Head start for the handicapped: Congressional mandate audit.

The 1972 Amendments to the Economic OpportunityAct mandatedthat not less than 10% of the Head Start enrollment nationwide be made available to handi­ capped children. This article reports research evaluating the effect of the mandate during the first year of its implementation.The findings indicate reasonable progress in meeting the needs of the handicapped; however, label­ ing appears to have increased and serious problems remain in accommodating young­ sters with severe disabilities. Recommenda­ tions for the enhancement of Head Start efforts on behalf of the handicapped are including a suggestion for reducing society's inclination to segregate or exclude children with major differences in development. GAIL L. ENSHER is Associate Professor of Special Education, BURTON BLATT isPro­ fessor of Special Education and Dean of the School of Education, and JAMES F. WIN­ SCHEL is Professor of Special Education, Division of Special Education and Rehabili­ tation, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York. The research reported herein was per­ formed under a contract with Policy Research Incorporated, East Lansing, Michigan, pursu­ ant to Contract No. HEW-OS-73-222 from the Office of Child Development, US Department of Health, Education, andWel­ fare. The opinions expressed do not neces­ sarily reflect the position or policy of the Office of Child Development and no official endorsement should be inferred. I an age of national criticism it would be easy to lose sight of significant gains reg­ istered by public education over the past decade. Two of the advances recorded—the trend toward preschool programs and the right to education for all children—have found meaningful convergence in the 1972 Amendments to the Economic Opportunity Act. This mandate required that not less than 10% of the Head Start enrollment opportuni­ ties nationwide be made available to handi­ capped children (Public Law 92-424,1972). Since the inception of Head Start, theOffice of Economic Opportunity (OEO) and the Office of Child Development (OCD) have sought to serve a heterogeneous population of children, principally drawn from the socioeconomic "have nots" of American society. Deliberate efforts have been made to meet the developmental needs of disadvan­ taged children irrespective of intelligence, physical condition, emotional stability, or language development. In the face of such conviction, it is puzzling that Head Start has, to a large degree, neglected the seriously dis­ abled child. The concern of Congress was evident in the following excerpt from a 1972Senate commit­ tee report of S.2007 (LaVor, 1972): The history of Headstart clearly shows that severely handicapped children have been sys­ tematically excluded from programs and, in fact, children with only moderate handicaps havegen­ erally been refused access to such services. These refusals have normally been based on the feeling that the national program is not primarily oriented toward treating handicapping condi­ tions, and expertise is not available at the local level for developing effective programs, (p. 250)