Questions About How the Sequester Is Affecting Low-Income Children

On March 1, 2013, federal agencies were directed by the White House budget office to cut spending for the remainder of the 2013 fiscal year, through Sept. 30. The cuts, known as “sequestration” in Washington parlance, apply evenly to almost every program, so agencies do not have much leeway to protect certain programs at the cost of others. Now, two-and-a-half months later, the big question is how the cuts are affecting people on the ground. The answer: We have anecdotes, but no firm numbers.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) estimated the 5.0 percent budget reduction for most education programs would mean 70,000 low-income children would lose access to Head Start.  But in documents released alongside President Obama’s 2014 budget request, the White House did not clarify final fiscal year 2013 spending levels, and HHS showed only pre-sequester funding levels. Though the Department of Education later released some state-by-state post-sequester budget tables, the overall budget document still does not accurately list 2013 pre-sequester funding, let alone post-sequester funding.

Because the documents rely on pre-sequester figures, they are missing valuable data such as the number of children served, post-sequester, by Head Start and other programs. That means there is no way to know for sure whether the oft-cited HHS figure of a loss of 70,000 Head Start slots has any basis in reality. 

That raises even more questions about the data the documents do show, which depict a pre-sequester reduction of 13,000 Head Start and Early Head Start slots, despite increased funding for the program. Did the backwards slide occur because it cost more this year to educate Head Start children? Or were Head Start centers reluctant to increase enrollment, knowing they might face mid-year cuts that would force them to cut seats or staff?

Beyond these abstract budgetary questions, there are anecdotes about how Head Start centers are coping with lost funds. Mother Jones compiled a list of the effects of sequestration across the country, reporting that Head Start programs face a wide range of problems:

• Temporary closure of Head Start facilities;
• An early end to the school year for Head Start centers;
• The elimination of retirement benefits for Head Start teachers;
• Staff furloughs;
• Layoffs of Head Start teachers and administrators;
• Slots cut from Head Start programs; and even
• Closure of Head Start facilities.

A survey conducted of Washington State Head Start providers found that 68 percent planned to eliminate Head Start slots over the next several months because of sequestration, forcing children out of classrooms. Nearly as many programs – 64 percent – planned to cut teaching jobs.

Still, it is too soon to say for sure how many low-income children and their teachers will be affected, or how the cuts will be implemented from classroom to classroom. Those effects may change in the coming months, too, as Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA), chair of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, plans to introduce a measure to restore Head Start funding amid the already-contentious 2014 appropriations process.

Next year’s budget documents may hold more comprehensive details on the effects of sequestration, and we will be watching HHS for any new figures they gather as Head Start centers continue to implement the cuts.