[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 57 (Wednesday, May 11, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[Congressional Record: May 11, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
HUMAN SERVICES AMENDMENTS OF 1994--CONFERENCE REPORT
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will now
proceed to consideration of the conference report on S. 2000, which the
clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The committee on conference on the disagreeing votes of the
two Houses on the amendments of the House to the bill (S.
2000) to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 1995
through 1998 to carry out the Head Start Act and the
Community Services Block Grant Act, and for other purposes,
having met, after full and free conference, have agreed to
recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses this
report, signed by a majority of the conferees.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the Senate will proceed to
the consideration of the conference report.
(The conference report is printed in the House proceedings of the
Record of May 9, 1994.)
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, today the Senate gives its final approval
to S. 2000, the Human Services Reauthorization Act of 1994. This bill
is part of our national efort to help children, strengthen families,
and rebuild communities. It reauthorizes three mainstays of our current
effort--Head Start, the community services block grant, and the Low-
Income Home Energy Assistance Program.
Thirty years ago next week, President Lyndon Johnson declared war on
poverty by signing the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 into law. Head
Start, our first multigenerational, family centered, one-stop shopping
program, quickly became one of the Nation's most popular and most
effective social programs.
Today we pay tribute to Head Start with an overwhelmingly bipartisan
vote and affirm our commitment to renew and expand it.
The Head Start provisions in the bill give new support to staff
development and training, in order to provide the best possible
services to children and families. It enhances parent involvement, and
helps parents to be the first and best teachers of their children.
This action provides new flexibility to local programs to meet the
needs of today's families, many of whom are working full time jobs or
going to school to find better jobs. They need full-day and full-year
Head Start--and this bill will help see to it that such services are
available.
We have found that 1 year of Head Start at age 4 often comes too
little and too late for families struggling to survive against a rising
tide of poverty, drugs, violence, and hopelessness. This bill allows
programs to provide more than 1 year of service--and to focus on both
the comprehensiveness of service and the continuity of service.
Building on the success of the comprehensive child development
programs and the lessons we have learned from parent-child centers, S.
2000 sets aside significant resources for a new Early Start initiative
for infants and toddlers to give new families the support they need to
learn and grow together.
This legislation also includes two other priorities--the community
services block grant [CSBG] and the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance
Program [LIHEAP].
CSBG reauthorizes the community action programs, community
development corporations, and community food banks that serve on the
front lines of the war on poverty. In recent years, we have witnessed a
much greater rise in the number of families living in poverty than in
the resources dedicated to reducing it.
In neighborhoods across the country, these community-based public-
private partnerships are a central part of the low-income service
delivery network. They promote self sufficiency, family stability, and
community revitalization. S. 2000 affirms our commitment to these
grassroots efforts to help people help themselves.
The reauthorization of the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program
is equally important. This year's winter weather in New England and
across the country demonstrated the lifesaving nature of LIHEAP.
President Clinton recognized the importance of this program by
approving emergency appropriations to help low income families pay for
the fuel they need to survive.
Without this heating assistance, we would have lost far more lives.
No parents should have to chose between heating their homes and feeding
their children. Yet, every winter, doctors in Boston and cities across
the country see the number of malnourished children double or triple as
fuel costs continue to rise. Thanks to LIHEAP, many families are spared
from making the heat or eat decision.
Despite the widely acknowledged success of measures such as these, no
one program can be expected to permanently innoculate children against
the problems that plague too many youth. We also know that our
commitment to help cannot end with Head Start.
Four years ago I sponsored a demonstration transition project to
begin to build bridges between Head Start programs and local public
schools. These efforts have enabled children to make a smooth
transition to elementary school, and helped parents to continue to be
active participants in the education of their children. Head Start
programs and public schools have learned from each other and both
systems have benefitted. But the real winners are the children and
families.
Diane Hebert, a parent from Woburn, MA, told the Labor Committee how
Head Start had prepared her for her son's transition to public school
by saying:
When my son went to kindergarten, his teacher wouldn't let
me volunteer in the class. That February, she realized that
she had overlooked him. He was having trouble with his work,
but because he wasn't a behavior problem he didn't stand out.
Head Start helped me to make sure the school gave him a core
evaluation. How he receives the education he needs and
deserves. Today I advocate for all my son's education even at
the middle school and high school. Head Start showed me that
being a parent gave me a seat in my children's education even
if I have to push my way in.
Jill Ryan, a Head Start parent from Worcester, MA, said:
Head Start taught me to reach out, to ask questions, and to
voice my opinions openly. It prepared me to deal effectively
with the public school system and stand up for my child's
rights. Head Start taught me about the Chapter I program.
When Jennifer was in the first grade, she needed help in
reading. I appealed to the school for that help. They told me
she didn't need the program. But they didn't see her
struggling the way I did. Eventually, I convinced the school
to get her help.
Now my daughter is nine, and I am very proud to say that
her reading is at the A level. Jennifer has been chosen for
the Providing Equity for Able Kids program, which provides
challenging elementary learning opportunities for
academically and creatively talented elementary school kids.
Now Head Start is helping to change the schools for all
children and families. Three years ago, Worcester Head Start
got a grant to do one of the Transition Projects. I sat on
the committee with the Head Start Directors, Head Start
parents, and public school principals. We talked about why
parent input in schools is so important. We answered
questions, and explained why the schools need to provide
parent workshops, activities, and transportation, the way
that Head Start does.
As we have learned from these transition projects, Head Start cannot
be singlehandedly responsible for the success or failure of our poorest
children. As Head Start families move into the public schools their
continued success will be largely dependent on the schools.
We now have an opportunity--with the reauthorization of ESEA--to
provide incentives for school systems to work with Head Start and build
effective partnerships. Head Start is setting children and families on
the right path, and it is up to the elementary schools to continue that
progress.
The transition projects have shown that this can be done. We now have
an historic opportunity to solidify the lessons we have learned. We
have set-aside $35 million in Head Start funds to facilitate his
progress, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to create a
bipartisan proposal within ESEA to invest the schools as well.
We must give children and families a Head Start on life--and we must
prevent it from fading away. The benefits are too valuable--children
are too important--and the stakes are too high.
This is a moment of both victory and preparation. I urge my
colleagues to join in the challenge. We will not rest until we have
given America's children all that they deserve.
For American business that seeks a skilled and educated workforce--
for American families who seek safe streets--and for all American
citizens who seek a country true to its ideals--this is essential
legislation, and I urge the Senate to approve it.
thank Yous
Mr. President, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the
people without whom this legislation would never have happened.
First and foremost, I would like to thank the Labor and Human
Resources Committee staff--from both sides of the aisle--who worked
extremely well together on this effort. I hope this bipartisan
cooperation will continue as we move forward with the remainder of our
agenda.
Specifically, I would like to thank Michael Iskowitz and Catriona
Macdonald of my staff, Patty Cole, from Senator Dodd's subcommittee
staff, Kimberly Barnes-O'Connor from Senator Kassebaum's staff, and
Stephanie Monroe from Senator Coats' staff. Together they formed the
Senate team that made S. 2000 a reality. I commend them for their
excellent efforts.
In the House, I would like to thank Alan Lopatin and Chris Gilbert of
Chairman Ford's staff, Lee Cowen of Representative Goodling's staff,
and Les Sweeting and Terry Daschler of Representative Martinez's
subcommittee staff. They did a great job on the bill in the House--and
they too are to be congratulated for their efforts. Both sides were
lucky enough to have extremely cooperative and supportive conferees. I
would like to especially thank Lauren Gross, from Senator Pell's
office, Cheryl Birdsall from Senator Metzenbaum's office, and Matt
Bidgood from Senator Jeffords' office for their help.
And we could not forget our supporters in the administration who--
from the start--have been committed to an inclusive, productive, and
bipartisan process.
I commend Secretary Shalala for establishing the Head Start Advisory
Committee that launched this process, so effectively brought the staff
together, and created the working group that hung together throughout
this legislative process.
I would also like to thank her able assistants, including Mary Jo
Bane, Olivia Golden, Helen Taylor, John Busa, Rich Tarlin, and Mary
Burdette. They reminded us how helpful it is to design programs with
those who actually implement them.
Last and not least--I would like to thank a few able individuals who
have done so much for America's children.
I would like to recognize four longstanding friends of children and
friends of the Labor and Human Resources Committee--Ed Zigler, often
referred to as the Father of Head Start, Joan Lombardi, now with HHS,
Helen Blank of the Children's Defense Fund, and Bill Harris and Sarah
von der Lippe of KIDS Project.
Their energy and their commitment knows no bounds and I am grateful
for their tireless efforts and leadership.
And we could not conclude without thanking those in the community
struggling day after day to give these laws real meaning. Our work here
is far easier than theirs. I would like to send a special thank you to
Linda Likins of the National Head Start Association, Janis Santos of
the New England Head Start Association, Marie Galvin of the
Massachusetts Head Start Association, and to the thousands of Head
Start teachers and family services workers who give it their all every
day. This act is for you.
To the community action programs, community development corporations,
community food and nutrition advocates, fuel assistance providers and
all of the other front line workers who so ably use the resources of
this act--I thank you for your dedication, your commitment, and your
efforts.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise today to support the conference
report to S. 2000, the Human Services Amendments of 1994, and to urge
all of my colleagues to join me in voting for it. I would also like to
salute Senators Kennedy and Kassebaum for their indispensable
leadership in helping to guide this legislation.
I am confident that the vast majority of my colleagues will vote for
this bill because they recognize how critically important the programs
it authorizes are to their constituents. These programs are also
critically important to another group of Americans, a group that
doesn't vote but that nonetheless demands and deserves our full
attention. I am talking of course about the children of America.
Our children have been calling out for help, and we in Washington
have not done nearly enough to answer that call. For too many young
Americans, childhood has become a minefield of risk. They must navigate
their way through a series of explosive social problems in order to
successfully make it to adulthood.
The problems I am talking about are childhood poverty and unsafe
neighborhoods; crumbling families and disappearing health care
coverage; a cycle of abuse and a dimming of the once-bright dream of
education. We all need to commit ourselves to defusing as many of these
mines as possible and assisting our children in navigating their way
through the ones we can't.
That's exactly what the Human Services Act seeks to do. The programs
in this act, overseen by the Subcommittee on Children which I chair,
share a common orientation, in that they work within the community to
address the needs of individuals living there. They share a common
goal, that of helping people move toward self-sufficiency. They see
families' needs as a whole and seek to address them comprehensively.
While there is certainly no panacea in the legislation before us, the
programs it authorizes lend a helping hand to children and families in
need:
Head Start gives disadvantaged children the early, extra boost they
need to keep up once they start school.
The Family Resource Program responds to families to help them grow
strong and prevent crises.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program keeps the heat on for
millions of families who would otherwise go cold.
The Community Services block grant supports local antipoverty
agencies with deep roots in the communities they serve.
The legislation before us makes changes in each of these programs,
changes intended to make them as effective and efficient as possible.
The reauthorization of Head Start continues the provision enacted in
1990 that sets aside one-fourth of all new appropriations for improving
quality. This money already has helped programs raise staff salaries,
provide needed training, and improve facilities and equipment.
To ensure that programs are offering quality services, the
legislation strengthens performance standards and monitoring procedures
so that programs that cannot correct their deficiencies within 1 year
lose their funding. The bill seeks to build the work force Head Start
needs to guide children into the next century by developing
qualifications and credentials for family service workers and creating
innovative approaches such as mentor teachers and Head Start
fellowships.
The reauthorization of Head Start also contains a set-aside for
expanded services to families with infants and toddlers. It takes the
comprehensive approach associated with Head Start and expands it to
vulnerable children at the earliest possible age.
family resource centers
The bill also contains a provision I authored to consolidate several
existing programs into an expanded community-based family resource
program. This new grant to States would help build networks of
comprehensive family resource centers and services and promote a
systematic approach to prevention.
The approach rests on two guiding principles: locality and
flexibility. It would provide comprehensive services at the local level
where they can do the most good, and it would encourage States to
approach funding family services creatively. This initiative also gives
families a voice in how services are provided in their communities.
low-income home energy assistance
Another component to the Human Services Act is the Low-Income Home
Energy Assistance Program [LIHEAP], a critical segment of the safety
net we try to provide for our most vulnerable citizens. LIHEAP provides
millions of American families, many of them with elderly or disabled
members, with the bit of extra help they need to pay for one of modern
life's essentials: residential energy.
The bill before us would reauthorize LIHEAP at $2 billion for fiscal
1995. This puts Congress on record opposing the budget cuts that have
been proposed for the program. The bill also reinforces LIHEAPS's
primary mission to help disadvantaged individuals afford energy bills
that would otherwise prove to be unaffordable. In addition, the bill
would create a permanent authorization for the LIHEAP emergency fund
and would allow the Secretary to target the money during particularly
harsh winters.
community services block grant
The reauthorization of the Community Services block grant would
strengthen this program by making groups supported by it more
accountable for the dollars they spend. It would also consolidate
existing community economic development and rural housing and
development activities into a new community initiative program.
conclusion
Taken together, these programs represent key segments of the safety
net we try to provide all America citizens. I believe the bill before
us will play a critical role in strengthening those segments, and I
look forward to its passage and signature by the President.
I would like to once again thank Senator Kennedy, the chairman of the
Committee on Labor and Human Resources, for all of his work on this
bill. he continues to be an inspiration to all of us who share his
vision of a caring and just America.
I would also like to thank Senator Kassebaum, the ranking member of
the committee, for all of her work on this legislation this was a truly
bipartisan bill: It was crafted and moved along by Republicans and
Democrats working together in complete tandem. Senator Kassebaum was
especially instrumental in our efforts to consolidate and reform a
number of existing programs into a new family resource grant. Senator
Coats, ranking member of the Subcommittee on Children that I chair, was
as always a full partner and highly valued colleague.
I would also like to commend several members of the other body who
made this legislation possible. Bill Ford, the chairman of the House
Education and Labor Committee, is a passionate advocate of Head Start,
and we could not have moved this legislation without him. We will
sorely miss him when he retires at the end of his term.
Major Owens and Matthew Martinez, chairman of the House Subcommittee
on Human Resources, were absolutely critical to the consensus we
reached on this legislation. I worked closely with them to craft a
strong and effective family resources program authorized by title IV of
this legislation, and I want to thank them and commend them for their
hard work.
Finally, as I have said on numerous occasions before this body, none
of the work we do here would get done without the able work and
tireless dedication of the staff. Although many were involved with this
legislation, I would like to single out just a few here today for the
significant contributions they made: Patty Cole, Joe Palmore, and Sarah
Flanagan of my staff; Marsha Simon, Michael Iskowitz, and Catriona
McDonald of Senator Kennedy's staff; Kimberly Barnes-O'Connor with
Senator Kassebaum; Stephanie Monroe with Senator Coats; Mark Powden and
Matt Bidgood with Senator Jeffords; Lauren Gross of Senator Pell's
staff; and Cheryl Birdsall with Senator Metzenbaum. They should all be
proud of what they have accomplished for the children and families of
America.
Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I am pleased to speak in support of
passage of the conference report to S. 2000. This legislation will
reauthorize programs which are vital to helping low-income families and
their children, including Head Start, the Low-Income Home Energy
Assistance Program [LIHEAP], and the community services block grant
[CSBG].
At the heart of this conference report is the reauthorization of Head
Start. In my mind, the Head Start reauthorization is a strong one. It
will help Head Start programs across the United States improve the
quality of services they provide as we move toward full funding. It
will help them better meet the needs of families they serve in their
communities. And it provides for expansion to serve more children. This
is particularly important, since less than 40 percent of all eligible
children are currently enrolled.
I commend President Clinton for proposing a $700 million increase for
Head Start in his fiscal year 1995 budget request. This increase
signifies confidence that the program is sound, but also recognizes
that there is a strong need for expanded enrollment.
The bill also includes a new program to give an even earlier head
start to children who most need our help. The initiative for families
with infants and toddlers will build on the results and knowledge
gained from programs currently serving families with very young
children, including the Comprehensive Child Development Program [CCDP].
The CCDP's, such as the one I visited in Brattleboro, VT, have proven
enormously effective in providing much-needed services to these
families. I am pleased that existing CCDP's will be eligible to provide
services under the zero to three program.
I am also pleased that this bill contains provisions establishing a
priority for longitudinal studies, as well as an authorization of up to
$3 million in fiscal year 1995 and such sums as may be necessary
through fiscal year 1998 for this purpose. Longitudinal studies on Head
Start will allow us as policymakers to follow Head Start participants
through the years to determine what effects the program has had on
them.
Mr. President, we live in a changing world. It is becoming more
economically competitive than we could have imagined even a decade ago.
If we are to succeed in this new world, our citizens must be adequately
prepared. We must start with our youngest children, giving them the
early, comprehensive, social, health, and education services they need
so they won't fall through the cracks. Head Start does that for the
most vulnerable children. Thanks to this reauthorization, it will
continue to do it, for more children, and better than before.
Mr. President, I won't go into detail about what the conferees agreed
to with regard to the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program
[LIHEAP], but there are a few points I would like to highlight.
First, the House receded to the Senate regarding the program's
authorization levels. The conference report to S. 2000 stipulates that
the authorized funding level for LIHEAP shall be $2 billion annually
for each of the fiscal years 1995 through 1999. I wish we could do
more, but the budget deficit constrains us. Making the $2 billion
explicit, though, is certainly preferable to authorizing ``such sums as
may be necessary.''
We also have made permanent authorization for a $600 million
contingency fund to help pull us through the sort of winter that much
of the Nation just experienced. Clearly, the extreme cold that gripped
much of the country this past winter stretched regular LIHEAP benefits
way beyond the breaking point. Now we have the ability to respond to
genuine weather-related fuel emergencies in a timely fashion. I just
want to add here, as I did when the Senate first considered S. 2000,
that the emergency fund is just that: for emergencies. Emergency funds
are to supplement, not supplant, regular funding.
I think the conference report contains some useful provisions for
helping beneficiaries reduce their energy bills by reducing their
energy consumption. Energy efficiency education is something we should
always promote. But we do need to be careful that such efforts do not
cause reductions in basic benefits.
A final point, Mr. President, concerning the House-passed sense-of-
Congress language regarding funding for fiscal years 1995 and 1996. I
am pleased that the conferees essentially retained the language.
Congress already has appropriated $1.475 billion for fiscal year 1995.
It's going to be very tough to keep that appropriation intact. But we
must try. And we'll have to try mightily to preserve current services
next year. Having Congress on record in support of such efforts will be
helpful.
The conference report also contains good improvements to the
community services block grant. This block grant is a vital part of our
efforts to address poverty in this country. The community action
agencies funded by CSBG provide a critical service in my state and
throughout the United States.
This bill will help them do an even better job by providing training
and technical assistance, and improving governance and public
participation. The bill will also make some improvements to our
economic development efforts funded under CSBG, by creating a new
Community Initiative Program. On this last point, I want to thank Bob
Justis of Vermont for his contribution to our efforts.
Finally, the conference report retains authorization for the
Community Food and Nutrition Program. Despite its success, the Clinton
Administration had proposed to eliminate CFNP when it sent its
recommendations to the Senate. But my colleagues and I on the Senate
Labor Committee, which has jurisdiction over the program, rejected the
administration's proposal and renewed the authorization for the
program. Importantly, we also left intact the provisions for small
States we established in the last authorization of the program. All
told, I think this is great news, because CFNP is a low-cost but
vitally important anti-hunger program, in Vermont and across the
country.
Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I rise in support of the conference version
of the Head Start reauthorization bill.
I have always been a strong supporter of the Head Start Program;
2,300 Montana children benefit from this program, and that does not
even include the children served through the programs on the Indian
reservations.
Concerns have been expressed about maintaining the program's quality
during Head Start's expansion. I am glad that the final bill requires a
setaside for quality improvements to address this issue.
It is also my understanding that the bill includes a section that
would allow Head Start to legally construct facilities. The need for
this has been brought to my attention by the Head Start grantees in
Montana.
Head Start is an important and worthwhile program, and I will be
voting in favor of the conference report.
Mrs. KASSEBAUM. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleagues in
support of the conference report on the Human Services Reauthorization
Act, S. 2000. This legislation is the cumulation of a bipartisan,
House-Senate-administration partnership that started a year ago with
the appointment of the Advisory Committee on Head Start Quality and
Expansion. I know that some people expressed sincere doubts that such a
partnership would work. I believe that the Head Start provisions of S.
2000 are a clear demonstration of the benefits of an inclusive
thoughtful legislative process--and hope that this successful
experience will serve as the catalyst for more bipartisan, bicameral
efforts.
In addition to the Head Start program, this legislation reauthorizes
several important programs including the community services block grant
the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Act, the Ready To Learn Act, the
State Dependent Care Development programs, the Child Development
Associate Scholarship Initiative, and the new Family Resource Program.
The Federal and State coordinating mechanisms created in the Claude
Pepper Young Americans Act also are reauthorized in S. 2000, and I hope
that appropriations are finally allocated so that this important
initiative can begin.
When I introduced the Head Start Quality Improvement Act, with
Representative Goodling and Representative Molinari in March 1993, I
hoped that our efforts to improve and ensure the quality of Head Start
programs would be successful. With the passage today of the Human
Services Reauthorization Act I believe that the Department of Health
and Human Services now has the mandate and the tools it needs to
provide quality early education and care services for low-income
children and their families. This legislation will help Head Start
programs to expand to meet the needs of local communities in a variety
of ways. It is also important to note that as the new initiative to
serve infants and toddlers begins, there are other provisions in the
legislation which strengthen the activities designed to help children
and their parents make the critical transition to elementary school.
Both Head Start and schools must work together to sustain and build on
the successes begun in Head Start.
I would like to thank the staff for their diligence and commitment to
crafting a truly bipartisan bill--Lee Cowen, Hans Meeder, Alan Lopatin,
Lester Sweeting, Terry Zimmer-Deshler, Braden Goetz, Dennis Glaven, and
Leslie Harris from the House Committee on Education and Labor and from
the Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources, Kimberly Barnes-
O'Connor, Stephanie Monroe, Matthew Bidgood, Mark Powden, Michael
Iskowitz, Patricia Cole, Catriona McDonald, and Joe Palmore. This
legislation is better and stronger because of their efforts.
Mr. DURENBERGER. Mr. President, I am pleased to rise in support of
final passage of the conference committee agreement on S. 2000 which
includes reauthorization of the Head Start Program.
There are a number of positive features in this reauthorization, Mr.
President, including continued emphasis on improving quality, greater
performance accountability for Head Start agencies, and increased
authority to use Head Start funds for year-aground programs and
initiatives that serve very young children and their families.
In addition, the conference committee accepted the Senate's position
authorizing the use of Head Start funds for facilities construction in
low-income communities if there are not other facilities available, if
the lack of facilities will inhibit the operation of the program, and
if construction is more cost-effective than purchase of available
facilities.
The final bill also permits Head Start grantees to make capital
expenditures--including amortizing the principal and paying the
interest on loans--for construction of facilities, major renovation of
facilities, and purchase of vehicles used for programs located at Head
Start facilities.
Unfortunately, the conference committee did not adopt the Senate
position that Head Start children should be automatically eligible for
meals under the child care food program.
The conferees were sympathetic to the burdens placed on Head Start
agencies in establishing eligibility for the child care food program,
But, the conferees did not feel they had jurisdiction to expand
eligibility for what is, in effect, an entitlement program under the
jurisdiction of the Agriculture Committees in both Houses of Congress.
The conferees did, however, urge the Secretaries of HHS and
Agriculture to work together to accomplish the goal of joint
eligibility through regulatory changes and urged the appropriate
authorizing committees to address the problem during the
reauthorization of other child nutrition programs.
Mr. President, I am most pleased that the conference
agreement maintains and expands on the goal I have been pushing
throughout this reauthorization that we encourage flexibility to meet
the changing needs of today's Head Start families and that we encourage
a greater degree of collaboration between Head Start, subsidized child
care, and other programs that serve low-income children and their
parents.
For example, the conference committee agreement directs the Secretary
of HHS to encourage the development and testing of innovative, locally
designed options to extend the hours of service of Head Start agencies
to meet local needs. Options identified by the conferees include
collaboration with child care and other child and family service
programs where such collaborations maintain the quality and integrity
of services provided under Head Start's performance standards.
Where administrative rules and regulations are a barrier to
effectively combining funds from different Federal program sources, the
conferees also urged that a timely mechanism for requesting and
granting waivers be put into place.
Head Start's authorizing legislation and administrative rules already
allow national and regional administrators and local agencies
considerable freedom to design local programs to meet local needs. So,
the real test of whether we will see increased collaboration with other
early childhood services will depend on how this reauthorization is
actually administered.
With that challenge in mind, Mr. President, I have today written HHS
Secretary Donna Shalala to encourage her and others in the
administration to fully implement the collaborative spirit of this
reauthorization. I would ask that a copy of my letter to Secretary
Shalala be printed at the conclusion of my remarks.
Mr. President, I want to pay tribute to the principal authors of this
legislation for their diligent efforts to steer its passage through the
Senate and for their openness to the ideas and suggestions for
improvements that I and others have authored.
I also want to pay special tribute to the thousands of Minnesotans
who labor each day in the Head Start classrooms, offices, and homes of
my State--as teachers, aides, drivers, administrators and others. And,
I want to offer a special word of encouragement to the parents and
children who will benefit from this reauthorization. You are our hope
for a future in which all children will have the opportunity to learn
and to grow and to prepare for school and for life.
I yield the floor.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
U.S. Senate, Committee on Labor and Human Resources,
Washington, DC, May 11, 1994.
Hon. Donna E. Shalala,
Secretary, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
Washington, DC.
Dear Secretary Shalala: Today's final passage of the Head
Start reauthorization represents an excellent opportunity to
recommit our support--not only to the Head Start program, but
to the children and families it serves.
I am also hopeful that this reauthorization will contribute
to a greater degree of collaboration between Head Start and
child care and other child or family support services in each
local community.
That hope became more urgent for me during the Easter
recess when I had the opportunity to meet with a group of
Head Start and child care advocates in Minnesota.
One of the themes of that meeting was that collaboration
among child and family service programs is especially
important to the growing number of Head Start parents who are
working or in school as part of federal land state welfare
reform initiatives. And, as additional changes are made in
AFDC and other welfare programs, we are likely to see even
more Head Start parents needing (and qualifying for) child
care services that extend beyond the traditional part-day,
part-week Head Start program.
Fortunately, Head Start and other early childhood programs
are starting to respond to this growing need. In fact, five
different examples of child care/Head Start collaboration or
other locally designed Head Start delivery models were
described to me in some detail during the meeting I recently
held in Minnesota.
All five of these initiatives are program models other than
the traditional full-day, part-day, or home-based models used
by most Head Start agencies. All five meet or exceed Head
Start's performance standards. And, all five are designed to
help meet the changing needs of today's Head Start families.
In each case, however, the directors of these initiatives
expressed serious concerns that they will not be allowed to
continue or replicate these highly innovative programs.
Reasons for that concern range from uncertainty about future
funding availability to bureaucratic resistance.
This uncertainty about the future of these programs is
troubling in light of the most recent round of Head Start
rulemaking--which articulated three different delivery
options but which also included authority on the part of a
senior HHS administrator to approved other locally designed
options.
This centralized appeal and approval process is time
consuming, costly, and burdensome, however, and may
discourage agencies from designing and requesting approval
for locally designed options. This may be especially true in
smaller agencies or agencies in rural areas where
collaboration may be even more difficult because there are
fewer organized child care and other support services
available.
According to several of the Head Start directors I met with
in Minnesota, there also appears to be a presumption in the
current system that more traditional delivery models are
preferred--perhaps because they are easier to monitor and
hold accountable.
In fact, one irony in the current laudable move to better
monitor Head Start quality and agency performance is that
computerized data gathering is much easier if programs are
uniform in how they are organized. The same may be true in
designing and testing new forms of results-oriented
accountability.
In responding to these sometimes competing objectives, it's
important to note that Head Start has always been a grass-
roots, community and family-responsive program. So having
flexibility to tailor programs to meet unique community and
family needs is in keeping with the original purpose and
history of Head Start.
That's why I felt so strongly that this reauthorization
must be used to encourage Head Start administrators to use
expansion funding to offer financial and other incentives to
design unique and innovative local delivery options--as long
as the underlying principles and strengths of Head Start are
maintained and as long as local needs and results-oriented
performance standards are met.
Because of the importance of maximizing the use of all
available resources, any real or perceived barriers to
collaboration with other agencies and programs should also be
removed. That would include barriers to mixing funding
sources and contracting with other agencies who may actually
employ teachers and other staff.
In addition, I strongly believe there should be a
presumption that locally designed delivery options are
acceptable unless its's determined that they do not meet
results--oriented standards through the normal Head Start
oversight process.
And, finally, whatever changes are needed in Head Start
performance standards to promote an innovation-friendly
environment should be made.
I realize that at least some of the encouragement needed to
innovate and collaborate may have to wait until we take up
the child care components of welfare reform later this year.
And, I look forward to working with you on this issue once
the President's welfare reform proposal is brought to the
Congress.
At the same time, I believe implementation of this Head
Start reauthorization represents an excellent opportunity to
allow maximum flexibility in local communities to use
combined funding, waivers, demonstrations and administrative
flexibility to help meet the changing needs of Head Start
families.
To seize that opportunity, I believe Head Start
administrators should do at least the following four things
as they implement this reauthorization:
First, include the changing needs of Head Start families
for child care and the potential for collaboration with child
care and other early childhood and family services to Head
Start's new quality standards.
Second, ensure that new performance measures created for
Head Start agencies be adaptable for non-traditional program
options including collaborations with local child care
programs.
Third, reward collaboration with other community
organizations serving children and families in the allocation
of expansion funds within states.
And, finally, use Head Start's R&D program, to encourage
the development and testing of innovative locally designed
program options including programs that involve collaboration
with child care and other child and family service programs.
During the course of this reauthorization, I became
convinced that statutory changes were not needed to achieve
these objectives. At the same time, I was pleased that
Senators Kennedy and Kassebaum were willing to join me in a
colloquy affirming legislative intend that increased
collaboration with child care and other early childhood and
family programs should be an outgrowth of this
reauthorization.
As you know, I was an original co-sponsor of this Head
Start reauthorization legislation. And, I was pleased to vote
to adopt this legislation at every step in the legislative
process. At the same time, I believe the full potential for
serving today's low income families and children will depend
on how this legislation is implemented and administered.
Now more than ever, Head Start must be responsive to the
changing needs of the families it serves. That means Head
Start must be flexible enough to meet those needs through a
variety of different program models. And, it means Head Start
must encourage collaboration with child care and other
services available to those same families.
With that kind of locally initiated flexibility and
collaboration, Head Start will enter its second 30 years an
even stronger and more effective resource for this children
and families of this nation.
Thank you for your past and future leadership in making
these essential goals a reality.
Sincerely,
Dave Durenberger
U.S. Senator.
Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I would like to ask a question
regarding the LIHEAP provisions in the Human Services Act. I wanted to
clarify that none of the changes made regarding the LIHEAP program,
including the provisions directed at the Secretary of HHS, are intended
to alter households' current ability to seek redress under the statute
directly from the federal courts. Is that correct.
Mr. DODD. The Senator's statement is correct.
Mr. KENNEDY. That is also my understanding.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the question is on
the adoption of the conference report.
The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from Alabama [Mr. Shelby] is
absent because of illness.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 98, nays 1, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 109 Leg.]
YEAS--98
Akaka
Baucus
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boren
Boxer
Bradley
Breaux
Brown
Bryan
Bumpers
Burns
Byrd
Campbell
Chafee
Coats
Cochran
Cohen
Conrad
Coverdell
Craig
D'Amato
Danforth
Daschle
DeConcini
Dodd
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Durenberger
Exon
Faircloth
Feingold
Feinstein
Ford
Glenn
Gorton
Graham
Gramm
Grassley
Gregg
Harkin
Hatch
Hatfield
Heflin
Hollings
Hutchison
Inouye
Jeffords
Johnston
Kassebaum
Kempthorne
Kennedy
Kerrey
Kerry
Kohl
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lott
Lugar
Mack
Mathews
McCain
McConnell
Metzenbaum
Mikulski
Mitchell
Moseley-Braun
Moynihan
Murkowski
Murray
Nickles
Nunn
Packwood
Pell
Pressler
Pryor
Reid
Riegle
Robb
Rockefeller
Roth
Sarbanes
Sasser
Simon
Simpson
Smith
Specter
Stevens
Thurmond
Wallop
Warner
Wellstone
Wofford
NAYS--1
Helms
NOT VOTING--1
Shelby
So the conference report was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no objection, the motion to
reconsider is laid upon the table.
____________________