by Jamie Lackey, Georgia Recorder
April 30, 2025

Childhood poverty doesn’t happen by accident – it is found at the intersection of poor public policy, generational poverty, and a lack of access to essential resources. 

And while childhood poverty can’t be solved by one policy or organization alone it can be made much worse by removing one. Head Start is one of the most effective anti-poverty programs we have in the United States. Cutting it would have devastating effects on families and communities for generations to come. 

At Helping Mamas, a baby supply bank, we see every day what happens when children and families get the support they need and what happens when they don’t.

Head Start is so much more than just a preschool program. It is a family-centered program where parents receive workforce development support, health education and parenting education. Children receive quality early learning instruction closing literacy and school readiness gaps. It is a lifeline where families feel safe, loved and seen. 

Like many learning environments, Head Start Programs are often the heart of a community. Through my work with Helping Mamas I see Head Start utilizing our resources for diapers, wipes, car seats and other essential items. They became a place of safety during Hurricane Helene. They partnered with us to make sure that families in rural areas had access to essential items at their most vulnerable moments.

Head Start mobilizes the community to volunteer with children and parents. I know that when parents engage with Head Start they are getting the tools and support they need to break the cycle of generational poverty.

And I have to ask, in a time where the U.S. is consistently falling behind the world in academic achievement – particularly in math where U.S. students currently rank 28th globally – why would we cut a program that has shown to increase a child’s academic success all the way through college? 

I believe that good public policy, when paired with adequate funding, has the power to transform lives. It always has. 

And when you combine that with strong community partnerships, you’re not just supporting individual children — you’re investing in our future workforce, the long-term health of our communities, and the strength of our economy. 

Nonprofits alone cannot and should not continue to be the public safety net for our children. Overcoming educational deficits and poverty takes a combined approach of nonprofits, communities and public policy. Remove even one piece of the foundation and the structure won’t hold – collapsing along with the futures of our children.

Every dollar invested in Head Start generates up to $9 in economic returns through increased earnings, reduced reliance on public assistance and lower involvement with the criminal justice system. It also increases parental employment and reduced child maltreatment rates. 

Head Start was created as part of our country’s War on Poverty – because early childhood education, health care, and family support are not luxuries – they are necessities. Cutting Head Start doesn’t just impact our classrooms today – it threatens the future of our workforce, our economy and our country’s ability to compete on the world stage. 

So I will ask again: Can we afford the cost of cutting Head Start Programs? I don’t think so. Our children don’t think so. And if our politicians are serious about creating a better future, they shouldn’t think so either.  

This is more than a budget item, it is the future of our children and our communities. Let’s send the message that we cannot keep trying to balance a budget on the backs of our youngest most vulnerable citizens.

Georgia Recorder is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Georgia Recorder maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor John McCosh for questions: info@georgiarecorder.com.

The post Can we afford the cost of cutting Head Start? appeared first on georgiarecorder.com

Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Left-Leaning

This content strongly advocates for the preservation of the Head Start program, which is framed as a critical anti-poverty and educational tool for children. The language used emphasizes the benefits of government-funded initiatives and community partnerships, promoting the idea that such programs are essential to societal progress and economic well-being. The tone is persuasive, appealing to values of social equity and the long-term advantages of investing in early childhood education. This focus on the positive impact of government-supported programs and the critique of budget cuts reflects a left-leaning perspective on social welfare and education policy.