Summary: Sixty-nine federal programs provided or supported education and care for children younger than age five in fiscal year 1999. The Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) ran most of them. Twenty-nine of the 69 programs provided education and care as a program purpose, as in the Child Care Development Fund (CCDF), or as an allowable activity, as in the Native American Employment and Training Program, or facilitated them in some way, as in the National School Lunch Program. Spending on early childhood education and care varied widely: Of the 21 programs that provided data, about half spent 40 percent or more of their budgets on education and care for children younger than age five. The other programs that provided data spent 13 percent or less of their budgets for this purpose. The 29 programs spent at least $9 billion to provide education and care to children younger than age five in fiscal year 1999. Three HHS programs--Head Start, CCDF, and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families--accounted for about $8 billion of the $9 billion. The 29 programs targeted poor children, children with special needs, and members of certain native populations. Some of the smaller programs focused on narrower groups, such as children with disabilities. The programs were generally allowed to provide a broad range of services: health, dental, mental health, social, parental, and nutritional services; speech and hearing assessments; and disability screening. Four programs actually provided most of these services to a high proportion of the participants younger than age five. Mission fragmentation and program overlap, although sometimes necessary to meet federal priorities, can create an environment in which programs do not serve participants efficiently and effectively. To address these issues, policymakers could coordinate, integrate, or consolidate programs. To identify the best method for addressing inefficiencies among fragmented and overlapping programs, policymakers need to know whether programs are fulfilling a unique role, are redundant, or are being administered in the most effective way to meet strategic goals. Information required by the Government Performance and Results Act should answer some of these questions.
