start and public
prekindergarten programs operate, the agencies must coordinate their
activities. This includes working together to identify eligible
children and align services. Head Start agencies must also coordinate
with a range of other programs that serve young children and families,
such as child care assistance programs, child welfare and foster care
services, programs serving children experiencing homelessness, family
literacy initiatives, and early intervention and special education
services. In addition, per the Act, Head Start programs must take steps
to work with local educational agencies and schools to share
transportation and facilities when appropriate, reduce duplication of
services, improve efficiency, expand access for underserved children,
and exchange information about noneducational services such as health
and social supports (see Sec. 642(e)). Finally, the Act requires Head
Start agencies to enter into a written memorandum of understanding with
the local entities responsible for managing publicly funded preschool
programs in their service area, if one exists (see Sec. 642(e)).
While this NPRM proposes to rescind the regulations on Community
Engagement (current Sec. 1302.53), the majority of these requirements
would continue to apply through the requirements specified in the Act,
including coordinating and collaborating with public and private
entities (e.g., schools, other early childhood programs, health, mental
health, child welfare) to improve the availability and quality of
services to Head Start children and families (Sec. 642(e)). In
proposing to rescind the regulations at current Sec. 1302.53, this
NPRM removes prescriptive guidance for how programs should
operationalize

[[Page 51272]]

their coordination and collaboration, including that programs should
participate in state Quality Rating and Improvement Systems (QRIS).
With respect to QRIS specifically, while there is some evidence
that participation in QRIS leads to increases in quality ratings
particularly based on indicators or structural quality.\6\ Other
academic research 7 8 has generally found weak or
inconsistent association between QRIS ratings and children's
developmental outcomes. Overall, there is not clear evidence that the
QRIS infrastructure and strategies developed by states have had a
meaningful impact on driving quality that produces child outcomes.
Under the proposed regulations, programs would retain the flexibility
to participate in their State or local QRIS and share relevant data
with state systems, as long as doing so does not violate any state or
Federal statutes or regulations, but the regulations would no longer
tell programs they should participate. These proposed changes to
regulations on Community Engagement greatly reduce duplication between
the regulations and the Act and restore needed flexibility to programs
to make determinations on how to coordinate with state partners and
systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\6\ Gomez, C. J., Whitaker, A. A., & Cannon, J. S. (2023). Do
early care and education programs improve when enrolled in quality
rating and improvement systems? Longitudinal evidence from one
system. Early Education and Development, 34(5), 1236-1253. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2022.2105624">https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2022.2105624</a>.
\7\ Markowitz, A. J., Bassok, D., & Player, D. (2020).
Simplifying quality rating systems in early childhood education.
Children and Youth Services Review, 112, 104947. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.104947">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.104947</a>.
\8\ Hong, S. L. S., Howes, C., Marcella, J., Zucker, E., &
Huang, Y. (2015). Quality rating and improvement systems: Validation
of a local implementation in LA County and children's school-
readiness. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 30(Part B), 227-240.
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2014.05.001">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2014.05.001</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Program Transition Supports
This NPRM proposes to rescind current 1302 Subpart G--Transition
Services from the Performance Standards and does not propose new
regulations on the topic of transition services. However, the Act
includes several requirements for supporting families in transitions
that will still apply to programs that ACF will hold programs
accountable to through monitoring.
The Act directs Head Start agencies to take specific actions to
promote continuity of services and effective movement of children from
Head Start into elementary school settings (see Sec. 642A). Each Head
Start agency must take steps to enable children to maintain the
developmental and educational gains achieved in Head Start and to build
upon those gains in further schooling by coordinating with the local
educational agency. Agencies are required to establish ongoing
communication channels between Head Start staff and their counterparts
in the schools and promote the continued involvement of parents in
their children's education as children transition to elementary school.
Agencies must help prepare parents to be involved with schools, school
personnel, and school-related organizations.
The Act also requires programs to coordinate and collaborate with
other entities providing early childhood education (Sec. 642(e)(3)).
This collaboration should, among other things, be used to support the
transition of children between early childhood programs; however, the
Act does not specify requirements of what this process looks like,
which gives programs the opportunity to choose how best to structure
these transition practices. In addition, section 645A requires Early
Head Start programs to develop and implement a systematic procedure for
transitioning children and parents from an Early Head Start program to
a Head Start program or other local early childhood education and
development program.
In summary, this NPRM proposes to remove regulations on transition
services that are largely duplicative of requirements outlined in the
Act. The Act includes specific, detailed requirements about supporting
families transitioning to kindergarten. The requirements in the Act
regarding supporting children transitioning from Early Head Start to
Head Start and from Head Start to other early childhood programs are
less restrictive than the requirements in the current regulations which
give programs more flexibility and reduces administrative burden.

Services for Pregnant Women

This NPRM proposes to streamline requirements for providing
services to pregnant women to reduce administrative burden, while still
ensuring programs provide important support to pregnant and postpartum
women. Under the proposed Sec. 1301.11, programs would continue to be
required to provide newborn visits and offer comprehensive supports
through referrals that at a minimum includes nutritional counseling and
food assistance. In addition, the proposed rule maintains the current
requirement to provide postpartum information, education, and services
that address, as appropriate, fetal development, the importance of
nutrition in the prenatal and postpartum stage including breastfeeding,
the risk of alcohol, drugs, and smoking, and the benefits of substance
use treatment, labor and delivery, postpartum recovery, and infant care
and safe sleep practices.
The Act requires recipients to provide for family involvement,
including conducting an individualized needs assessment for each
participating family (see Sec. 642(b)). This is inclusive of enrolled
pregnant women so under the proposed regulation, this requirement will
still apply. While the proposed removal of current Sec. 1302.82
removes some specific Federal requirements around this process for
pregnant women, the overarching requirements from the Act will remain.
For example, while newborn visits will continue to be required, the
NPRM proposes to no longer require programs to schedule the newborn
visit within two weeks of birth. This proposed change provides much
needed flexibility to programs to determine when to schedule the
newborn visit with families.
The NPRM proposes to remove requirements to reduce administrative
burden, including the requirement that programs conduct health care
determinations and facilitate access to health insurance for pregnant
women, to provide services that help reduce barriers to healthy
maternal and birthing outcomes, and to track all services provided to
enrolled pregnant women. Several of these requirements were introduced
in a 2024 final rule in an effort to address maternal health-related
challenges and infant health needs during the early postpartum period.
Upon further consideration, ACF no longer believes that Federally
prescribed requirements regarding services to enrolled pregnant women
are necessary to achieve the goals of the Early Head Start program and
impose administrative burdens on grant recipients. While these
requirements are proposed to be removed, if finalized, programs would
not be prevented from providing currently specified services to
pregnant women, but would no longer be required to do so by Federal
regulations.
This proposed rule also removes a requirement in current Sec.
1302.80(f) that programs provide services that help reduce barriers to
healthy maternal and birthing outcomes for each family, including
services that address disparities across racial and ethnic group in
alignment with E.O. 14151 Ending Radical And Wasteful

[[Page 51273]]

Government DEI Programs And Preferencing. The proposed removal of this
requirement is responsive to feedback from programs after the release
of the 2024 final rule that addressing disparities in birth outcomes is
beyond the scope of what programs can reasonably be expected to do.

Management Systems and Administrative Costs

The proposed regulatory changes on Management Systems and
Administrative Costs reflect ACF's commitment to fiscal stewardship,
federalism, and regulatory streamlining. Consistent with the principles
of restoring authority to state and local programs and reducing
unnecessary regulatory burden, these proposed regulations address
Personnel and Records Policies (proposed Sec. 1301.12), Program Goals,
Continuous Improvement and Reporting (proposed Sec. 1301.13), and
Limitations on Administrative Costs (proposed Sec. 1301.14).
Personnel and Records Policies
The proposed regulation at Sec. 1302.12(a) on personnel policies
would continue to require programs to comply with all Federal and state
statutes and regulations regarding staff, contractor, and volunteer
background checks, including work authorization, staff standards of
conduct, and other affiliated human resource requirements. In proposed
Sec. 1302.12(b) programs would be required to establish policies,
protections, and rights equivalent to those in FERPA, 20 U.S.C. 1232g,
for the confidentiality of any personally identifiable information
(PII) in child records.
Finally the proposed regulation also introduces a new requirement
in Sec. 1301.12(c) related to staff hiring considerations. Under this
provision, programs may not require or incentivize the attainment of
postsecondary education credits, hours, or credentials unless they can
demonstrate that such educational attainment is necessary for the
position based on specified skills that can only be acquired through a
particular postsecondary education pathway. Programs must also provide
explicit alternatives for demonstrating required skills, including
assessments, industry-recognized credentials, or relevant work
experience, rather than relying solely on postsecondary educational
attainment. This requirement is intended to promote skills-based hiring
practices, expand access to employment opportunities for individuals
without traditional postsecondary credentials, and help ensure that
education requirements are directly tied to the competencies needed to
perform the job.
The proposed changes streamline requirements currently found in
1302 Subpart I--Human Resources Management by eliminating prescriptive
regulations not mandated by statute (e.g., staffing requirements for
dual language learners and volunteer requirements) and removing
duplicative requirements found in the Act and other regulations (e.g.,
establishing personnel policies and standards of conduct). Programs
will still be required to comply with the Act and all other applicable
Federal and state statutes. In addition to retaining these statutory
protections, the proposed revisions remove certain regulatory
provisions that exceed or duplicate those requirements, as described
below. This NPRM does not address the removal from the Performance
Standards of all the wages and benefits requirements in current Sec.
1302.90(e) and (f) because they have been proposed for removal by ACF
in a separate NPRM, Restoring Flexibility to Support Head Start Program
Access, which was published in the Federal Register for a 30-day public
comment period on May 12, 2026. ACF is considering public comments on
the proposed rescission of the wages and benefits requirements from
that NPRM and will address them in a final rule.
Child Safety and Background Checks
The proposed regulations remove restrictive Federal process
mandates and provide programs greater flexibility in developing
personnel policies and standards of conduct that reflect local
community needs. However, statutory requirements related to staff
accountability and background checks will remain in effect. As
described in the Act, programs must adopt rules that ensure full staff
accountability in matters governed by law, regulation, or agency policy
(Sec. 644(a)(1)). Programs must also continue to conduct interviews,
verify references, and obtain required State, tribal, or Federal
criminal record checks before hiring staff (Sec. 648A(g)). In addition,
programs remain subject to applicable state requirements aligned with
the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 2014, including
criminal background check requirements for all child care staff
members.
The proposed revisions would eliminate existing prescriptive
regulatory requirements, including those related to performing
background checks. Many of these regulatory requirements related to
background checks, such as requiring programs to conduct subsequent
background checks every five years following the initial background
check, were introduced in a 2016 final rule to highlight the importance
of protecting child safety and to complement the background check
requirements in the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 2014.
Although ACF continues to regard child safety as a paramount
responsibility, upon further consideration, these highly prescriptive
Federal requirements impose unnecessary administrative burden on grant
recipients, create duplicative screening requirements, and reduce local
flexibility in personnel practices. However, programs would continue to
be required to comply with all other applicable Federal, State, Tribal,
and local laws governing criminal background screening.
Staff Qualifications and Professional Development
Under the proposed regulations, the Performance Standards would no
longer contain any specific requirements for staff qualifications and
professional development beyond those expressly required by statute.
The Act requires programs to meet qualification requirements for
specified staff positions, including those for education managers,
education coordinators, mentor teachers, curriculum specialists, Head
Start Preschool center-based teachers and assistant teachers, and Early
Head Start center-based teachers (see Sec. 648A(a) and 645A(h)). All
other staff qualification requirements that expand beyond statutory
language currently found at Sec. 1302.91 (e.g., Head Start director,
Family Child Care provider, coaches, family service staff, and health
professional qualification requirements) would be removed under the
proposed regulations.
In a 2016 final rule, ACF introduced several additional staff
qualification requirements beyond those expressly required by statute,
in an effort to increase staff quality. However, at the time, ACF
acknowledged that the available research did not support the need for
specific degree requirements for certain positions. In general,
education requirements of classroom staff are not strongly related to
quality or child outcomes; research finds that increased qualifications
do not consistently correlate to better child outcomes.\9\ There is not
significant or

[[Page 51274]]

meaningful research on educational requirements of other staff roles
and their relationship to quality or child outcomes. Upon further
consideration, ACF believes that these non-statutory qualification
requirements unnecessarily restrict grant recipients' ability to
recruit and retain qualified staff and may limit programs' ability to
respond to local workforce conditions and community needs. ACF now
believes that, for positions not subject to qualification requirements
in statute, grant recipients are better positioned to determine the
combination of education, training, experience, competencies, and other
qualifications necessary for effective service delivery. Removing these
requirements will reduce barriers to hiring, expand the pool of
qualified candidates, and provide important flexibilities for programs
to determine the needed qualifications for staff positions and return
qualifications to what Congress authorized in the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\9\ Yang, X., Abdul Rahman, M.N., & Sun, Y. (2025). The impact
of teachers' qualifications on development outcomes in early
childhood: a systematic literature review. International Journal of
Early Years Education, 33(2), 426-445. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2025.2451301">https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2025.2451301</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Programs must continue to meet statutory requirements related to
professional development for staff. This includes creating and
regularly evaluating professional development plans for all full-time
Head Start employees who provide direct services to children (Sec.
648A(f)). Programs must also continue to ensure each classroom teacher
completes at least 15 clock hours of professional development annually
(Sec. 648A(a)(5)). The Act continues to require Mentor Teachers
(648A(b)) which align to coaching requirements. Programs also remain
required under statute to establish plans to assist limited English
proficient children in making progress toward English language
acquisition and toward attaining the knowledge, skills, abilities, and
development described in section 641A(a)(1)(B) (Sec. 641(d)(K)).
In alignment with E.O. 14151 Ending Radical And Wasteful Government
DEI Programs And Preferencing, the proposed revisions also eliminate
prescriptive regulatory requirements that require staff, consultants,
or contractors demonstrate familiarity with the ethnic backgrounds and
heritages of families served; and require at least one classroom staff
member or home visitor to speak the non-English language spoken by a
majority of children in a class or program.
Confidentiality and Records Protections
Under the proposed regulation, current 1303 Subpart C--Protections
for the Privacy of Child Records would be replaced with proposed Sec.
1301.12(b), which would require that a program establish policies,
protections, and rights equivalent to those in FERPA, 20 U.S.C. 1232g,
for the confidentiality of any personally identifiable information
(PII) in child records. This will give programs the flexibility to
establish their own policies and procedures provided that they are
equivalent to FERPA.
Furthermore, the Act requires programs to protect personally
identifiable information in child records through policies,
protections, and rights equivalent to those provided to parents under
the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) (Sec.
641A(b)(4)(A)). Accordingly, under the proposed regulation, programs
would be afforded flexibility to establish their own confidentiality
policies and procedures, provided those policies are equivalent to
FERPA. Programs must also continue to comply with confidentiality
provisions under Part B or Part C of IDEA to protect personally
identifiable information in records of children who are referred to, or
found eligible for, services under IDEA.
Staff Health and Wellness
The proposed revisions remove prescriptive regulatory requirements
concerning staff health and wellness that are not expressly required by
statute. Requirements proposed for removal include staff breaks, staff
health exams, and provision of mental health information to staff;
programs will now have increased flexibility in these areas. In
addition to the Act requirements, programs remain required to comply
with the Americans with Disabilities Act, section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act, and all other applicable Federal, state, and local
laws and regulations related to staff health and wellness.
Program Goals, Continuous Improvement, and Reporting
The proposed regulations on program goals, continuous improvement,
and reporting (Sec. 1301.13) promote child safety and the delivery of
effective, high-quality program services. The proposed regulations
would continue to require programs to establish goals and measurable
outcomes, including provision of evidence-based education, health,
nutritional, and family engagement services to further promote the
school readiness of enrolled children. The proposed regulations specify
that educational services must be evidence-based, reflecting the
importance of using proven practices to improve child outcomes.
Programs will continue to be required to conduct a self-assessment of
their progress towards meeting such goals and submit the findings to
ACF (as required by current Sec. 1302.102). In addition, the proposed
regulation would continue requiring programs to report any incident
regarding circumstances affecting the financial viability of the
program, breaches of personally identifiable information, or program
involvement in legal proceedings, or any matter for which notification
or a report to State, Tribal, or local authorities is required by
applicable law. The proposed regulations maintain the requirement to
submit to HHS any significant incident that affects the health and
safety of a child that occurs in the setting where head start services
are provided immediately, but no later than, seven calendar days
following the incident.
The proposed changes would streamline requirements currently found
in 1302 Subpart J--Program Management and Quality Improvement by
removing duplicative requirements found in the Act and other
regulations. Although these requirements are not explicitly restated in
the proposed regulation, programs are required to comply with the Act
and all other applicable Federal and state statutes. The statutory and
other legal requirements summarized below will continue to apply.
Consistent with the Act, programs are required to establish school
readiness goals that are aligned with the Head Start Child Outcomes
Framework: Ages Birth to Five, state and tribal early learning
standards, as appropriate, and the requirements and expectations of the
schools Head Start children will attend (Sec. 641A(g)(2)(A)). Programs
will also still be required to establish and implement a system of
ongoing oversight to ensure the effective implementation of the
Performance Standards, including child safety, and compliance with
other applicable Federal regulations (Sec. 641A(g)(3)).
In addition, programs will still be required to annually publish
and disseminate a report in accordance with section 644(a)(2) of the
Act. If applicable, programs must submit a quality improvement plan as
required under section 641A(e)(2) of the Act.
Programs will remain subject to statutory requirements governing
services for children with disabilities and must provide services
through collaboration with IDEA, as described in sections 640(d) and
642(b)(14)-(15) of the Act, consistent with section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act and the

[[Page 51275]]

Americans with Disabilities Act (Sec. 640(d)(2)).
In addition, programs will still comply with applicable provisions
of the OMB Uniform Guidance (2 CFR part 200), including requirements
related to financial management (2 CFR 200.302) and internal controls
(2 CFR 200.303).
Finally, programs will still be required to comply with applicable
State, Tribal, and local mandatory reporting laws concerning reasonably
suspected or known incidents of child abuse and neglect, consistent
with the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) and any other
applicable Federal laws.
In addition to streamlining requirements, the proposed changes
remove prescriptive requirements not mandated by statute and restore
flexibility to local programs. Under the proposed regulations programs
would no longer be required to adhere to prescribed data aggregation
and analysis processes for child-level assessment data, including the
requirement to conduct subgroup analysis. Instead, programs would
continue to conduct annual self-assessments and use data for continuous
improvement as required by statute, while gaining flexibility to
analyze child-level data when and how it best informs local decision-
making and program improvement. The proposed changes also eliminate
requirements that programs implement prescriptive coordinated
approaches and procedures at the beginning of each program year.
Programs will continue to collaborate with schools, child care
providers, disability services, and other community partners as
required by statute, while eliminating prescriptive coordination
procedures and timelines that do not account for local partnership
contexts. These proposed eliminations provide programs with flexibility
to develop management and reporting systems that best meet local
community needs while maintaining compliance with all statutory
accountability and quality standards, including continued reporting to
state and local authorities under Federal child protection laws.
Limitations on Administrative Costs
The proposed regulation on administrative costs (Sec. 1301.14)
would reduce the allowable costs to develop and administer a Head Start
program from 15 percent to 5 percent of the total approved program
cost, which includes both Federal costs and non-Federal match. ACF
considered administrative cost limitations in other Federal grant
programs and found that 5 percent caps are used in several HHS programs
with many Head Start programs already operating within this range. At a
time when needs exceed available resources, this proposed regulation
prioritizes direct service delivery and ensures that more Federal
dollars reach children and families in communities throughout America.
Programs would retain the flexibility to allocate costs within the 5
percent limit to best support their operational and administrative
needs.
The proposed changes streamline requirements currently found in
1303 Subpart A--Financial Requirements by removing duplicative
requirements found in the Act and other regulations. Although these
requirements are not explicitly restated in the proposed regulation,
programs will still be required to contribute 20 percent of the total
approved program cost as non-Federal match, as described in section
640(b) of the Act, which provides that Federal financial assistance
will not exceed 80 percent of the total approved program cost. While
the proposed regulations do not restate the specific cost
categorization and delineation procedures currently found at Sec.
1303.5(a)(2), programs remain subject to all applicable provisions of
the OMB Uniform Guidance (2 CFR part 200) regarding financial
management and administration, including applicable cost categorization
and reporting requirements.
This NPRM proposes a broader waiver provision at Sec. 1301.18.
Under that proposed regulation, programs may request a waiver of any
regulatory requirement, including the administrative cost cap and non-
Federal match, provided (1) the request is submitted in writing to HHS;
(2) does not relate to nutrition, physical activity, or eligibility
requirements; (3) does not violate any Federal statutes; and (4)
demonstrates that the waiver will not negatively impact the health or
safety of children in care. These proposed regulatory changes would
streamline financial requirements for grant recipients, reduce
duplication across the Act and other Federal regulations, maximize
resources for direct service delivery, and safeguard efficient use of
taxpayer dollars. The proposed waiver language would still allow for
HHS to determine which waivers to grant, but allows for programs to
submit waivers on a variety of components of operation.
Separately, this NPRM proposes to eliminate current 1303 Subpart
B--Administrative Requirements that are duplicative of requirements
already established in the Act and other Federal regulations, while
making clear that programs remain fully subject to all applicable
provisions of the Act and other Federal and state statutes. Although
these regulatory sections are proposed for elimination, grant
recipients will still be required to adhere to sections 644(e),
644(g)(3), 653, 654, 655, 656, and 657A of the Act. These sections
pertain to union organizing, the Davis-Bacon Act, limitations on
compensation, nondiscrimination, unlawful activities, political
activities, and obtaining parental consent. In addition, recipients
must continue to observe standards of organization, management, and
administration that will ensure that all program activities are
conducted in a manner consistent with the purposes of the Act and the
objective of providing assistance effectively, efficiently, and free of
any taint of partisan political bias or personal or family favoritism
(Sec. 644(a)(1)). Finally, recipients will still be required to carry
sufficient insurance coverage and maintain adequate fidelity bond
coverage consistent with applicable provisions of the OMB Uniform
Guidance (2 CFR part 200). Together, these eliminations reduce
regulatory redundancy and administrative burden without diminishing any
program accountability or financial integrity obligation.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\10\ OECD (2025), OECD Regulatory Policy Outlook 2025, OECD
Publishing, Paris, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1787/56b60e39-en">https://doi.org/10.1787/56b60e39-en</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Facilities

Proposed Sec. 1301.15 specifies the requirements related to the
application and eligibility to purchase, construct, and renovate
facilities. Proposed Sec. 1301.15(a) would continue to require
programs to submit an application for funds to purchase, construct, or
renovate a facility. Proposed Sec. 1301.15(b) aligns with current
Sec. 1303.42(d), which states that prior to applying for such funds,
grant recipients must establish that the proposed construction of a
facility is more cost-effective than the purchase of available
facilities or renovation of an existing facility. These proposed
regulatory changes advance ACF's priorities of promoting quality early
learning environments and practicing fiscal stewardship. They also
further the goals of streamlining regulations and reducing
administrative burden.
The proposed regulations would continue to require programs to
submit an application for funds to purchase, construct, or renovate a
facility. Prior to applying for such funds, grant recipients would
continue to be required to establish that the proposed construction of
a facility is more cost-effective than the purchase of available
facilities or renovation of an existing facility.

[[Page 51276]]

This NPRM would simplify and significantly streamline the
facilities application process by removing from regulation requirements
not mandated by statute. For example, the proposed changes would remove
from regulation the requirement that programs complete 20-year useful
life cost comparisons, agree to minimum lease terms (30 years for
purchase/construction and 15 years for renovation), and adhere to
strict filing deadlines for legal documents, among others outlined in
Sec. 1303.44 of the current performance standards. HHS acknowledges
that the requirements in Sec. 1303.44 were adopted to support review
of facilities applications, ensure cost-effective use of Federal funds,
and protect the Federal interest in facilities funded under the Head
Start program. HHS continues to believe these are important objectives.
However, HHS has determined that the specific procedural requirements
currently prescribed in regulation are not necessary to achieve those
objectives. HHS can evaluate facilities proposals, protect the Federal
interest, and ensure responsible stewardship of Federal funds through
case-by-case review and application requirements established by the
Secretary. Accordingly, HHS proposes to remove these prescriptive
requirements from regulation to provide greater flexibility and reduce
administrative burden while maintaining appropriate oversight of
facilities investments.
The application would outline the uniform procedures for requesting
facilities related approvals. HHS would specify requirements for
facilities applications at the Secretary's discretion.
The proposed regulatory changes also remove duplicative provisions
that restate requirements in the Act and other Federal regulations.
Although such requirements are not explicitly stated in the proposed
regulation, programs will still be required to adhere to the Act, OMB
Uniform Guidance, and all other applicable Federal and State statutes
and regulations. These include but are not limited to: meeting
eligibility criteria requiring that facilities be available to Indian
Tribes, rural, or low-income communities; being located within the
designated service area; and demonstrating necessity due to lack of
suitable facilities (Sec. 644(g)(1)); describing efforts to coordinate
or collaborate with other providers in the community to seek
assistance, including financial assistance, prior to using funds as
described in Section 644(f)(2); at a minimum, meeting or exceeding
State and local licensing requirements and ensuring continued
compliance (Sec. 641A(a)(1)(D)); retaining records which fully disclose
financial assistance and other records of cost required for an
effective audit (Sec. 647(a)); adhering to the access requirements of
the Americans with Disabilities Act, section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act, and the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973; and complying with
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. Programs will also still be
required to follow all applicable parts of the Uniform Guidance such as
insurance coverage (2 CFR 200.310), real property (2 CFR 200.311),
property trust relationship (2 CFR 200.316), and retention requirements
for records (2 CFR 200.334) regardless of whether these proposed
changes are finalized.
This NPRM removes duplicative procedural detail, while preserving
all statutory safeguards and Federal property protections. In total,
these proposed changes condense 17 regulatory sections (currently found
at Sec. 1303.40-1303.56) into a single streamlined provision (Sec.
1301.15), meaningfully reducing administrative burden on programs and
allowing them to focus their time and resources on serving children and
families.

Designation Renewal

The proposed regulatory changes in Sec. 1301.16 on Designation
Renewal reflect ACF's commitment to improved outcomes for children and
families, regulatory streamlining, and fiscal stewardship. The proposed
changes in this NPRM are consistent with the values of prioritizing
high-impact investments based on evidence and results.
Basis for Determining if an Agency Is Subject to Open Competition
Consistent with the current Head Start Designation Renewal System
(DRS) implemented by ACF, the proposed regulation in Sec. 1301.16
would continue to require a Head Start agency to compete for its next
five years of funding if ACF determines that such agency is not
delivering a high-quality and comprehensive Head Start program that
meets the educational, health, nutritional, and social needs of the
children and families it serves, or is not meeting program and
financial management requirements and standards described in section
641A(a)(1) of the Act. Mostly consistent with current regulations at
Sec. 1304.11, this NPRM proposes for a Head Start agency to be
required to compete for its next five years of funding if one or more
of the following conditions existed during the award period of the
current grant:
<bullet> Two or more deficiencies identified across Federal
monitoring reviews conducted under section 641A(c)(1)(A), (B), (C), or
(D) of the Act;
<bullet> Failure to produce suitable results towards achieving
program goals for improving the school readiness of children, as
required by section 641A(g)(2) of the Act, based on a review conducted
under section 641A(c)(1)(A), (C), or (D) of the Act;
<bullet> Determination that the agency is not delivering classroom
quality as measured under section 641A(c)(2)(F) of the Act;
<bullet> Revocation of the agency's license to operate a Head Start
center or program by state or local licensing authorities;
<bullet> Suspension from the Head Start program, after an initial
opportunity to show cause, that has not been overturned or withdrawn;
<bullet> Debarment from receiving Federal or state funds from any
Federal or state department or agency or has been disqualified from the
Child and Adult Care Food Program;
<bullet> Risk of failing to continue functioning as a going concern
within the current project period;
<bullet> Two or more audit findings of material weakness or
questioned costs associated with Head Start funds in audit reports
submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse; or
<bullet> Any other measure as specified in the Head Start Act.
The proposed changes would reduce administrative burden by
simplifying and streamlining the designation renewal process to focus
on outcomes rather than prescriptive compliance procedures not mandated
by statute. Under the current regulations, agencies can be required to
compete based on whether they established school readiness goals that
meet detailed specifications (current Sec. 1304.11(b)(1)), and took
prescribed steps to achieve those goals, including aggregating and
analyzing child assessment data at least three times per year and
documenting specific analysis procedures (current Sec. 1304.11(b)(2)).
Under the proposed regulation, the relevant condition on school
readiness goals would instead focus on whether the agency produced
suitable results towards achieving its program goals for improving the
school readiness of children, as required by the Act. This proposed
approach would focus on evidence and results and would provide programs
with flexibility to determine the best methods for achieving goals and
assessing outcomes, while still maintaining accountability for
delivering measurable improvements in school readiness.

[[Page 51277]]

Similarly, current regulations (Sec. Sec. 1304.11(c) and 1304.16)
specify the CLASS: Pre-K instrument as the instrument ACF uses to
measure classroom quality within the context of the DRS. Under current
regulations (Sec. 1304.11(c)), agencies can be required to compete
based on classroom quality scores using the CLASS: Pre-K instrument
with specific numerical thresholds. The proposed regulation retains
classroom quality as a condition under the DRS, consistent with
sections 641(c)(1)(D) and 641A(c)(2)(F) of the Act, which require that
Head Start classroom quality be assessed using a valid and reliable
research-based observational instrument and that the results of such
observations be considered as part of the DRS. However, this NPRM
proposes to remove from regulation both the requirement to use CLASS:
Pre-K as the sole measure of classroom quality and the associated
CLASS: Pre-K thresholds that trigger competition. Although ACF
anticipates continuing to use CLASS: Pre-K as the observational tool to
assess classroom quality for the foreseeable future, this proposed
change to regulations provides ACF with flexibility to possibly use
other methods to measure and assess classroom quality in the future.
Safeguarding effective instruction in Head Start classrooms remains a
key component of quality assessment under the proposed regulation.
The proposed changes also strengthen fiscal stewardship by
restructuring fiscal-related conditions for greater clarity and
appropriate accountability. Current regulations at Sec. 1304.11(g)
combine two distinct fiscal criteria, (1) risk of failing to continue
functioning as a going concern and (2) two or more audit findings of
material weakness or questioned costs associated with Head Start funds,
into a single condition. Under current regulations, an agency meeting
either or both fiscal criteria would be considered to have met one
condition. The proposed regulation will separate these into two
independent fiscal conditions: agencies at risk of failing to continue
functioning as a going concern (proposed Sec. 1301.16(e)), and
agencies with two or more material audit findings or questioned costs
associated with their Head Start funds (proposed Sec. 1301.16(f)).
This proposed change would ensure that each fiscal concern is
independently evaluated and appropriately assessed. Under the proposed
regulation, an agency with both fiscal concerns would now meet two
separate conditions rather than one combined condition, reflecting the
cumulative seriousness of multiple fiscal management concerns. In
addition, the proposed regulation retains deficiencies and revocation
of license as conditions without change and includes a provision
allowing for competition based on any other measure specified in the
Head Start Act, preserving the Secretary's statutory authority to
evaluate program quality comprehensively.
Separately, the proposed regulation would retain deficiencies,
suspensions, and revocation of license as conditions without change and
includes a provision allowing for competition based on any other
measure specified in the Head Start Act, preserving the Secretary's
statutory authority to evaluate program quality comprehensively.
Finally, this NPRM proposes to simplify the designation renewal
section to include only the conditions that would require a recipient
to compete for their next five years of funding. Under this proposed
regulatory change, purely procedural and administrative requirements
would be removed or relocated. The proposed changes will eliminate and/
or relocate multiple sections, as described in the paragraphs that
follow.
Reporting requirements concerning certain conditions (current Sec.
1304.12) would be addressed in the proposed Program goals, continuous
improvement, and reporting (proposed Sec. 1301.13).
Tribal government consultation (current Sec. 1304.14) would be
addressed in the proposed ``Tribes'' section (proposed Sec. 1301.17).
Consistent with the government-to-government relationship and unique
considerations for tribal grant recipients, the proposed regulation
would maintain the existing consultation process if a Tribe meets one
or more DRS criteria (Sec. 641(c)(7)(B)) and reiterates that non-Indian
Head Start agencies are ineligible to carry out an Indian Head Start
program unless there is no other option, and then only until an Indian
Head Start agency becomes available (Sec. 641(e)).
Requirements to compete for designation for a five-year grant
(current Sec. 1304.13): will be eliminated under the proposed
regulatory changes. While not restated in the proposed regulation,
agencies remain required to submit an application that demonstrates
that it is the most qualified entity to deliver a high-quality and
comprehensive Head Start program. The application must address the
criteria for selection listed in section 641(d)(2) of the Act.
Designation request, review and notification process (current Sec.
1304.15) would be eliminated under the proposed regulatory changes.
While these procedural requirements are not restated in the proposed
regulation, a grant recipient must continue to submit applications as
required by the Secretary (see Sec. 641(b)). ACF will continue to
provide timely notice and adequate opportunities for agencies to
respond to designation renewal determinations, consistent with all
application and notification requirements under section 641 of the Act.
Selection among applicants (current Sec. 1304.20) would be
eliminated under the proposed regulatory changes. While not restated in
the proposed regulation, ACF will continue to consider the applicable
criteria under Section 641(d) of the Head Start Act when selecting an
agency to provide Head Start Preschool, Early Head Start, Migrant or
Seasonal Head Start, or Tribal Head Start Preschool or Early Head Start
services.

Tribes

Proposed section 1301.17 would align with provisions in the Act for
Tribal programs but would streamline and reorganize the requirements
specific to Tribal programs in one section. These proposed requirements
reiterate the existing requirement that Tribal programs have a
reevaluation process if they meet one or more DRS criteria (Sec.
641(c)(7)(B)) and that non-Indian Head Start agencies are ineligible to
carry out an Indian Head Start program unless there is no other option,
and then only until an Indian Head Start agency becomes available (Sec.
641(e)). The requirements proposed in Sec. 1301.17 outline the process
by which a Tribal program may designate an alternate agency to provide
Head Start services to Tribal members if there is a relinquishment,
termination, or denial of refunding (Sec. 646(e)(1)(A-B)) and specifies
that the alternative agency must meet all requirements established in
the Head Start Act and cannot be prohibited from designation as
detailed in Sec. 646(e)(2). These proposed regulations are more
streamlined and concise than what is in current Sec. 1304.30 of the
Performance Standards. Proposed Sec. 1301.17(d) is new language that
proposes to exempt Tribal programs from the English-only provision in
proposed Sec. 1301.04(a) if the language being spoken relates to the
furtherance of tribal heritage.
The Act includes provisions specific to Tribal programs that will
remain in effect, even though they are not included in the proposed
regulations. The Act requires the Secretary to conduct annual
consultations with tribal governments operating Head Start

[[Page 51278]]

programs to address issues that affect service delivery, to publish a
Federal Register notice before consultations, and to issue a detailed
report to all Tribal governments within 90 days (Sec. 640(l)(4)). The
Act also requires training and technical assistance be provided by
staff with knowledge of and experience in working with Indian
populations (Sec. 640(l)(3)(A)), appointment of a national Indian Head
Start Collaboration Director (Sec. 640(l)(3)(B)), and studies and
reporting specific to Indian and Alaska Native populations (Sec.
649(k)).
Tribal programs would also continue to have flexibilities provided
in the Act even though they are not included in the proposed Sec.
1301.17. Tribal programs operating both Early Head Start and Head Start
programs may reallocate funds between programs at their discretion to
address population fluctuations (Sec. 645(d)(3)). Additionally, section
238 of the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024 amended the
Head Start Act to allow Tribal programs to consider eligibility for
Head Start services regardless of income and establish selection
criteria to prioritize Tribal children, and those statutory
flexibilities will remain in place under the proposed regulations.
There are multiple provisions in the current Performance Standards
that address flexibilities for Tribal programs that would no longer be
relevant because the NPRM proposes to remove those restrictive sections
and grant that flexibility to all Head Start programs. For example,
current Sec. 1302.11(a)(1)(i)-(ii) allows Tribal programs the
flexibility to define service areas based on where members of the
Indian tribes reside. This flexibility would no longer be needed under
the NPRM, because the NPRM proposes to remove the requirements in
current Sec. 1302.11. Additionally, current Sec. 1302.53(b)(4) allows
Tribal programs to determine whether to participate in Quality Rating
and Improvement Systems and state education data systems; this
flexibility would no longer be needed, as the NPRM proposes to remove
requirements related to coordination with other programs and systems.
Lastly, current Sec. 1302.36 allows Tribal Head Start programs to
integrate efforts to preserve, revitalize, restore, or maintain the
Tribal language for enrolled children into program services. This
flexibility would no longer be relevant because the proposed Sec.
1301.17(d) exempts Tribal programs from the English-only requirement in
proposed Sec. 1301.04(a).

Program Flexibility

Proposed Sec. 1301.18 would significantly expand the flexibilities
available to Head Start programs, if finalized. Proposed Sec.
1301.18(a) would allow programs to request a waiver for almost any
requirement in the entirety of proposed Sec. 1301, as long as a waiver
would not negatively impact the health or safety of children and would
not violate any Federal or State laws. The exception, as noted in
proposed Sec. 1301.18(b), is that requirements in the proposed
regulations relating to nutrition, physical activity, or eligibility
would not be eligible for a waiver. All waiver requests are subject to
approval by HHS. Proposed Sec. 1301.18(c) would align with the
flexibility provided in current Sec. 1302.24 in the Performance
Standards that programs can request to operate locally-designed options
(LDO) to better meet the unique needs of their communities. Note that
while the proposed LDO flexibility aligns with the concepts outlined in
current Sec. 1302.24(a) and (b), the more specific requirements in the
current Sec. 1302.24(c)(1)-(5) regarding ratios, group size, and
duration are proposed for removal to give local programs further
flexibility in operationalizing an LDO.
While the Act provides the Secretary of HHS with waiver authority
for a small subset of requirements, including operating locally-
designed options (Sec. 640(f)(1)), waiving non-Federal share (Sec.
640(b)), exceeding the current 15 percent cap for administrative costs
(Sec. 644(b)(2)), filling at least 10 percent of actual enrollment
slots with children eligible for IDEA (Sec. 640(d)(4)), and meeting
teacher qualification requirements (Sec. 648A(a)(4)), proposed Sec.
1301.18 would broaden waiver flexibility beyond those explicitly stated
in the Act. The rationale for this proposed change is to increase
flexibility for state and localities to deliver Head Start services in
a manner that is responsive to their local context, while still
maintaining the emphasis on health, nutrition, physical exercise, and
eligibility requirements, which are the requirements in the proposed
Sec. 1301.18 programs would not be able to waive. HHS would not grant
waiver requests for requirements that are mandated by the statute where
the statute does not allow for a waiver.
The current Performance Standards that reiterate and expand upon
the flexibilities provided in the Act are no longer relevant because
the flexibility proposed in Sec. 1301.18 provides a more blanket
waiver authority. For this reason, ACF proposes removal of these
provisions in the current Performance Standards that address more
specific flexibilities. For example, Sec. 1304.17 in the current
Performance Standards, which provides flexibility for DRS
determinations in cases of certain emergencies when data may not be
available, is proposed for removal in the NPRM. Additionally, the
current Performance Standards mentioned in the prior paragraph that
mirror the flexibilities included in the Act, are proposed for removal
because they are duplicative of the Act. For example, Sec. 1302.14(b)
requires programs to fill 10 percent of their actual enrollment with
children eligible for services under IDEA. This provision is proposed
for removal because the flexibility is provided in the Act, and
proposed Sec. 1301.18 allows for more expansive flexibilities than
both the Act and the current Performance Standards.

Appeals and Other Federal Procedures

The proposed changes on Appeals and Other Federal Procedures are
consistent with ACF's commitment to faithfully administer programs
consistent with statute and congressional intent. By reducing
duplication and unnecessary administrative burden, the proposed
regulation consolidates appeals provisions under Sec. 1301.19.
The proposed regulation on appeals would continue to honor an
agency's right to appeal a final decision by ACF to terminate financial
assistance or deny refunding of an application. The Departmental
Appeals Board procedures in 45 CFR part 16, govern notice and appeal
rights and establish a fair and impartial process for review of final
agency decisions in cases properly before the Departmental Appeals
Board. Similarly, if a Head Start Agency denies, or fails to act on a
prospective agency's funding application, prospective delegate agencies
will retain the right to appeal within 30 days of the agency's decision
or 120 days after the agency's inaction on the prospective delegate's
application. Head Start agencies will continue to be required to
respond to both ACF and the prospective delegate agency within 30 days
of the filed appeal. As with current practice, the decision rendered by
ACF would be final and not subject to additional appeals.
The proposed changes remove redundant regulatory text that restates
statutory requirements and procedures already contained in section 646
of the Act and 45 CFR part 16. Rather than repeating these
requirements, the proposed regulation explicitly cross-references the
governing statutory and regulatory authorities. Additionally, the
proposed regulation eliminates non-statutory procedural requirements
and timelines.

[[Page 51279]]

Monitoring
While the discussion of monitoring (current Sec. 1304.2) is
proposed for removal from the NPRM, ACF remains statutorily required to
conduct monitoring reviews at least once during each three-year period,
as described in section 641A(c) of the Act. Additionally, if a grant
recipient meets one or more of the criteria for a deficiency as defined
in section 637(2) of the Act, ACF must continue to inform the grant
recipient of the deficiency and require correction in accordance with
section 641A(e) of the Act. The proposed removal of Sec. 1304.2 would
not alter ACF's statutory monitoring authority, its obligation to
address deficiencies, or the process by which ACF would notify and
consult with agencies to address deficiencies.
Suspension
This NPRM proposes to remove current Sec. 1304.3 and Sec. 1304.4
related to suspension with notice and suspension without notice.
However, ACF remains authorized under Section 646(a)(5) of the Act to
suspend financial assistance for up to 30 days, or longer in limited
circumstances involving multiple and recurring deficiencies, provided
that ACF gives notice and an opportunity to show cause why financial
assistance should not be suspended.
In emergency situations, such as those involving risk to property,
misuse of funds, criminal violations, or threats to health and safety,
ACF remains authorized, under Section 646(a)(2) of the Act, to suspend
financial assistance without prior notice and opportunity to show
cause.
In all cases grant recipients must continue to adhere to the
Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit
Requirements for Federal Awards at 2 CFR part 200. Restrictions on
incurring new obligations during suspension and the allowability of
necessary and otherwise allowable costs continue to be governed by 2
CFR 200.375, and cost sharing or matching requirements, including
third-party in-kind contributions, remain governed by 2 CFR 200.306.
Under these proposed changes related to suspension in Sec. 1301.19
there would be significantly fewer bureaucratic processes, because many
of the requirements are not in the Act and they are proposed for
removal in this NPRM. Under the proposed rule, ACF would no longer be
required to follow specific requirements for suspension notices beyond
those required by statute.
Termination, Denial of Refunding, and Legal Fees
Similarly, this NPRM proposes to remove Sec. Sec. 1304.5, 1304.6
and 1304.7 from the Performance Standards. ACF remains authorized under
section 646(a)(3) of the Act to terminate financial assistance or deny
refunding to a grant recipient after providing reasonable notice and an
opportunity for a full and fair hearing. Grant recipients retain the
right to file an appeal within 30 days of receiving notice and to
receive a hearing within 120 days of filing such appeal.
While these statutory authorities and protections remain unchanged,
the proposed rule removes regulations that exceed or duplicate
statutory requirements. Specifically, this NPRM eliminates prescriptive
procedural provisions not explicitly required by statute, such as
specific procedures for termination and denial of funding (Sec.
1304.5), procedures for appeal for prospective delegate agencies (Sec.
1304.6) and policies regarding the allowability of legal fees (Sec.
1304.7). The proposed removal of these overly prescriptive procedural
provisions aligns with an overall goal of this NPRM to ensure that the
only requirements that exist in regulation are those that are required
by the Act. ACF will provide additional information for recipients on
procedures for termination and denial of funding, appeals for
prospective delegate agencies, and legal fees in forthcoming sub-
regulatory guidance. ACF does not intend to change existing policies or
procedures on these topics.
With respect to legal fees, the proposed regulation does not create
new authority or modify existing practice. Although current 1304.7 is
proposed for removal from this NPRM, consistent with section
646(a)(4)(C) of the Act, grant recipients may not charge to their grant
legal fees or other costs incurred in appealing termination, reduction,
or denial decisions. However, ACF retains existing authority under
section 646(a)(6) to reimburse reasonable and customary legal fees if
the grant recipient prevails.
Head Start Fellows Program
The proposed regulations remove discussion of the Head Start
Fellows Program (current Sec. 1304.40 and Sec. 1304.41) since these
requirements are largely duplicative of those outlined in the Act.
However, the Secretary retains authority to establish a program of
fellowships in accordance with Section 648A(d) of the Act.
Delegate Agencies
This NPRM proposes to rescind 1303 Subpart D- Delegation of Program
Operations because these regulations are, in large part, duplicative of
the requirements in the Act. Under the Act, a Head Start agency is
empowered to transfer Federal funds and delegate powers to other
agencies when doing so will improve efficiency, effectiveness, or
otherwise further program goals (Sec. 642(a)). The statute makes clear
that the authority to transfer funds and delegate powers includes the
ability to transfer and delegate for component projects when
appropriate to support program objectives.
The Act further outlines specific procedures that each Head Start
agency must establish concerning its delegate agencies (Sec. 641A(d)).
These procedures must include mechanisms for evaluating delegate
agencies, procedures for defunding a delegate agency, and procedures
that allow a delegate agency to appeal a defunding decision. Once these
procedures are in place, the agency must evaluate each delegate agency
in accordance with those procedures and inform the delegate agency of
deficiencies identified through that evaluation that must be corrected.
If a delegate agency's performance is found to be deficient, the Head
Start agency is required to take action, which can include initiating
steps to terminate the delegate agency's designation or conducting
monthly monitoring visits to the delegate agency until all identified
deficiencies are corrected or until the Head Start agency decides to
defund the delegate agency. The statute also places constraints on when
a Head Start agency may terminate a delegate agency or reduce its
service area by requiring the agency to show cause or demonstrate the
cost-effectiveness of the decision before doing so.
While the proposed regulations do not include current Sec.
1303.30, under the proposed regulation the grant recipient retains
legal responsibility and authority and bears financial accountability
for the program when services are provided by delegate agencies.
While this proposed rule would remove regulations regarding
delegate agencies in an effort to eliminate duplication between the
regulation and the Act, most requirements regarding delegate agencies
would remain in place through the Act. The proposed rule would also
remove reporting and procedural requirements to increase program
flexibility and reduce administrative burden.

[[Page 51280]]

In summary, these proposed revisions to regulations on appeals and
other Federal procedures remove duplicative and non-statutory
procedural details, while preserving all statutory authorities, notice
requirements, appeal rights, and due process protections mandated by
the Head Start Act and 45 CFR part 16. The changes are intended to
reduce unnecessary administrative burden and procedural rigidity
without altering substantive rights or enforcement authority and
faithfully administer programs consistent with statute and
congressional intent.

Definitions

Replacing the current Sec. 1305.2 definitions with the proposed
Sec. 1301.20 definitions would remove any unused or commonly
understood defined terms in the Head Start regulations. For ease of
viewing the proposed regulations in relation to the current regulations
on Definitions, please view the comprehensive comparison table below:
BILLING CODE 4814-87-P

[[Page 51281]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07AU26.014

[[Page 51282]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07AU26.015

[[Page 51283]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07AU26.016

[[Page 51284]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07AU26.017

BILLING CODE 4814-87-C
In summary, the proposed changes would preserve core statutory
program and fiscal definitions while eliminating definitions that are
either commonly accepted or are tied to terms that are no longer found
in the proposed regulations.

VI. Regulatory Process Matters

ACF has examined the impacts of the proposed rule under Executive
Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, Executive Order 13132, the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), and the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). Executive Orders 12866 and
13563 direct us to assess all benefits, costs, and transfers of
available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to
select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits.
Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 defines a ``significant
regulatory action'' as an action that is likely to result in a rule:
(1) Having an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, or
adversely affecting in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities; (2) creating a serious inconsistency or otherwise
interfering with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3)
materially altering the budgetary impacts of entitlements, grants, user
fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or (4) raising novel legal or policy issues arising out of
legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth
in Executive Order 12866. The Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs has determined that this proposed rule is a significant
regulatory action under section 3(f)(1) of Executive Order 12866 and we
have prepared a Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA). This proposed rule,
if finalized, is anticipated to be a deregulatory action under
Executive Order 14192.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), see 5 U.S.C. 605(b), as
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act,
requires Federal agencies to determine, to the extent feasible, a
rule's impact on small entities, consider regulatory options for
reducing any significant impact on a substantial number of such
entities, and explain their regulatory approach. The term ``small
entities,'' as defined in the RFA, includes small businesses, not-for-
profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are
not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000. Under this definition, many Head Start
grant recipients, particularly nonprofit organizations and certain
local governmental entities, may be considered small entities. A rule
is generally considered to have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities if it has at least a three percent
impact on revenue for at least five percent of such entities.
To provide context for the potential number of entities that may
meet or exceed Small Business Administration size standards, we
conducted a screening analysis using Head Start funding levels and
organizational type. The applicable SBA size standard for Child Day
Care Services (NAICS 624410) is based on average annual receipts and is
currently $9.5 million. Because data on total organizational receipts
are not available, we compared Head Start grant funding levels to this
threshold as a conservative proxy. Separately, we identified agencies
that are nonprofit organizations, which may qualify as small entities
under the RFA definition.
We then combined these two screens to identify agencies that meet
at least one of these criteria. Based on this combined screening,
approximately 1,450 (95 percent) of agencies either have Head Start
funding levels below the $9.5 million threshold, are nonprofit
organizations, or meet both conditions. Taken together, these counts
provide an upper-bound estimate of the number of entities that may be
considered small entities for purposes of this analysis. However, for
entities with Head Start funding below the threshold, this method does
not determine whether the entity qualifies as small, because such
entities may have additional revenue from other funding sources. As a
result, this analysis does not represent a definitive classification of
small entities under the RFA.
The proposed rule primarily reduces and streamlines existing
regulatory requirements and is expected to reduce

[[Page 51285]]

administrative burden and provide greater operational flexibility for
Head Start grant recipients. One provision of the proposed rule reduces
the allowable administrative cost cap from fifteen percent to five
percent of total approved program costs. This change may require some
entities to adjust how administrative and programmatic costs are
allocated within existing funding levels, and it may have a
particularly significant impact on Head Start programs classified as
small entities. This change is intended to direct a greater share of
Head Start resources toward services for children and families.
Approximately 3.7 percent of Head Start grants currently operate at or
below a five percent administrative cost threshold. In addition, as
discussed in the RIA, an additional 27.7 percent of grants currently
operate above 5 percent but below 10 percent administrative costs. The
proposed rule's broader reductions and streamlining of regulatory
requirements are expected to reduce administrative workload and may
support programs in transitioning toward the proposed cap while
maintaining service delivery. If needed, programs may request a waiver
of the administrative cost cap pursuant to proposed Sec. 1301.18,
subject to HHS review and approval. However, given the possible impact
on small businesses, below we provide an initial regulatory flexibility
analysis.
The proposed requirement for English-only instruction may affect a
subset of programs, particularly those serving high proportions of dual
language learners. Based on available data, ACF estimates that
approximately 33.4 percent of non-tribal Head Start classrooms may be
impacted by this requirement. While ACF does not expect this
requirement to result in a significant economic impact for most
entities, impacts may be more concentrated in certain programs,
including those serving predominantly non-English-speaking communities
(e.g., Migrant and Seasonal Head Start programs). ACF recognizes that
this requirement may result in additional costs or operational
challenges for programs serving dual language learners or operating in
predominantly non-English-speaking communities. At the same time, this
requirement reflects Administration priorities and broader Federal
policy emphasizing the importance of English language acquisition for
early learners, including supporting children's ability to participate
in English-language educational settings and engage with community
institutions.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

Consistent with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603), ACF
has prepared this Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis to assess the
potential economic impact of the proposed rule on small entities and to
consider significant alternatives that would minimize such impacts. The
proposed reduction of the allowable administrative cost cap from 15
percent to 5 percent of total approved program costs may require some
entities to adjust administrative and programmatic cost allocations.
Based on program budget data, this change corresponds to an estimated
reduction in allowable administrative expenditures of approximately
$754,343,701 annually. The extent of impact will vary depending on
existing cost structures and may be more pronounced for smaller
programs. About half of Head Start grants (about 50 percent) serve 200
or fewer children, representing smaller-scale operations that may have
more limited ability to distribute fixed administrative costs. These
smaller grants span a range of organizational types, including
nonprofit organizations, school systems, governmental entities, and
Tribal programs, many of which may meet the RFA definition of small
entities.
ACF considered regulatory alternatives to minimize potential
impacts on small entities, including setting the administrative cost
cap at 10 percent rather than 5 percent and applying an exemption for
programs funded to serve 200 or fewer Head Start slots. Under a 10
percent cap, estimated reductions in allowable administrative
expenditures would be approximately $146,002,007 annually, reflecting a
smaller change from current administrative spending levels. This
smaller reduction is driven in part by the fact that many programs
currently operate below the 15 percent cap and closer to the 10 percent
level; as a result, the adjustment required on the part of programs
under a 10 percent cap is more limited than under a 5 percent cap. Such
a change may also prove less burdensome for small entities. ACF also
considered exempting smaller programs (those with 200 or fewer Head
Start funded slots) from the proposed cap.
ACF expects that reductions in administrative burden associated
with other provisions of the proposed rule may partially offset the
impact of the administrative cost cap. While some entities,
particularly smaller programs, may experience adjustment needs, ACF has
also provided for the availability of waivers (proposed Sec. 1301.18),
which may allow programs to address specific circumstances where
compliance with the administrative cap of 5 percent would present undue
operational challenges. ACF determined that the proposed approach
appropriately balances regulatory burden, program efficiency, and the
objective of maximizing resources available for services to children
and families. These considerations inform ACF's broader assessment of
the overall economic effects of the proposed rule on small entities.
Like all components of this NPRM, ACF will accept public comment on
these alternatives under consideration for the policy change on the
administrative cap for small entities.
Overall, ACF expects that the proposed rule will reduce regulatory
burden and associated costs for Head Start grant recipients, allowing
recipients the flexibility to reinvest funds into other areas,
including the potential to serve more eligible children within existing
operational budgets. While certain provisions, such as the reduction in
the administrative cost cap, may require adjustments for some entities,
the combined effects of the proposed rule are expected to reduce
overall compliance burden. To the extent that impacts vary across
entities, including smaller entities, such variation is expected to
reflect differences in organizational structure, existing cost
allocations, and local implementation decisions rather than the
imposition of new regulatory compliance requirements.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4, section
202(a)) requires us to prepare a written statement, which includes
estimates of anticipated impacts, before publishing ``any rule that
includes any Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by
State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted annually for
inflation) in any one year.'' The current threshold after adjustment
for inflation is $193 million, using the most current (2025) Implicit
Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product. This proposed rule, if
finalized, will not result in unfunded mandates that meet or exceed
this amount. Head Start grant recipients receive over $12 billion
annually in Federal funding to implement the requirements of the
program, including policy changes as a result of this proposed rule.

[[Page 51286]]

Federalism Assessment Executive Order 13132

Executive Order 13132 requires Federal agencies to consult with
State and local government officials if they develop regulatory
policies with Federalism implications. Federalism is rooted in the
belief that issues that are not national in scope or significance are
most appropriately addressed by the level of government close to the
people. This proposed rule, if finalized, would not have substantial
direct impact on the states, on the relationship between the Federal
government and the states, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with section 6 of Executive Order 13132, it is determined
that this action does not have sufficient Federalism implications to
warrant the preparation of a Federalism summary impact statement.

Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 1999

Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act of 1999 requires Federal agencies to determine whether a policy or
regulation may negatively affect family well-being. If the agency
determines a policy or regulation negatively affects family well-being,
then the agency must prepare an impact assessment addressing seven
criteria specified in the law. ACF believes it is not necessary to
prepare a family policymaking assessment (see Pub. L. 105-277) because
the action it takes in this proposed rule does not have any impact on
the autonomy or integrity of the family as an institution.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

The Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.,
minimizes government-imposed burden on the public. In keeping with the
notion that government information is a valuable asset, it also is
intended to improve the practical utility, quality, and clarity of
information collected, maintained, and disclosed.
The PRA requires that agencies obtain OMB approval, which includes
issuing an OMB number and expiration date, before requesting most types
of information from the public. Regulations at 5 CFR part 1320
implemented the provisions of the PRA and Sec. 1320.3 defines a
``collection of information,'' ``information,'' and ``burden.'' PRA
defines ``information'' as any statement or estimate of fact or
opinion, regardless of form or format, whether numerical, graphic, or
narrative form, and whether oral or maintained on paper, electronic, or
other media (5 CFR 1320.3(h)). This includes requests for information
to be sent to the Government, such as forms, written reports and
surveys, recordkeeping requirements, and third-party or public
disclosures (5 CFR 1320.3(c)). ``Burden'' means the total time, effort,
or financial resources expended by persons to collect, maintain, or
disclose information.
The proposed rule will affect the information collection approved
under OMB control number 0970-0148. ACF will revise the associated PRA
package for the Head Start Performance Standards (Performance
Standards) to align with the regulatory changes.

VII. Regulatory Impact Analysis

Summary

The changes to the Performance Standards in this proposed rule
would produce substantial net reductions in regulatory compliance costs
across Head Start programs, primarily by eliminating or streamlining
prescriptive Federal requirements related to eligibility, recruitment,
selection, enrollment, and attendance (ERSEA); education; staffing;
service duration; health services; and administrative requirements.
Major quantified cost reductions stem from increased flexibility in
staffing models (e.g., removal of Federal ratio requirements,
requirements for a coaching system, and certain staff roles), reduced
administrative and reporting requirements (including for community
assessments and data aggregation), and a decrease in allowable
administrative spending (from 15 percent to 5 percent), alongside
smaller savings in facilities, transportation, and safety requirements.
Consistent with the Head Start program structure, where Federal funds
must be used to deliver services, these cost reductions in certain
areas are expected to function largely as resource reallocations
(transfers) that may support expanded enrollment, enhanced service
delivery, or other program priorities.
Because the proposed rule would increase local program discretion,
this RIA applies behavioral adjustment thresholds (low, primary, high
scenarios) to estimate impacts of the proposed policy changes, which
are intended to reflect varying degrees of possible program response:
lower adjustment assumptions are used where external constraints (e.g.,
state licensing requirements, physical infrastructure, operational
limitations) may limit operational changes by programs, while higher
adjustment assumptions are applied where historical stakeholder
feedback indicates that existing requirements have been particularly
burdensome and programs are more likely to scale back activities in
response to policy changes. ACF assumes that the proposed policy
changes are implemented over a five-year time horizon and the total
cost reductions would be realized upon full implementation in year
five. Unless otherwise noted, wage and compensation inputs based on
2025 BLS or PIR data are adjusted by 2 percent to express estimates in
constant 2026 dollars before applying fringe benefit adjustments.
Fringe benefits are assumed to represent 24 percent of total
compensation.
For purposes of this analysis, ACF assumes that the wage and non-
wage benefit requirements established in the 2024 final rule will not
take effect, but that other provisions of the 2024 final rule will take
effect. This reflects the proposed rescission of the wage and non-wage
benefit requirements through the proposed rule ``Restoring Flexibility
to Support Head Start Program Access'' (91 FR 25842). Accordingly, the
estimated cost reductions presented in this analysis are measured
relative to a baseline in which those requirements are not implemented.
However, we also present a sensitivity analysis to consider the impacts
of this proposed rule if all requirements of the 2024 final rule are
fully implemented or if this proposal is finalized before the
rescission proposal.
Overall, this analysis shows that the proposed changes would reduce
compliance costs and give programs more flexibility, allowing resources
to shift toward direct services, though implementation may vary by
program. As with all other sections of this NPRM, we invite public
comments on the assumptions made in this RIA that underline the
quantitative and qualitative discussions of costs and benefits of the
proposed policy changes.

Education and the Learning Environment

Overview
Part 1302 Subpart C of the current Performance Standards requires
programs to support both English acquisition and home language
development for dual language learners. The proposed rule would require
that all education for Head Start children be conducted in English,
except for American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) Head Start programs
that are using their tribal language in the program to further tribal
heritage.

[[Page 51287]]

This proposed change introduces one-time implementation costs for
certain non-tribal programs that currently provide primary instruction
in languages other than English or primarily serve dual language
learners. AIAN programs are excluded from this estimate consistent with
the proposed exemption.
Additionally, Part 1302 Subpart B of the current Performance
Standards establishes detailed requirements for program structure,
including center-based ratios and group sizes, center-based service
duration requirements, home-based service duration and caseload limits,
and requirements for child development specialists in family child care
settings.
The proposed rule would remove certain Federal ratio, duration, and
caseload requirements and defer to applicable state requirements or
local program design, thereby increasing flexibility and reducing
prescriptive Federal standards.
A. One-Time Costs With Requirement for English-Only Instruction
We estimate that 33.4 percent of non-tribal Head Start service
locations (including classrooms, family child care homes, and group
socialization sites) with available language-related data are operated
by programs that primarily serve dual language learners (i.e., at least
50 percent of children in the program speak or are learning a language
other than English at home) or where the reported primary language of
instruction is not English. This reflects 18,767 \11\ classrooms that
will be potentially impacted with one-time costs to implement the
changes necessary to comply with this requirement. To implement
English-only instruction, affected classrooms may need to replace
curriculum and instructional materials and books that contain non-
English content. Per proposed Sec. 1301.18, programs may request a
waiver of these requirements, subject to HHS review and approval. ACF
invites comment on the proposed waiver process, including circumstances
under which programs may seek waivers from the proposed English-
language instruction requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\11\ This figure is based on the PIR to identify programs where
at least 50 percent of children in the program speak or are learning
a language other than English at home, and based on administrative
data on service locations and their class level data provided to
identify classrooms or groups of children served where the primary
language of instruction is not English.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The cost methodology assumes the estimated cost of replacing
classroom materials at $2,500 per classroom. This is based on the costs
of replacing frequently used curricula and related teaching materials,
estimated at $2,000, and an estimated additional cost of $500 for
classroom materials that have words, such as educational toys and
books. We multiply this estimate of $2,500 by the estimated number of
affected classrooms (18,767) for an estimated one-time cost total of
$46,917,500.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07AU26.018

We also estimate potential one-time costs associated with teacher
retraining, recruitment, or administrative adjustments for the same
classrooms discussed previously. Using PIR data, there are 103,186
preschool classroom teachers, preschool assistant teachers, and infant/
toddler classroom teachers across Head Start Preschool and Early Head
Start, of which an estimated 34,464 teachers and assistant teachers are
in potentially affected classrooms.
We assume a per-teacher retraining or recruitment cost of $3,000
reflecting moderate targeted professional development (e.g., English-
language instruction training and support), or recruitment process
expenditures (e.g., job board posting, screenings and interviews,
onboarding, overhead). This estimate reflects a blended assumption that
some affected teachers would require retraining while others may need
to be replaced. For recruitment-related costs, ACF considered estimates
used by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS),\12\ which
assumed recruitment and hiring costs of approximately $5,000 per worker
based on inflation-adjusted estimates of direct hiring costs and
recruitment expenditures. ACF does not adopt the full CMS estimate
because the proposed rule anticipates that some affected teachers would
be retained and retrained rather than replaced. For retraining costs,
ACF assumes approximately $1,000 per teacher, reflecting moderate
professional development activities and training materials associated
with implementing English-language instruction requirements. This
assumption reflects targeted training intended to support existing
staff in adapting instructional practices. Accordingly, ACF adopts a
blended estimate of $3,000 per teacher, representing a midpoint between
lower-cost retraining activities and higher-cost recruitment and
onboarding activities associated with staff replacement. Under the
primary scenario, we assume 50 percent of teaching positions in
affected classrooms incur retraining or recruitment costs, representing
moderate behavioral adjustment. The low scenario assumes 25 percent,
and the high scenario assumes 75 percent. We apply higher adjustment
assumptions to this policy change relative to other policy changes in
this proposed rule, as we expect some programs may need to make
significant changes to classroom staffing to comply with this proposed
requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\12\ Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare
and Medicaid Programs; Omnibus COVID-19 Health Care Staff
Vaccination, 86 FR 61555, 61668 (Nov. 5, 2021). CMS assumed
recruitment and hiring costs of approximately $5,000 per worker,
based on inflation-adjusted hiring cost estimates of $4,000 for
lower-skilled workers and $6,000 for higher-skilled workers.
Available at: <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-23831/p-642">https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-23831/p-642</a>.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 51288]]

We multiply this estimate of $3,000 per teacher times the share of
teaching staff for the given scenario (n= 34,464 teachers). Under these
assumptions, estimated one-time staffing-related costs are
approximately $25,848,093 under the low scenario, $51,696,186 under the
primary scenario, and $77,544,279 under the high scenario.
Inputs for estimating another key portion of transition costs once
again include 34,464 baseline Head Start staff, as well as ratios of
25-percent, 50-percent, and 75-percent. Also used here is an estimate
of $8,000 in per-employee welfare harm of employment disruption
(updated to 2026 dollars from estimates reflecting normal economic
conditions, as reported in Table 1 of Kuminoff et al., 2015 \13\). If
roughly one-third of affected teachers experience employment
disruption, rather than retraining, the resulting upfront cost they
experience is approximately $139 million, with a range from $69 million
to $208 million.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\13\ Kuminoff, N.V., Schoellman, T., & Timmins, C. (2015),
Environmental regulations and the welfare effects of job layoffs in
the United States: A spatial approach, Review of Environmental
Economics and Policy, 9(2): 198-218.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

ACF recognizes that English-only instruction may result in
additional costs or burden not described here for programs serving dual
language learners or operating in predominantly non-English-speaking
communities.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07AU26.019

B. Removal of Head Start Group Size and Ratios
Under the current regulation, the maximum group sizes and staff-
child ratios for center-based settings are specified by age group.
These findings indicate that replacing the current prescriptive Federal
standards with deference to state licensing requirements will not
impede children's development or leave children unsafe, while enabling
programs to allocate resources more efficiently toward direct services
and expanded enrollment. The proposed rule would remove these specific
Federal ratio requirements and defer to applicable state licensing and
Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) requirements.
To estimate potential reductions in personnel costs, we compare the
reported number of teachers under current Head Start ratio requirements
and compare it to the number required under applicable state maximum
ratios. By using the maximum ratio of children to adults under state
ratios, this analysis represents a maximum adjustment in behavior,
which we later use as the upper bound on the potential impacts of this
rule change. This analysis is conducted at the state level, using PIR
data on number of teachers and enrollment by single-year age groups,
and state licensing ratios identified through a comprehensive research
of ratios required by licensing for each state.
For each state and age group, we calculate the number of teachers
required under state ratios by dividing the number of enrolled children
in each single-year age group by the maximum number of children
permitted per adult. Because state ratios do not align to single-year
age groups, we converted state age ranges into one-year groups and
averaged ratios across the months covered within each group. When
multiple ratios applied to the same month, we used the least strict
ratio to avoid double-counting. For limited data gaps (e.g., ages 5 or
older and select U.S. territories), we applied averages from available
data to ensure those slots were included. Once state ratios were
standardized to calculate the number of teachers required in each
single-year age group, we then used the number of children served in
each one-year age group by state and territory (as reported in the PIR)
to estimate the total number of teachers required under state and
territory ratios for the specific one-year age ranges. After taking a
sum of the number of teachers required in each age range for each state
and territory, we applied a reduction of approximately 13 percent to
account for the fact that the reported data on the number of children
served in each age range by state and territory reflects cumulative
enrollment.
By reducing the estimated number of teachers by 13 percent, we
adjust for the difference between cumulative enrollment reported in the
PIR and funded enrollment. Because cumulative enrollment includes
children who enter and exit programs during the year, it exceeds the
number of children enrolled at any given point in time. The 13 percent
adjustment reflects the difference between cumulative enrollment and
funded enrollment and is intended to align the teacher estimate with
the number of children occupying funded slots during the program year.
The following example illustrates the methodology used to estimate
the number of teachers required under state licensing ratios. Using
Texas as an example, the analysis applies the state's maximum child-to-
staff ratio for each age group to the number of children served in that
age group, as reported in the PIR. The resulting estimates are summed
across age groups to determine the total number of teachers required
under state ratios. Because PIR enrollment data reflect cumulative
enrollment over the course of the program year, including children who
enter and exit programs during the year, the total is then reduced by
13 percent to align the estimate with funded enrollment levels, which
more closely reflect the number of children served at a given point in
time.

[[Page 51289]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07AU26.020

We compare this figure to the number of teaching staff currently
reported in the PIR, broken out by teaching staff type (e.g., preschool
classroom teachers, preschool assistant teachers), and multiply the
number of staff by their respective average annual salaries as reported
in the PIR, adjusted by 2 percent to express the estimates in constant
2026 dollars, and then apply a 24 percent fringe adjustment to estimate
the teaching personnel expenditures at current levels. We calculate the
difference between the number of teaching staff reported in the PIR and
the total estimate of the number of teachers required by state ratios
to identify the estimated maximum potential reduction in the teaching
workforce. We calculate the proportional reduction in the teacher
workforce by dividing the difference in teaching staff by the current
reported teaching staff, and we apply this ratio to the estimated
teaching personnel expenditures to arrive at the maximum potential
reduction in personnel expenditures.
Recognizing that not all programs may immediately or fully adjust
to state maximum ratios, we apply behavioral multipliers to reflect
different levels of response. ACF recognizes that any steps towards
lower ratios will lead to lower cost per child costs, which will
improve program efficiency. The table below illustrates the low
estimate assumes 25 percent of the maximum potential reduction is
realized in year five, representing minimal behavior change. The
primary estimate assumes 50 percent realization in year five. The high
estimate assumes 75 percent realization, representing significant
behavior change in year five. These estimates are calculated by
multiplying the respective percent realizations by the maximum
potential reduction in personnel expenditures. ACF assumes that the
proposed policy changes are phased in over the five-year time horizon
and fully implemented in year five.
Results from this analysis are presented in the following table.
Under the primary scenario, the annual reduction in personnel
expenditures associated with ratio flexibility is estimated at
$668,299,826, with corresponding low and high estimates of $334,149,913
and $1,002,449,739, respectively.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07AU26.021

The estimated reduction in teaching staff can be used to estimate
the potential change in the average number of children per teacher.
Under the maximum adjustment scenario, the estimated number of teachers
required

[[Page 51290]]

under state licensing ratios is approximately 24 percent lower than the
number of teaching staff currently reported in the PIR (80,078 compared
to 105,423). Holding enrollment constant, this implies an increase of
approximately 32 percent in the average number of children per teacher.
Under the primary scenario, which assumes programs realize 50 percent
of the maximum adjustment, the increase in the average number of
children per teacher would be approximately 16 percent. Actual changes
would vary across programs and states depending on staffing decisions
and the extent to which programs adjust toward state licensing ratios.
No adjustments were made to these estimates for the proposed
removal of the Head Start per-child facility square footage
requirements. Although related, any effects from the removal of these
requirements are expected to be marginal because state licensing
standards already align closely with, or in some cases exceed, current
Head Start center-based requirements of 35 square feet of usable indoor
activity space per child and 75 square feet of outdoor play space per
child. While a small number of states permit lower space standards in
limited circumstances, many states impose more stringent requirements
that would already apply to Head Start programs operating in those
states. For example, Texas requires 80 square feet of outdoor space per
child, the District of Columbia and Rhode Island require 45 square feet
of indoor space for infants and toddlers, and Illinois increases
required square footage depending on whether sleep and play areas are
combined and whether cribs are used. As a result, in many states, about
30 to 40 states depending on the measure, licensing standards already
meet or exceed Head Start space benchmarks, making the proposed removal
of the Federal per-child facility requirement negligible for this
estimate.
C. Removal of Center-Based Head Start Preschool Duration and Program
Schedule Requirements
The current regulation requires that at least 45 percent of Head
Start Preschool center-based funded enrollment receive 1,020 annual
hours of planned class operations and establishes minimum days and
hours for remaining slots. The proposed rule removes this Federal
duration requirement for Head Start Preschool. Early Head Start is
excluded from this analysis because, as discussed in the preamble of
this NPRM, the Act specifies that EHS programs must provide
``continuous'' comprehensive child development and family support
services, which ACF has long interpreted to mean a full day and full
year of services for infants and toddlers in EHS center-based programs.
To estimate potential reductions in personnel costs associated with
reduced duration, we compare median annual hours of operation using
administrative data reported on program schedules of operation,
weighted by fu

[…truncated; see source link]

View on FederalRegister.gov →Plain-text source

Indexed from Federal Register on August 7, 2026.

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.