In the winter of 2005-2006, the Office of Head Start (OHS) conducted a review of program needs with respect to serving young dual language learners, ages birth to five years. The purpose of this project was to assess program needs, opportunities, and barriers; gather existing resources and innovative programming; and outline recommendations and suggestions from the field.

Dual language learners are children learning two (or more) languages at the same time, as well as those learning a second language while continuing to develop their first (or home) language. For the purposes of this report, the term dual language learners encompasses other terms frequently used, such as Limited English Proficient (LEP), bilingual, English language learners (ELL), English learners, and children who speak a language other than English (LOTE).

OHS recognizes that dual language learners enter Head Start programs with unique challenges and opportunities. The goal of this review was to determine what Head Start, Early Head Start, Migrant and Seasonal Head Start, and American Indian Alaska Native Head Start programs needed—in terms of knowledge, skills, and resources—to address these challenges and maximize opportunities as they support dual language learners in learning English and in continuing to develop their home language. OHS’ interest in this topic arose from its understanding of the importance of language development for learning in all domains and as a precursor for literacy development. The development of language and early literacy are fundamental building blocks for achieving Head Start’s legislated mandate of promoting school readiness for all children.

While Head Start has a long history of serving culturally and linguistically diverse populations, the numbers have been growing rapidly. According to Head Start Program Information Reports, almost three out of ten Head Start children come from families who speak a primary language other than English, and only 16% of Head Start programs serve exclusively English speaking children. In 1993, a survey of Head Start programs conducted by the ACYF Office for Policy, Research and Evaluation found that over 140 languages were spoken by Head Start children and families nationwide. The number of cultures represented would be higher still.

In addition to the increase in the numbers of culturally and linguistically diverse children and families served by Head Start, the geographic distribution of these families is ever changing. Many communities throughout the United States have experienced rapid influxes of immigrant families. Head Start programs nationwide face significant challenges in obtaining the knowledge and rallying the resources and staff needed to effectively
serve these children and families.

Rationale for Action
The Head Start Act, as amended in 1998, and the accompanying Head Start Program Performance Standards require that programs support children in the acquisition of their home language and English as well as provide the full spectrum of comprehensive Head Start services to families in culturally appropriate and respectful ways. Furthermore, the Improving Head Start for School Readiness Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-134) emphasizes improving outreach and increasing enrollment and quality of services to children and families, particularly in communities that have experienced a large increase in speakers of languages other than English (LOTE). Research also unequivocally shows the importance of intentionally supporting the acquisition of English and the home language in young children. Knowledge of the home language facilitates learning a second language. Children who know two languages often have higher levels of cognitive achievement than monolingual children and almost certainly will have a broader array of social and economic opportunities available to them as they become adults. Through their home language and culture, families share a sense of identity and belonging. Children learn how to relate to and communicate with others. Loss of home language can interfere with these important aspects of a child’s life, disrupting family communication, inhibiting relationship development, leading to the loss of intergenerational wisdom, negatively affecting a child’s self-concept, and potentially interrupting thinking and reasoning skills.

Methodology
To determine how best to address the needs of children, families, program staff, and local communities with respect to supporting language development in children learning two or more languages, OHS conducted this assessment. In addition to reviewing research in the field of dual language acquisition for young children, OHS conducted focus groups, conference calls, and meetings with over 200 individuals within the
Head Start community.

Seventeen focus groups, conference calls, and meetings were held with Head Start parents, program directors, teachers, home visitors, family service workers, Federal staff, Head Start-State Collaboration Offices, and Head Start training and technical assistance providers and other national contractors. Input was gathered from Head Start programs in each of the ACF Regions as well as from the American Indian Alaska Native and Migrant and Seasonal Program Branches.

Findings
The findings from the assessment were extensive and complex. As we read the research and heard from families, practitioners, and experts, it became increasingly clear that supporting language development in young children learning two or more languages requires a comprehensive approach that includes families, communities, and all levels and positions within Head Start. The following major challenges were voiced by participants—

1. Many Head Start programs reported struggling with knowing how best to promote children’s language acquisition, both their home language and English, when children come from diverse language and cultural backgrounds. Because of the inextricable link between culture, language, and learning, supporting children’s language development is essential to attaining Head Start’s mission of ensuring school readiness for all its children.
2. Local programs are required to conduct developmental screenings and ongoing assessments of enrolled children. Yet, there exist few valid and reliable assessment instruments for evaluating progress in language and literacy development, as well as development in other domains of learning for children who are learning two languages. Without accurate assessment information, staff are not able to properly support the child’s development, identify progress, individualize the curriculum fully, or identify behavior or delays requiring further evaluation and possible intervention.
3. Many programs reported struggling with being uncertain about how best to support young English learners as they transition into or out of the Head Start program, as well as onto other child care arrangements or public schools. Transitions are important and often stressful times for children, often requiring extra support and scaffolding from staff and parents.
4. Head Start programs reported having great difficulty finding, attracting, and retaining bilingual staff qualified in early childhood education. Having staff who speak the language and understand the culture of the children and families is essential for communication and learning.
5. Many, if not most, monolingual Head Start managers reported having difficulty assessing the language skills of prospective bilingual staff, which is important to ensure that proper language usage is being modeled for children and clear and respectful communication occurs with parents.
6. Successfully serving children and families from various language and cultural backgrounds cannot be accomplished without a program-wide, comprehensive plan. Yet, many programs did not know how to undertake this process (and some did not understand its importance). As the full report clearly indicates, supporting children in the acquisition of two languages is a complex, multi-faceted task that requires intentional support at all levels of a program.
7. Many Head Start parents stated that they were unable to fully participate in their children’s education or in the Head Start program’s governance and parent involvement activities because they did not speak English well or at all.  Additionally, parents often were concerned about their children continuing to speak the home language at home because of the pervasive, mistaken belief that doing so interferes with English language development. The costs to the child of losing the home language and the benefits of learning two languages overwhelmingly point to the value of (and feasibility of) nurturing the  development of both English and the home language.
8. Many Head Start programs reported being unable to communicate fully and, at times at all, with parents, particularly when multiple languages and cultures were served by a program. This inhibited, at best and prohibited at worst, parents from participating in the education of their children and the governance of Head Start, cornerstones of the Head Start philosophy.
9. Many Head Start programs reported having difficulty helping families from diverse language and cultural backgrounds access the support services they need (medical, dental, mental health, English as a Second Language classes, speech therapists, social services, etc.) due to a lack of culturally responsive services and providers. At times, accessibility was aggravated by community biases. This limited the ability of the program to provide the comprehensive services and support to families that are a hallmark of Head Start.
10. Many American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) communities, as well as other native communities, reported facing the impending loss of their native languages. Supporting children in learning their community-wide languages and cultures, which are inextricably tied to the languages, requires a community-wide approach. In addition to supporting children’s language development as they learn their native languages and English, support must also be offered to the native communities to strengthen native language revitalization and expansion.

Recommendations
Each of the recommendations that follow address the needs cited above.

1. Establish a Head Start priority/initiative dedicated to improving staff knowledge and program performance with respect to promoting dual language learning for children, birth to five, and for providing the full range of comprehensive Head Start services to children and families who speak a primary language other than English. A Head Start initiative may include some or all of the recommendations that follow.
2. Commission, through the establishment of a National Head Start Center for Dual Language and Literacy Development and/or through partnerships, consortiums, or contracts with other organizations, the following activities—
   a. Research, design, and develop resources and strategies to—
       i. Support language development for children who are English learners,
       ii. Promote family involvement, and assist families in identifying, addressing, and advocating for their family needs, and
       iii. Help build community capacity and strengthen program planning as they relate to working with children and families who speak a primary language other than English.
   b. Disseminate information on demographic trends in Head Start eligible populations and programmatic services for its children and families through analyses of Head Start PIR data, U.S. Census data, and other demographic data sources.
   c. Provide translated core Head Start documents and templates of typical program documentation/information in multiple languages as well as funding options and strategies for accessing additional translation and interpretation services.
   d.Develop culturally and linguistically appropriate child development assessments in multiple languages for all domains of learning and development for young English learners.
   e. Develop language and literacy assessments for children learning two (or more) languages in multiple languages.
   f. Develop or identify strategies for assessing staff language skills to assist Head Start managers in knowing how best to evaluate the language competency of prospective staff based on the needs of the staff position and task.
   g. Provide research-based resources and facilitate an online forum, through the Head Start Early Childhood Learning and Knowledge Center (ECLKC), for programs to share information and resources related to dual language learning.
   h. Liaison with Federal staff and TA providers to ensure that the expertise of the Center reaches the field and that TA providers have the knowledge and skills needed to assist programs in implementing appropriate program policies, procedures, strategies, and activities.
   i. Collaborate with the Administration for Native Americans (ANA), Office of English Language Acquisition (OELA), and other Federal agencies to implement strategies for supporting native language acquisition among Alaska Native and American Indian children, as well as other native communities, and actively support native language revitalization and expansion.
   j. Conduct, as needed, additional analysis to further define the extent, type, and distribution of program needs, as well as resource development priorities.
3. Enhance professional development opportunities to strengthen Head Start staff’s knowledge and skills related to serving young English learner children and their families, including support for online training and credentialing programs, such as—
   a. Teaching certifications in dual language acquisition for infants, toddlers, and preschoolers.
   b. Early Childhood Education degree programs (AA, BA) and early childhood credentials (CDA) offered in multiple languages.
   c. Additional coursework for two and four-year institutions on language and literacy development theory and strategies for working with young children who are learning English and their home language.
   d. Language courses designed for early childhood professionals to enhance their ability to communicate with children and families who speak languages other than English.
4. Pursue and carry out appropriate research with ACF partners in the area of home language and English learning for young children, birth to five.
5. Coordinate with other Federal and State agencies to ensure the efficient and effective dissemination of targeted resources and strategies that promote dual language acquisition for young children.

Conclusion
This national assessment of program needs related to supporting dual language development among Head Start children is intended to provide the Office of Head Start with the preliminary information it needs to direct resources in a targeted and efficient manner. Ultimately, effective program support for promoting dual language acquisition in children will result in more children eager to learn in Head Start as well as more children
being prepared to begin school ready and eager to continue learning—an investment well worth making.

The impetus for this analysis came from the Office of Head Start’s (OHS) recognition of the challenges Head Start programs face in ensuring optimal learning experiences and subsequent outcomes—including in language, literacy, and other domains of learning—for young children learning two (or more) languages. (These children are also referred to as dual language learners and English learners throughout this report.)

OHS’ clear mandate—in keeping with research in the area of dual language acquisition for young children—is to support and strengthen the home language of children while also helping children progress in the acquisition of English. Oral language development is a precursor to literacy as well as to most other domains of learning (Dickinson & Tabors 2001; Joint Policy Committee 2001; Paez & Rinaldi 2006). Language (i.e., vocabulary, listening, and speaking) and literacy (i.e., reading and writing) development are fundamental building blocks for achieving Head Start’s legislated mission of promoting school readiness for all children (Head Start Act, as amended 1998; Im et al., forthcoming).

Head Start has a long history of serving culturally and linguistically diverse populations. Over 140 languages are spoken by Head Start children and families (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 2000). The number of cultures represented is higher still. Almost three out of ten children enter Head Start speaking a primary language at home other than English. Those numbers have been growing in recent years (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 2006). In fact, in the Head Start 2004- 2005 program year only 16% of Head Start programs nationwide served exclusively English speaking children (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 2005).

Among Head Start programs that serve children and families from diverse backgrounds, tremendous variation exists across the country—

• From programs that have been serving diverse populations since the beginning of Head Start to those that have experienced rapid demographic shifts in their community and programs within a handful of years;
• From programs that serve only a few children from diverse language and cultural backgrounds to programs that serve a majority; and
• From centers with only two languages spoken (most frequently Spanish and English) to centers with eight, or significantly more, languages spoken.

Head Start programs throughout the nation face significant challenges in obtaining the knowledge and rallying the resources and staff needed to reach out to, recruit, and fully serve these children and families. The complexity for managers and staff is enormous. The opportunities and benefits to children and families are of equal magnitude.

Supporting first and second language learning – an assessment. This project began as an assessment of local program needs with respect to supporting first and second language learning for Head Start children. After reviewing the research and listening to program needs, it quickly became apparent that supporting language  learning for young children whose primary language is not English, or in the case of some native groups, language revitalization, requires a comprehensive approach that reaches out to parents and community partners, as well as to all levels of the Head Start community. It became clear that the vital connection between language, culture, and learning needs to be integrated into all aspects of a Head Start program—from program philosophy to classroom practices to family involvement and community partnerships. This is in keeping with the Head Start philosophy of providing comprehensive services for children, building strong partnerships with families, collaborating with community partners, and continuously strengthening staff knowledge and skills. This connection between language, culture, and learning must also continue to inform the policies and regulations that guide Head Start as a national program.

Dual language learners are children learning two (or more) languages at the same time, as well as those learning a second language while continuing to develop their first (or home) language. For the purposes of this report, the term encompasses other terms frequently used, such as Limited English Proficient (LEP), bilingual, English language learner (ELL), English learner, and children who speak a language other than English (LOTE). Thus, within Head Start, three out of ten children are dual language learners, children who are learning both English and their home language.

This assessment attempts to document how Head Start, Early Head Start, Migrant and Seasonal Head Start, and American Indian Alaska Native Head Start programs (referred to throughout this report as Head Start, except where the information presented is specific to program type) have addressed the needs of young dual language learners and their families and where programs are struggling.

While this report refers generally to all of the languages and cultures represented among Head Start children and families, Spanish is overwhelmingly the dominant “second” language in Head Start, with almost one out of every four children coming from families who speak Spanish as their primary language at home (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 2006). In addition, while perhaps obvious, it should be explicitly noted that Spanish-speaking families come from a wide variety of countries and cultures.

Head Start regulations affirm the value of supporting children in learning two (or more) languages, the importance of reaching out to families from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds, and the link among culture, language, and learning. Both the Head Start Act as amended in 1998 and the related Head Start Program Performance Standards clearly speak to the need to support children in the acquisition of language—including English and the home language. The Head Start Program Performance Standards also require that Head Start services are provided to children and families in culturally appropriate and respectful ways. A few highlights from the Head Start Act, 1998, and the Head Start Program Performance Standards are distributed throughout the text of this report in the left margin. A full listing of relevant requirements from the Head Start Act, 1998, and the Head Start Program Performance Standards can be found in the Appendix of this report.

A note to the reader: This project was undertaken when the Head Start Act, 1998, and the Head Start Program Performance Standards were in effect. Therefore, references in the text are to these documents, which provided mandates and guidance to Head Start programs during the winter of 2005-2006 when the review of program needs was conducted. After the completion of this project, the Improving Head Start for School Readiness Act of 2007 was signed into law on December 12, 2007, and the regulations are being reviewed and revised, if necessary, to reflect the new legislation. As of publication of this report, the Head Start Program Performance Standards are still in effect.

The Office of Head Start, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, has long recognized the importance of providing culturally responsive services to children and families from diverse language and cultural backgrounds. Since the early 1970s, Head Start has engaged in a number of activities to support English learners and their families. To name just a few highlights, the Office of Head Start (formerly the Head Start Bureau)—

• Developed the Multicultural Principles in 1990 and subsequently incorporated them into the Head Start Program Performance Standards in 1996.
• Surveyed Head Start programs to determine languages spoken by families in their programs and collect innovative practices for supporting these children and families (ACYF Office of Research and Evaluation and Head Start Bureau, Celebrating Cultural and Linguistic Diversity in Head Start, April 2000).
• Conducted a “Focus Group to Identify Strategies to Support English Language Learners in Head Start and Early Head Start” in 2002 (which echoed many of the same themes outlined in this report).
• Held the Early Head Start Expert Work Group on Dual Language Acquisition convened in 2005 and again in 2006.
• Published “English Language Learners” Head Start Bulletin (2005) and “Linguistic Diversity and Early Literacy: Serving Culturally Diverse Families in Early Head Start” EHS NRC Technical Assistance Paper No. 5 (2001).
• Funded two cohorts of CRADLE (Culturally Responsive and Aware Dual Language Education) pilot demonstration grant projects. CRADLE assists 44 Early Head Start programs in designing and implementing program-wide philosophies, policies, and practices to support children and families from diverse language and cultural backgrounds.
• Funded two Head Start Innovation and Improvement Projects (2005- 2008) that address the needs of programs in serving English learners, including—
  - University of Cincinnati’s Bilingual Bridge program, which offers
  an online early childhood AA degree taught in Spanish as well as
  an array of support services, and
  - Community Development Institute’s HELLP (Head Start English
  Language Learners Project) which provides a comprehensive training
  program to 44 Head Start programs to assist them in working
  with English learner children and their families.
• Developed infant/toddler learning online modules, translated into Spanish.
• Conducted the National Head Start Hispanic Institute (February 2005 & 2006) and the National Head Start Hispanic and Other Emerging Populations Institute (April 2007) to share research and innovative practices designed to support children and families from diverse language and cultural backgrounds.
• Begun a number of other activities that are in process, including—
  - The Community Assessment Workbook for Serving Hispanic and
  Other Emerging Populations (available on the Early Childhood
  Learning and Knowledge Center (ECLKC)).
  - The translation of the recently released “Professional Development”
  Head Start Bulletin into Spanish as well as the translation of
  other early childhood resources (each of which will be available on
  the ECLKC).

To assist programs in meeting the challenges and taking advantage of the opportunities presented by serving children and families of diverse backgrounds, to enhance outcomes for all Head Start children and families, and to ensure that Head Start Program Performance Standards and other regulations are being fully met, the Office of Head Start undertook this assessment.

The Improving Head Start for School Readiness Act of 2007 notes the importance of increasing outreach and enrollment, and improving service delivery to children and families “in whose homes English is not the language customarily spoken.” The Act of 2007 also notes the importance of improving qualifications and skills of staff who work with these children and families and coordinating Head Start services with other entities to meet the needs of this population. Given the mandates in the new law, this report and its implications and recommendations are more relevant than ever before.

The tasks undertaken in this assessment were to:

• Review the major research in the field of dual language learning for children, age birth to five years;
• Collect demographic information, in broad strokes, for the Head Start population;
• Gather information on existing resources and innovative programming within the Head Start community;
• Assess program needs, opportunities, and barriers; and
• Solicit recommendations from the field.

Of these, the primary emphasis was on assessing program needs, opportunities and barriers and soliciting recommendations for effectively addressing these issues. To gather information from the field, 17 focus groups, conference calls, and meetings were conducted, with over 200 participants in total. Whenever possible, face-to-face focus groups or meetings were held. When that was not feasible or cost-effective, conference calls were scheduled. Focus groups were held in conjunction with other conferences and meetings to minimize expenses.

Focus groups were conducted with:

1. Head Start and Early Head Start parents (Spanish speakers)
2. Head Start and Early Head Start parents (mixed language group, no Spanish speakers)
3. Head Start and Early Head Start program directors
4. Head Start and Early Head Start teachers, home visitors, and family service workers
5. Head Start Technical Assistance (TA) Managers
6. Head Start Child Development TA Specialists
7. Staff from the Migrant and Seasonal Program Branch and locally based TA Specialists
8. Staff from the American Indian Alaska Native Program Branch and TA Specialists
9. Staff from the Office of Head Start and national Head Start contracts (focus group)
10. Staff from the Office of Head Start and national Head Start contracts (brainstorm meeting)

Conference calls were held with:

1. Head Start-State Collaboration Offices
2. Early Learning and Literacy TA Specialists
3. Early Head Start Liaisons and EHS Program Specialists
4. Locally-based TA Specialists

Additional information was gathered at two workshop sessions held during the 2005 Hispanic Institute and one meeting held at the Early Head Start CRADLE conference.

Questions for these groups generally followed the format outlined below:

1. Assessment project introduction
2. What is the need in [Head Start/Early Head Start programs in your ACF Region] for dual language learning support for:
   a. Children?
   b. Families?
   c. Program staff?
   d.Local communities?
3. Who [in your Region] is doing innovative work in these areas?
4. What types of support are needed (i.e., training, technical assistance, resources) in what specific areas (i.e., teaching strategies, assessment, working with parents, professional development, program planning, etc.)?
5. What should the Office of Head Start's role be in supporting these efforts?

The focus groups, conference calls, and meetings conducted in this preliminary assessment of needs allowed for rich, in-depth dialogue. Although we heard many barriers and recommendations repeated, we are not able to state the percentage of programs facing a particular challenge or recommending the value of a specific resource. A further study to survey programs with respect to these issues would be needed. Nonetheless, given the frequency, the logic, and the urgency of the comments we received, we are confident in the validity of the qualitative information collected through this process.

One of the first questions addressed by this report is what do national and Head Start demographic data tell us about the need, distribution of need, and emerging populations trends. The underlying question being: How might variations in demographics affect program needs and program planning?

The annual Head Start Program Information Report (PIR) presents aggregate data on all grantees, including information about enrollment and families’ primary language. For Program Year (PY) 2006-2007, the PIR indicated that out of the 1,061,275 enrolled children, approximately 30.06 percent, or 322,126 children, spoke a primary language other than English at home (up from 29.2 percent in PY 2005-2006). Of these families, approximately 84.62 percent (up slightly from 84 percent in PY 2005-2006) were Spanish-speaking and the remaining families were identified as speaking, in order of frequency: East Asian languages, Middle Eastern/South Asian languages, European/Slavic languages, African languages, Native Central/ South American and Native Mexican languages, Caribbean languages, Pacific Island languages, and Native North American/Alaska Native languages. An additional 733 children were identified as speaking other languages. The primary language of 6,875 children was unspecified. (Note that the PIR indicates families’ primary language by language group rather than specific language.) Of the 11 non-English language groups tracked by the PIR for PY 2006-2007, 16 states served all language groups and another 25 states served at least eight language groups. A significant number of programs served families speaking eight or more languages.

Earlier PIR data from PY 2004-2005 also indicated that 84% of Head Start grantees served children and families from more than one language group. In five states, all the grantees in PY 2004-2005 worked with children whose families spoke a primary language at home other than English (DE, HI, NJ, RI, UT). In 36 states, three-quarters of the grantees served children from families whose primary language was not English. In nine states, one-quarter of the programs served a majority of children from families with a primary language other than English (AZ, CA, CO, CT, DE, IL, MA, NJ, NY).

In addition to the PIR, other sources of data support the picture of linguistic and cultural diversity in the Head Start population. In 2000, the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services reported that Head Start children and families spoke a total of 140 different languages (U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Services 2000). Based upon trends in national Census data, it can be assumed that Head Start families have a wide range of English language proficiency, from fluently bilingual to “linguistically isolated.”

General immigration data provide an indication of the demographic trends affecting Head Start programs. In the last 35 years, the immigrant population in the United States has tripled to 35 million people in 2005 (Dinan 2006). More than half the immigrants are Latino, and one-quarter are Asian (Dinan 2006). Geographically, “gateway states” including California, Florida, Illinois, New Jersey, New York, and Texas account for 70% of the immigrant population. However in recent years, states such as North Carolina, Georgia, Nevada, Arkansas, Utah, Tennessee, Nebraska, Colorado, Arizona, and Kentucky have seen rapid immigration growth (Capps, Fix, & Passel 2002). Many small communities throughout the country have seen immigrant population grow by as much as 600% in the last decade (Dinan 2006). Immigrants in these new communities tend to be younger, poorer, less educated, and more likely to be undocumented (Dinan 2006). Half of children under age six of immigrant parents live below the poverty level (Dinan 2006), in income eligibility ceiling for Head Start. Three-quarters of children in low-income immigrant households have parents who are married and at least one parent who works 1,000 hours annually. Yet, in part due to fear of interacting with government officials, many immigrant families do not access services such as health care and Head Start (Dinan 2006).

Demographic data also tell us that the geographic distribution of America’s culturally and linguistically diverse families is changing—in some cases rapidly. A number of states, including New York, New Jersey, Florida, and the Southwest border states (Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, California) have a long history of working with immigrant families. Yet more recently, and often within a matter of a few years, many communities throughout the United States are experiencing significant influxes of immigrant families—at times because a new industry has attracted a particular immigrant group, at other times because of refugee resettlements or changes in migration patterns. Programmatic needs vary significantly depending on the mix of the families they serve, but also on how quickly their service population has changed. This has implications for outreach, staffing, organizational culture, family involvement, community partnerships, educational resources and materials, and a host of other issues, many of which are delineated in the findings section of this report.

The needs of Head Start programs with respect to providing comprehensive services to children and families whose home language is other than English are significant and complex. They range from the need for staff knowledge and skills related to language acquisition theory and strategies for children learning more than one language, to hiring and retaining qualified bilingual/bicultural staff, to effectively working with families from multiple language backgrounds and cultures.

The findings are categorized according to the four major areas reviewed:

I. Ensuring positive outcomes for children
II. Strengthening program planning and professional development
III. Enhancing family involvement
IV. Building community resources

Within each of the four areas, major challenges encountered by Head Start are noted in italics. Following each of these statements of need is more specific information on the challenges faced, resources needed, and, in places, strategies used by local programs to address the need.

II.A. Attracting & Retaining Skilled Bilingual Early Childhood Staff
When asked about program organizational needs—staffing needs, training needs, etc.—a consistent cry was heard: Head Start programs have great difficulty finding, attracting, and retaining bilingual staff who are qualified in early childhood education. In most communities, Head Start salaries are not competitive with the school districts and hospitals, for example, that compete for the same skilled staff. Furthermore, as the requirements for staff qualifications have increased, with the passage of the Improving Head Start for School Readiness Act of 2007, it is becoming more difficult for programs to find and recruit bilingual staff who are also qualified in early childhood education.

The child development field, in general, suffers from high turnover. Coupled with the high demand for skilled bilingual staff, Head Start programs are regularly challenged in recruiting and retaining qualified bilingual staff. Head Start programs report that they invest heavily in staff training and increasing the qualifications and credentials of their staff. Yet they lose this investment as staff are lured away by organizations capable of paying higher salaries. Skilled, bilingual staff are particularly difficult to retain. To ensure that they had staff who spoke the language of the majority of the children as required by the Head Start Program Performance Standards, but unable to find qualified bilingual staff, some programs reported that they have hired monolingual Spanish staff. At times, organizational tensions arose because the monolingual [English] program managers could not communicate adequately with the monolingual [Spanish] classroom staff, family service workers, and bus drivers. In these cases, the programs reported that the resulting language and cultural barriers created communication breakdowns that affected the quality of services provided to children and families.

It is essential that Head Start programs have access to the professional development  resources they need in order to enhance staff skills and retain qualified bilingual staff. This helps programs promote continuity of care for children while ensuring that staff are able to speak with children in the language with which they are most familiar and that those same staff members have a solid grounding in early childhood development. Bilingual/bicultural skills are not only needed in teaching staff, but are also necessary for family services workers, home visiting staff, bus monitors and other staff positions that regularly communicate with families. In fact, language and diversity should be reflected throughout the program and the larger Head Start community.

Focus group participants stated that programs need—

• Incentive strategies to attract and retain qualified bilingual and bicultural staff in all positions, not just direct teaching staff. Programs noted that financial incentives are only one of many strategies, and that effective strategies may vary according to the values and traditions of various cultures and communities. A culturally responsive repertoire of options would be a useful resource for programs.
• Reasonable wage compensation scales for financial incentives for qualified bilingual staff (i.e. bonuses and/or pay differentials for being bilingual).
• A menu of staffing and language assistance strategies that can be employed when multiple languages are spoken in a program. Some examples given include—
  - Programs pair bilingual staff who lack content expertise with those who have it, an expensive yet effective strategy.
  - Programs hire monolingual staff and support them as they take English as a Second Language classes. (However, it takes five to seven years to become proficient, consequently it is important to also have early childhood education classes in their first language so that they can pursue both simultaneously.)
  - Programs hire a staff member whose specific purpose is to coordinate all translations and interpretations needs of the program (some reported reducing administrative staff in order to fund these positions).
  - Programs reach out to community groups for either paid or volunteer language assistance.
  - A program in a rural area in the West reported using a provisional professional visa program to recruit Spanish-speaking staff from South America.
  

Additionally, focus group participants reported needing access to an array of professional development options that enable staff to obtain the credentials they need to work within a multicultural child development program.
Programs need—

• Early childhood education degrees and credentials (CDA, AA, and BA) taught in other languages. This may be particularly helpful in cultivating and nurturing Head Start parents as prospective employees—an option that has become more difficult for Head Start programs to do with the higher requirements for staff qualifications mandated by the Head Start Act. The “loss” of this potential pool of Head Start staff limits programs’ ability to hire people with the most direct understanding of not only the language but also the culture and lifeways of the children and families in their programs. Several programs also mentioned the loss (or demotion) of excellent Spanish-speaking teachers who did not have the necessary credentials. Several projects are underway to assist in meeting this need, including—
  - The University of Cincinnati has developed the Bilingual Bridge Early Childhood Education online AA degree, which is marketed nationwide (a Head Start Innovation and Improvement Project grant).
  - The Council for Professional Recognition provides the Child Development Associate (CDA) credential in both English and Spanish. Additionally, they will work with students and/or programs so that the CDA can be taken in other languages. In these cases, the student or program arranges and pays for the required translationand interpretation services.
  - Head Start Higher Education Grantees, and in particular the Hispanic Serving Institutions, provide college degrees in early childhood education.
  - One program serving a large number of diverse immigrant populations set up a network of Family Child Care (FCC) providers for infants and toddlers and their families from diverse language and cultural backgrounds. They trained the FCC providers who spoke the home language of the families in the early childhood content and FCC requirements and then matched families with providers who spoke their language and understood their culture.
  

Programs also could benefit from—

• Assistance with transcript analysis for course credits taken from multiple sources and affordable articulation processes for degrees from entities outside the United States.
• OHS allowing college-level degrees obtained from other countries to count toward the AA, BA mandate.

Even staff with bilingual skills and early childhood education credentials are often not trained in strategies for supporting dual language development in young children. Thus, staff training is needed in dual language acquisition theory and strategies as noted above. A credentialing option was suggested as a way of verifying knowledge in this area.

At times, neither staff nor regular volunteers with the needed language skills are available in the community. In these cases, program staff could benefit from basic language training targeted to early childhood professionals for simple communication with children (i.e., greetings and goodbyes; standard language needed for child routines such as going outside, circle time, bathroom time, eating, naptime, etc.). This level of speech would obviously not be appropriate for communicating with parents.

Some examples include—

• Programs reported partnering with community colleges to provide basic instruction in the languages of their families.
• Programs hire parents as language aides.
  

II.B. Assessing Staff Language Proficiency
Many, if not most, monolingual Head Start managers have difficulty assessing the language skills of prospective bilingual staff. Language proficiency of bilingual teaching and home visiting staff is