By the time they enter kindergarten, many low-income children are already behind their peers from more advantaged backgrounds. During early childhood, low-income children face a number of risk factors that threaten healthy development and learning, including low birth weight, stunted growth, obesity, and lead poisoning--all of which are associated with physical disabilities, reduced IQ, and grade repetition. Well-designed and well-implemented early care and education programs can improve outcomes for all children, particularly those in low-income families. High-quality programs should also address other risks to child development by helping parents access comprehensive services for themselves and their children--such as medical, dental, mental health, and family support services--that are necessary for healthy development. While states and local communities recognize the importance of these investments, limited funding has constrained policymakers' ability to create and expand programs that meet young children's needs from birth through school entry. Unlike other funding sources, Title I of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) has seen some increases in funding levels since 2002. As a result, a number of policymakers interested in investing in high-quality early care and education programs have turned to Title I as a funding source. The child care and early education team at CLASP has spent the last two years examining the relationship between Title I and the provision of high-quality early education programs in local communities. It has collected information on more than 100 programs and has conducted interviews with nearly half of these to understand the barriers and flexibility in the law. Its work has led to the following recommendations for the reauthorization of NCLB: (1) Improve data collection; (2) Enhance language on transitions between community-based early childhood programs and local schools; (3) Sustain and support local flexibility in use of funds for discretionary purposes, such as early childhood programs; (4) Ensure that joint professional development opportunities are available to build knowledge of child development and appropriate practices with English language learners (ELLs); (5) Encourage state educational agencies to promote early childhood programs at the local level; and (6) Increase funding. (Contains 23 endnotes.)