Make It Make Sense: The $217 Million Brag, the Missing Cost-of-Living Increase, and the “Why Aren’t We Fully Staffed?” Mystery

 At the last All Hands meeting, leadership did what many of us have learned to expect: they showed up with big numbers—and big confidence—without the follow-through that teachers and staff actually live with every day.

They bragged that Head Start was awarded a $217 million contract. Then, in the very same breath, they told us there’s no money left in the budget to provide a cost of living increase. This now makes four years in a row with no increase.

So I need help making it make sense—because how does this add up for the people doing the work?

“Congratulations, We Got Millions!” …“But There’s Nothing for You”

If an organization receives millions of dollars, the natural assumption—at least from the outside looking in—is that at least some portion of that funding should support the workforce that makes the program run.

And for teachers and staff, a cost-of-living increase isn’t a luxury. It’s not “extra credit.” It’s the bare minimum needed to keep up with the reality of groceries, gas, housing, and everything else that has gone up while wages haven’t.

Instead, leadership framed it as: we got the money, but we can’t afford to acknowledge inflation.

That message doesn’t motivate retention. It does the opposite.

Four Years. No Raise. Still Expect Excellence.

The meeting continued into a second major topic: the hiring shortage across the board.

We’ve all seen it. The vacancies. The stretched schedules. The constantly shifting coverage plans. The way new hires either don’t come, don’t stay, or come and burn out quickly.

But here’s the part that makes it hard to believe leadership is connected to the daily experience: How did they expect employees to refrain from leaving and remain in roles when there was no increase for four years?

People don’t stay in jobs because they’re inspired by meeting slides. They stay because the work is supported—financially, professionally, and practically.

If leadership wants us to solve staffing shortages with good attitudes while withholding compensation, the strategy is essentially: “Please stay and do more with less.”

The Inspection on Day Three: “Your Staffing Isn’t Enough”

And then—today, on the third day of school—I got hit with a Head Start inspection.

Along with everything else on a new school year calendar (new routines, new students, new expectations), I was dealing with the added pressure of an inspection process that—predictably—also raises concerns about staffing levels and staffing needs.

They were complaining about the amount of teachers I had.

So now we’re in the final loop of this story:

1. Leadership says they can’t provide raises because there’s no money left.
2. Leadership says there’s a hiring shortage across the board.
3. Leadership still holds sites accountable through inspections.
4. Sites are expected to meet requirements even when staffing reality doesn’t match the plan.

So tell me—how is a program supposed to function when the workforce is under pressure and understaffed, but the standards are still enforced like everything is fully covered?

Bragging Without Paying the Cost

There’s a disconnect that’s difficult to ignore. Leadership can talk about a $217 million contract, but then explain there’s no budget for cost-of-living increases. They can discuss staffing shortages, but staff are still held responsible for teacher counts.

That creates a message to employees that sounds like:

• “We want the outcome.”
• “We know the problem exists.”
• “We acknowledge you’re stretched thin.”
• “But we won’t change the compensation that would help stabilize staffing.”
• “And we’ll still evaluate you based on requirements.”

That’s not a path to retention. It’s a path to ongoing turnover and burnout.

What’s Really Missing?

The hard truth is that this isn’t only about one raise or one contract number. It’s about alignment.

• If millions come in, where do they go?
• If there’s a hiring shortage, what are we doing to compete with the market?
• If we’re unable to provide raises, what other supports are replacing that stability?
• If inspections are coming, how are staffing gaps being addressed in advance—before Day Three?

Because right now, it feels like the program is asking teachers and staff to absorb the mismatch between funding headlines and on-the-ground reality.

Make It Make Sense—For the People Doing the Work

I’m not asking for a miracle. I’m asking for clarity and consistency.

If leadership can say “we received $217 million,” then leadership should be able to explain how that funding translates into the resources that keep classrooms staffed, retain experienced employees, and sustain morale.

And if leadership can’t provide cost-of-living increases—despite acknowledging inflation and hiring shortages—then leadership also needs to stop acting surprised when people can’t afford to stay.

Because day after day, the consequences land directly on teachers: in inspections, in coverage gaps, in classroom stress, and in the exhausting work of trying to do the job with fewer hands.

So yes—right now, I’m left asking the same question that’s been echoing since that All Hands meeting:

How can they brag about millions of dollars and still claim there’s no money for an increase—then complain about staffing once school starts?