In a new discussion paper released by the Hamilton Project at The Brookings Institution, Jens Ludwig and Isabel Sawhill argue for making more explicit links between Early Head Start, Head Start and Title I.  Ludwig and Sawhill call for expanding the two early childhood programs to accommodate more eligible children, but also changing them to become more like the highly-successful Abecedarian Program or "Head Start on steroids."  The authors also make a case for requiring high-poverty elementary schools to use their Title I funds for Success for All, a research-based reading program. Linking these early childhood programs and Success for All would address the "fade out" of the benefits of early childhood programs when children subsequently enter elementary schools without high-quality reading programs.

To work, the proposed "Success by Ten" program requires that high-poverty elementary schools partner with a Head Start program to form the necessary linkages, something that, in my understanding, doesn't happen often enough.  The catch?  Success for Ten would require about $40 billion in additional federal funds per year, not exactly chump change.  And, while I would certainly rather see high-poverty schools spend their Title I funds on a research-based reading program like Success for All than, say, an unproven supplemental educational services program, I would hesitate to require that all schools spend all of their Title I funds on such  programs.  What if the problem in your school is lagging math performance? Being too prescriptive in how schools spend their Title I funds has its disadvantages.  That said, IMHO, Success by Ten is a serious and interesting proposal that deserves serious consideration by policymakers.

* It's unclear to me why the authors talk only about Title I Part A funds and not Reading First funds (Title I Part B).