Head Start, an early-childhood network that pairs classroom learning with health and family support systems for infants through preschoolers at 1,600 local agencies, now faces new language curbs on its grant requests. Court filings show federal officials sent applicants a six-page list of roughly 200 terms to remove, a directive that providers say conflicts with their duties to deliver culturally and linguistically appropriate services and support.
The list, attached to a declaration from a program director, targets words such as “disability,” “women,” “Black,” “tribal” and “accessible” from narratives warning that their inclusion could jeopardize funding.
Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.
Point phone camera here
The same filing shows a six-page list titled “Words to limit or avoid in government documents.”
The new language rules extend to how programs describe the services that federal law requires them to provide. The Head Start Act requires “culturally and linguistically” appropriate services and early intervention for children with disabilities.
Providers argue that the word bans conflict with those mandates, creating an “impossible” bind between complying with the statute and following the new review instructions, according to a filing from a Wisconsin Head Start director.
What changed for Head Start applications?
According to legal filings, a Wisconsin program director alleges that the Department of Health and Human Services rejected her initial application, first citing a small number of prohibited terms. She claims a program specialist later sent a comprehensive list of nearly 200 banned words to ensure compliance.
The move follows a January directive from the White House targeting “illegal DEI and DEIA policies.” The Office of Head Start said in a March email that it would no longer approve funding for DEI initiatives.
NPR reported the list surfaced in litigation brought by Head Start associations in several states. HHS declined comment, citing the ongoing case.
Head Start plaintiffs say the term bans unlawfully conflict with statutory duties and are asking a judge to enjoin HHS from conditioning funds on language restrictions.
Are other grants being screened?
The transportation sector shows the same pattern. Agency memos from the Department of Transportation touted removing “DEI,” “Green New Scam,” climate and related language from thousands of grants. Congress then rescinded unobligated Neighborhood Access and Equity (NAE) funds in President Donald Trump’s “One Big, Beautiful Bill Act,” canceling awards such as Jacksonville’s $147 million Emerald Trail.
In a separate EV-charging case involving the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program, a judge ruled that the administration could not cancel congressionally appropriated grants, making clear the constitutional limits on the executive’s power to delay or rewrite existing awards.
Critics, including Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, argued USDOT’s review effectively amounted to a “control-F” search for flagged words, sweeping in locally supported projects.
What’s next
The Head Start lawsuit seeks preliminary relief to stop the word restrictions. At USDOT, most grants have moved through the new review. At the same time, projects tied to rescinded funds would need to submit new applications or find alternate sources.
