HHS Proposes Sweeping Rewrite of Head Start Standards: What It Means for Audiologists and SLPs

October 2, 2026

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), through the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), has proposed to rescind and replace the Head Start Program Performance Standards.

Head Start serves young children from low-income families from birth to age 5 and focuses primarily on early education, intervention, and health. Many of these children have or are at risk of developing speech, language, and hearing disorders. Head Start programs are a key setting for audiologists and speech-language pathologists (SLPs) to identify, refer, and provide services.

HHS claims its regulatory changes would reduce federal burden, defer to state policies, and give local programs and parents more control. HHS estimates that savings could support roughly 116,516 additional Head Start Preschool slots and 45,578 Early Head Start slots in 2031.

The Head Start Act's statutory requirements would remain in effect, which means "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 protections-would not change under the proposed rule.

Key Changes for Audiologists and SLPs

The proposed rule would make the following changes most relevant to ASHA members:

• Screenings and assessments. Current § 1302.33, which sets detailed requirements for developmental screenings, would be rescinded. The regulations would no longer specify hearing and vision screenings. HHS notes that the Head Start Act still requires screenings, but programs would have more flexibility on timelines and processes. This means that while hearing screenings are not cut, their exclusion from the Head Start Program Performance Standards could lead to fewer screenings overall because most staff use the standards as their guide.
• English instruction. Programs would be required to conduct "all education" in English and prioritize teaching English to children who do not speak it. Tribal programs are exempt when the language furthers tribal heritage. This could result in children who are non-native English speakers being misdiagnosed as having communication disorders if they are not assessed in their home language.
• Safety and transportation for children with disabilities. Programs would have more flexibility in determining how to structure transportation staffing. For example, programs would no longer be required to have at least one bus monitor on vehicles transporting Head Start children.
• Group size and ratios. Federal staff-child ratios and group size limits would be replaced by state licensing standards. This change could create increased workloads for providers, as there may be more students for every staff member.
• Suspension and expulsion. Some regulatory limits on suspension and expulsion would be removed. Programs would be incentivized to follow state and local rules. This change could result in more students being removed from Head Start settings.

Why "All English" Education Is Harmful

The use of more than one language (or languages besides spoken English), augmentative and alternative communication (AAC), and/or signed communication are not language-enrichment activities. For many children, they are primary or essential means of communication. Children who have communication disorders, who are nonspeaking or minimally speaking, who are deaf or hard of hearing, or who have complex communication needs may rely on individualized AAC systems-including signed languages-to participate in learning, express needs and preferences, develop relationships, and engage with caregivers, teachers, and peers.

Audiologists and SLPs are trained to evaluate a child's hearing and communication profile; select or design an appropriate AAC system; collaborate with families to select a communication modality that meets the child's and family's needs; and provide families, classroom staff, and interventionalists training on their consistent use.

This clinical decision-making is unique to each child and is often multimodal or multilingual. A child's AAC vocabulary and signed lexicon are most effective when they reflect the languages and dialects used in the child's home and the language of instruction.

The proposed directive that "all education" be conducted in English could be interpreted at the grantee or local level to restrict access to multilingual AAC options; multilingual screening, assessment, or intervention; or related services in the classroom. Moreover, this policy may decrease access to qualified interpretation and translation necessary for individualized service delivery and for families to participate meaningfully in decisions affecting their children.

Even if ACF does not intend these results, ambiguity in the final rule could lead to inconsistent implementation for children who rely on clear, individualized, and accessible communication supports.

What ASHA Is Doing

ASHA has concerns with many of these proposed changes and will submit comments to ACF outlining these concerns before the October 6, 2026, deadline.

What You Can Do

The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) outlines the final details of the Head Start proposed rule. Here's how ASHA members can help:

• Submit comments by October 6, 2026. Comments from individual audiologists, SLPs, students, faculty, and program directors carry weight-especially ones that describe specific personal impacts rather than general opposition. Reference specific section numbers when possible (e.g., § 1302.33). Agencies often find comments tied to specific provisions more useful.
• Discuss how these changes could affect infants, toddlers, and children with your colleagues, and encourage them to submit comments.
• Continue to engage with ASHA's advocacy work.

Questions?

Contact [email protected].