Ready, Willing,
And Unable
To Serve
75 Percent of Young Adults Cannot Join
the Military
Early Education across
America is Needed to
Ensure National Security

A Report by

A Message from America’s Retired Generals, Admirals and Civilian Military Leaders:
Americans have always answered the call to military service. Hundreds of thousands of young men and
women throughout America have put their lives on the line in both Afghanistan and Iraq, and served with
honor on humanitarian and other missions around the world.
Unfortunately, many young Americans who want to join cannot. Startling statistics released by the Pentagon
show that 75 percent of young people ages 17 to 24 are currently unable to enlist in the United States
military. Three of the most common barriers for potential recruits are failure to graduate high school, a
criminal record, and physical fitness issues, including obesity.
The United States military requires rigorous eligibility standards because it needs competent, healthy and
educated individuals to staff the world’s most professional and technologically-advanced military. The
best aircraft, ships and satellite-guided weaponry alone will not be enough to keep our country strong. To
ensure a strong, capable fighting force for the future, America’s youth must succeed academically, graduate
from high school, be fit, and obey the law. That is why retired senior military leaders are joining together to
launch Mission: Readiness.
The most proven investment for kids who need help graduating from high school starts early: high-quality
early education. It also helps kids stay away from crime and succeed in life.
Our recommendation to state and federal policymakers is to ensure that America’s children have access to
high-quality early education. That is the best way to make certain that more young Americans will meet the
tough standards of the United States military should they choose to serve. A strong commitment today to
high-quality early education will keep America strong and safe tomorrow.
Very Respectfully,
General John M. Shalikashvili, US Army (Ret.)
General Henry “Hugh” Shelton, US Army (Ret.)
General Wesley Clark, US Army (Ret.)
General Richard E. Hawley, US Air Force (Ret.)
General Johnnie E. Wilson, US Army (Ret.)
Admiral Leon A. “Bud” Edney, US Navy (Ret.)
Admiral Edmund P. Giambastiani, Jr., US Navy (Ret.)
Admiral Thomas B. Hayward, US Navy (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Joe N. Ballard, US Army (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Dennis L. Benchoff, US Army (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Robert G. Gard, Jr., US Army (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Jerome B. Hilmes, US Army (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Donald L. Kerrick, US Army (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Ricardo S. Sanchez, US Army (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Ronald L. Watts, US Army (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Joseph H. Wehrle, US Air Force (Ret.)
Lieutenant General Robert J. Winglass, US Marine Corps (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Donald Arthur, US Navy (Ret.)
Vice Admiral Edward H. Martin, US Navy (Ret.)
Vice Admiral James A. Zimble, US Navy (Ret.)
Major General Earl L. Adams, US Army (Ret.)
Major General Buford “Buff” Blount, US Army (Ret.)
Major General Roger R. Blunt, US Army (Ret.)

Major General William F. Burns, US Army (Ret.)
Major General George A. Buskirk, Jr., US Army (Ret.)
Major General Jack J. Catton, Jr., US Airforce (Ret.)
Major General Carroll D. Childers, US Army (Ret.)
Major General George F. Close, Jr., US Army (Ret.)
Major General James W. Comstock, US Army (Ret.)
Major General Wesley E. Craig, US Army (Ret.)
Major General John T. Crowe, US Army (Ret.)
Major General Nelson E. Durgin, US Air Force (Ret.)
Major General Paul D. Eaton, US Army (Ret.)
Major General Frank R. Faykes, US Air Force (Ret.)
Major General John T. Furlow, US Army (Ret.)
Major General Peter J. Gravett, US Army (Ret.)
Major General George H. Harmeyer, US Army (Ret.)
Major General Donald R. Infante, US Army (Ret.)
Major General James A. Kelley, US Army (Ret.)
Major General Paul E. Mock, US Army (Ret.)
Major General Paul D. Monroe, Jr., US Army (Ret.)
Major General George W. “Nordie” Norwood, US Air Force
(Ret.)
Major General Daniel J. O’Neill, US Army (Ret.)
Major General Stephen E. Nichols, US Army (Ret.)
Major General Joseph F. Perugino, US Army (Ret.)

Early Education Investments in America

Major General Walter F. Pudlowski, Jr., US Army (Ret.)	
Major General Carroll Thackston, US Army (Ret.)
Rear Admiral James A. Barnett, US Navy (Ret.)
Rear Admiral James J. Carey, US Navy (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Edward K. Kristensen, US Navy (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Roland G. Guibault, US Navy (Ret.)
Rear Admiral John F. Hekman, US Navy (Ret.)
Rear Admiral James E. McPherson, US Navy (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Stuart F. Platt, US Navy (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Alan M. Steinman, US Coast Guard (Ret.)
Rear Admiral David M. Stone, US Navy (Ret.)
Rear Admiral Robert Sutton, US Navy (Ret.)
Brigadier General Clara L. Adams-Ender, US Army (Ret.)
Brigadier General Sherian G. Cadoria, US Army (Ret.)
Brigadier General Robert G. Carmichael, Jr., US Army (Ret.)
Brigadier General George N. Clark, Jr., US Air Force (Ret.)
Brigadier General James P. Combs, US Army (Ret.)
Brigadier General Julia J. Cleckley, US Army (Ret.)
Brigadier General John W. Douglass, US Air Force (Ret.)
Brigadier General Michael A. Dunn, US Army (Ret.)
Brigadier General Charles K. Ebner, US Army (Ret.)
Brigadier General Evelyn “Pat” Foote, US Army (Ret.)
Brigadier General Robert E. Gaylord, US Army (Ret.)

Brigadier General Larry E. Gilman, US Army (Ret.)
Brigadier General Keith H. Kerr, US Army (Ret.)
Brigadier General Donald H. Marden, US Army (Ret.)
Brigadier General David L. McGinnis, US Army (Ret.)
Brigadier General David A. Sprenkle, US Air Force (Ret.)
Brigadier General Preston Taylor, US Air Force (Ret.)
Brigadier General Terry J. Tyler, US Army (Ret.)
Brigadier General Ted Vander Els, US Army (Ret.)
Brigadier General Augustine A. Verrengia, US Air Force (Ret.)
Brigadier General William L. Waller, Jr., US Army (Ret.)
Brigadier General John M. Watkins, US Army (Ret.)
Brigadier General Jack Yeager, US Army (Ret.)
Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force Frederick J. Finch (Ret.)
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy James L. Herdt (Ret.)
Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps John L. Estrada (Ret.)
Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps Alford L. McMichael (Ret.)
Sergeant Major of the Army Reserve Michele S. Jones (Ret.)
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast Guard Vincent W. Patton, III (Ret.)
Sergeant Major of the Army Jack L. Tilley (Ret.)
Former Secretary of the Navy John H. Dalton
Former Under Secretary of the Army Joe R. Reeder

1

Ready, Willing, and Unable to Serve

Ready, Willing and Unable to Serve
75 percent of America’s young adults cannot join the military
Early education is needed to ensure national security
The Pentagon reports that 75 percent of Americans aged 17 to 24 cannot join the United States military – 26 million young
Americans. The reasons behind this are serious and, if left unaddressed, will adversely affect the future strength of our military.
In the interest of national security, we must understand and deal with these problems now. We cannot rely on a continuation of
what may be the worst recession since the Great Depression to ensure that America has enough qualified men and women to
defend our country.

Three Crucial Reasons Why Young Americans Cannot
Join the Military:
Although there may be multiple reasons why an individual is
ineligible to serve in the military, the three biggest problems
are that too many young Americans are poorly educated,
involved in crime, or physically unfit.
Inadequate education: Approximately one out of four young
Americans lacks a high school diploma.1 Students who have
received a general equivalency degree (GED) can sometimes
receive a waiver if they score well enough on the military’s
entrance exam. However, most of those who dropped out and
obtained a GED instead of a regular degree do not possess
sufficient math or reading skills to qualify.
Not only are too many young people failing to graduate,
many of those who do graduate still lack the academic skills
necessary to take their place alongside others in the workforce
or in the military.
The “Nation’s Report Card,” the National Assessment of
Educational Progress (NAEP), reports that in 2007, 69 percent
of the nation’s eighth graders scored below proficiency level
in math, and 70 percent scored below proficiency level in
reading.2
Even with a high school degree, many potential recruits still fail
the Armed Forces Qualification Test (the AFQT) and cannot
join. The test is used by the military to determine math and
reading skills. About 30 percent of potential recruits with a
high school degree take the test and fail it.3
Criminality: One in 10 young adults cannot join because
they have at least one prior conviction for a felony or serious
misdemeanor (and for five percent of young adults, trouble
with the law is the only thing keeping them out).4

B0D#IF-<?-J0.#K-821#L0F#
M2.#B-F6218#@5J21#
C2D#E0FG#@58H#
B01#7.62421#
@:5A-60#
>0?180.#
9:54-<24=:5-#
9:02.5;#
,-.#7.80.50#
,-.#35260#
3-44-1#
,-.#/012#

('"#
$+"#
('"#
$)"#
)*"#
($"#
$!"#
&'"#
$%"#
!!"#
'"#

('"#

%''"#

!""#$"%&'()*+),-.&/)012&
3*40-(4)5&6(-71802&4.&3*+8),-.&/121)(89&:1.01(;&!""<&

To illustrate how serious the crime problem is in America,
there were more than 14 million arrests for crimes in the
United States in 2007 and nearly 600,000 arrests for violent
crimes.5 According to the Pew Center on the States, “One
in 30 men between the ages of 20 and 34 is behind bars.”6
Juvenile crime is also a serious problem, with over 2.2 million
juvenile arrests in America in 2006.7
Physically unfit: 27 percent of young Americans are too
overweight to join the military.8 Many are turned away by
recruiters and others never try to join. Of those who attempt
to join, however, roughly 15,000 young potential recruits
fail their entrance physicals every year because they are too
heavy.9
“One in 30 men between the ages
of 20 and 34 is behind bars.”
– Pew Center on the States
The percentage of Americans who are not just overweight but
actually obese has risen rapidly. The rate of obesity among
American adults has more than doubled over the past four
decades, with one in three adults being obese.10 So, the

Early Education Investments in America

number of enlistment-age young adults who cannot join the
military because of weight problems – currently 27 percent
nationally – is likely to continue to rise in the next few years.
Nearly a third (32 percent) of all young people have health
problems – other than their weight – that will keep them
from serving. Many are disqualified from serving for asthma,
eyesight or hearing problems, mental health issues, or recent
treatment for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.

2

In summary: when all the requirements are
considered, only about two out of 10 young people
are fully eligible to join the Army without any waivers,
according to the Army’s Accessions Command.14
The number of others who are eligible with waivers
depends on the service branch and where they
draw the lines on waivers for educational deficits,
legal offenses or health problems. In his March 2009
testimony, Curtis Gilroy, the Pentagon’s accessions
policy director, testified that currently 75 percent of
young Americans have problems that will keep them
from joining the military.15

When weight problems are added in with the other health
problems, over half of young adults cannot join because of
health issues.11 Additional young people
are not eligible to join because of drug
“Our men and women in uniform
or alcohol problems.
are the best in the world. But the
Even when recruits qualify, health
sophistication of our military is
problems can cause significant
increasing every year so we will soon
deployment and expense problems
need even better-qualified recruits.
later; for example, 20 percent of the
Unfortunately, the number of young
Army’s reservists arrived at mobilization
Americans who have high-school
sites with dental conditions that made
12
degrees, are in good physical shape,
them non-deployable.
and are without criminal records is
Additional reasons beyond education,
declining. To keep our country strong
crime, and physical fitness: Other
and safe, we need to ensure all young
young people are not eligible to join
Americans get the right start in life –
because they are too tall, too short,
we need more investments in highor have other non-medical reasons
quality early education.”
making them ineligible. For example,

Quality early education increases
graduation rates and cuts crime
Future Mission: Readiness reports
will discuss health issues; this report
is focused on what can be done to
decrease drop-out rates and cut crime.
Over 40 years of research on early
education programs has found they
successfully address both problems.

Research shows early education
builds a foundation for future
learning

Ninety percent of a person’s adult
brain weight is achieved by age
single parents with custody of a child
– Henry “Hugh” Shelton General,
five.16 According to the Institute of
cannot join. The cut-off points for
US Army (Ret.)
Medicine book From Neurons to
different service branches vary on many
Former Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff
Neighborhoods, brain scans and
standards.
neuroscience have now shown
Multiple problems: Solving one problem is often not
conclusively that the best time to influence a child’s trajectory
enough to allow someone to join. For example, some of the
in life is during the child’s earliest years when the architecture
overweight individuals are also involved in crime or have other of the brain is literally under construction. Changes in neurons,
medical problems that would disqualify them even if they were connections and structures in the brain continue throughout
to lose enough weight.
life, but the most important changes come during the 0-5
years:
Not a problem in 2009 but… The Washington Post recently
reported that, “For the first time in more than 35 years, the
What happens during the first months and years of life
U.S. military has met all of its annual recruiting goals.” During
matters a lot, not because this period of development
economic downturns, higher numbers of well-qualified
provides an indelible blueprint for adult well-being,
candidates seek to enlist and the military can temporarily rely
but because it sets either a sturdy or fragile stage for
less on waivers for those with academic deficits or criminal
13
what follows.17
records. But a weak economy is no formula for a strong
military. Once the economy begins to grow again, the
And “school readiness skills” are more than just learning
challenge of finding enough high-quality recruits will return.
the ABC’s or knowing how to count. Young children also
Unless we help more young people get on the right track
need to learn to share, wait their turn, follow directions, and
today, our future military readiness will be put at risk.

3

Ready, Willing, and Unable to Serve

build relationships. This is when children begin to develop a
conscience – differentiating right from wrong – and when they
start learning to stick with a task until it is completed. Nobelprize-winning economist James Heckman studies economic
productivity and argues that these early social skills are crucial
for future success in school and later in life. As Heckman
explains, success builds on success. Unfortunately, failure also
begets failure.18	
“I first learned about early
education from my wife’s personal
experience. An early education
teacher for 20 years, she would
share her classroom experiences
during our “How was your day
today?” dinner conversations. It
was clear to her that you could
easily identify students who
benefited from pre-kindergarten
programs. They had better social
skills and better cognitive skills
and were more adaptive to the
learning process. I was convinced.”
– Major General Frank R. Faykes
US Army (Ret.)

The solid research behind early education
Those who have served in leadership positions in the United
States military recognize that it is imperative that the military
be able to field not just highly-competent individuals who
can operate high-tech machinery and computer systems. The
military also needs individuals who will have the ability to work
in teams and the excellent judgment needed to successfully
carry out their duties while deployed on active duty in highstress situations. That cannot be acquired just in basic training.
Carefully designed studies have followed the children in
those high-quality early learning programs for decades. The
resulting research shows that children in the programs had
higher rates of high school graduation and lower rates of arrest
than the study participants who did not receive the preschool
programs.19
In fact, of the many school reforms that can impact children’s
chances of graduating, early education has the most solid proof
that it can raise graduation rates.20

a
b

7
35

quality EARLY ED cuts future crime
Chronic lawbreakers at age 27

35%

7%

Perry Preschool
children

Similar children who
did not attend the Perry
Preschool Program
Schweinhart, et al., 1993

At-risk 3- and 4-year olds randomly excluded from the High/
Scope Perry Preschool Program were five times more likely to
become chronic offenders (more than four arrests) by age 27.

Evidence supporting pre-kindergarten for at-risk children
comes from a randomized-controlled study following children
in the High/Scope Perry Preschool Project in Ypsilanti,
Michigan. Beginning in 1962, preschool teachers worked
intensively with low-income children ages 3 and 4. The
children attended preschool during the week and teachers
came to their homes once a week to coach their parents
on appropriate parenting skills. Researchers followed the
children up to age 40, comparing their life experiences with
the children who did not participate in the early education
program. The contrast was stark.
Almost half of the preschool children were performing at grade
level by the age of 14, compared with just 15 percent of the
children in the control group; and 44 percent more of the
children in the Perry program went on to graduate from high
school.21
By age 27, at-risk three- and four-year-olds left out of the Perry
Preschool program were five times more likely to be chronic
offenders than similar children who attended the program.
Significant and meaningful differences in life outcomes
continued through age 40.22
“Quality early education increases
graduation rates by as much as 44
percent.”
– Schweinhart, 2005

Early Education Investments in America

The Child-Parent Center (CPC) pre-kindergarten program has
served over 100,000 at-risk, inner-city children in Chicago. By
the age of 18, children left out of the program were 70 percent
more likely than program participants to have been arrested
for a violent crime. An outstanding charge or conviction for a
violent crime usually prevents a young person from enlisting in
the military.23 The children left out of the program were also
almost twice as likely to be placed in foster care as those in
the program.24 By age 20, participants in CPC were 29 percent
more likely to have graduated from high school.25

A strong investment with impressive returns
Not only does early education advance the educational
success of students, it also produces solid savings to taxpayers.
Disadvantaged children who repeatedly fail in school do not
simply disappear. Too often these children grow up to have
very troubled lives, and their struggles can be extremely costly
to society. Special education, crime, welfare, and other costs
account for staggering expenses for the nation’s taxpayers.

Child-Parent Centers: At-risk
children left out of quality early
education were 70 percent more

The United States military itself
understands the inherent value of early
education. The Army, Navy and Air

likely to commit violent crimes.
– Reynolds, 2001

Force have been providing high-quality
early care and education to the children
of personnel at bases around the
globe for more than a decade, and the
military’s Child Development Centers
have been recognized for their pathbreaking role in this area.28

Beginning as early as possible is critical
The Abecedarian home visitation and preschool program
randomly assigned children from impoverished families
living in a small Southern town to either a full-day, enriched
preschool program at a child center, or to no intervention. The
children began in the program as infants (usually at 4 months)
and continued receiving high-quality early education up to age
five.
The children not in Abecedarian had lower IQ’s at age 12,
were 91 percent more likely to be held back in school, and
dropped out of high school 48 percent more often. The
children served by Abecedarian were nearly three times more
likely to be attending a 4-year college at age 21.26
The Syracuse University Family Development Program
provided weekly home visitations and high-quality early
learning programs to low-income, single-parent families
beginning prenatally and lasting through age five. Ten years
after the initial study ended, children who were not included
in the program were 10 times more likely to have committed
a crime than comparable children enrolled in the program
(16.7 percent versus 1.5 percent). Furthermore, children not in
the program committed more serious crimes, including sexual
abuse, robbery, and assault.27
These snapshots over time of the children’s development show
that early childhood education and parent coaching can have
significant long-term impacts on a person’s success or failure
in school and beyond. Research shows that these interventions
beginning before birth up to age five have far-reaching
consequences later in life, and all of society benefits.

4

Individual children who grow up to drop out of school,
abuse drugs and become career criminals cost society, on
average, over 2.5 million dollars each.29 There are over
seven million Americans on probation, incarcerated, or on
parole.30 So, when a researcher, David Anderson, added up
all the quantifiable private and public costs for an article in the
University of Chicago’s Journal of Law and Economics, it was
not all that surprising that criminal behavior alone was found to
cost Americans $1.7 trillion a year.31
Because the various costs to society incurred by some of the
at-risk kids can be so high, research shows that the benefits of
investing in high-quality early childhood education for at-risk
kids far outweigh the costs. According to cost-benefit studies
done of the programs:

Net Savings from
Early Education Investments
High/Scope Perry Preschool	
Chicago Child-Parent Centers	

$244,81132
$70,97733

Unfortunately, America is still spending heavily on recurrent
social problems and not enough on preventing them in the first
place. For example, in order to take in fewer young people
who have a criminal record, are overweight, or have no high

5

Ready, Willing, and Unable to Serve

school degree, the Army has been spending about $22,000
per recruit in enlistment bonuses.34 As another example, while
the Chicago Child-Parent Centers have shown that highquality early education and parent coaching can cut foster
care placements almost in half, state and federal governments
together are paying over $20 billion a year to identify and care
for the victims of abuse or neglect in America.35
Individual children who grow up
to drop out of school, abuse drugs
and become career criminals cost
society, on average, over 2.5 million
dollars each.

Next steps for America
Nationwide, the proportion of four-year-olds served by state
pre-k programs has risen from 14 percent in 2002, to 24
percent in 2008 – a 71 percent increase over six years.36 While
this is substantial progress, most states fall well short of serving
most of their pre-k-age children. More than half of all states are
reaching only 30 percent or less of their four-year-old children
through state and federal programs, and ten states serve 20
percent or less of the four-year-olds in their state. Some states,
such as Oklahoma, have undertaken serious efforts to offer
families in their state pre-kindergarten. Oklahoma currently
serves 71 percent of all of the state’s four-year-olds in their
voluntary, high-quality pre-kindergarten program. Combined
with Head Start and programs for children with special
education needs, 88 percent of Oklahoma’s families with fouryear-old children are taking advantage of voluntary state or
federal pre-kindergarten programs.37
Nationally, funding for Head Start, the nation’s premier prekindergarten program for at-risk kids, is sufficient to serve less
than half of all eligible children, and Early Head Start serves
less than five percent of infants and toddlers from low-income
families who are eligible.38
Given this current lack of access, clearly a top national and
state priority must be to increase the number children served
by early education. However, as crucial as it is to increase
access, it is equally important to deliver high-quality programs.
The research is clear that only high-quality programs deliver
strong results. Military commanders all know that quantity is no
substitute for quality. A strong military unit needs both.

!"#"$%&'(#")*"+,"$%)-.)&-/$0)
12"+3,4$5),4$$-%)6-3$)%7")2383%4+&)
9$4:8"))
%-)6-3$)
;<=)
1:8")%-)
>-3$)
?<=)
;<=$1,=>?$-/9"=,+@$3:/"*094($
!"#$%&"'($)*+",-.$!*"/01,"$,2$300/((*,4($5,+*0-.$6#7#$!/89"1:/41$,2$!/2/4(/$

Conclusion: Early education is an investment in
national security
The best aircraft, ships, and satellite-guided weapon systems
are only as effective as the personnel the military can recruit to
operate them. Just as with our evolving economy, tomorrow’s
military will need young people who are better prepared than
earlier generations for tomorrow’s challenges. But the trends
are not encouraging. Too many young people are dropping
out of school, getting involved in crime, and are physically
unfit.
“Our national security in the year 2030 is
absolutely dependent upon what is going
on in pre-kindergarten today.”
	
– Rear Admiral James Barnett,
US Navy (Ret.)

This cannot continue. Our military readiness, and thus our
national security, will depend on the ability of the upcoming
generation to serve. We need to take action now to reverse
our current course.
If members of Congress, governors, and state legislators
act now to ramp up both the quantity and quality of early
education programs, they can count on strong support
from the retired generals and admirals of Mission: Readiness.
America’s military leaders fully understand what is at stake.
America can, and must, do a better job of preparing our
children for a successful life with many options in adulthood,
including a career in the military if they choose to serve.
Increased investments in high-quality early education are
essential for our national security.

Early Education Investments in America

Appendix
Nationally, 75% of young people
cannot join the military
States

75% of 17-24 year-olds (a)

States worse than the national
average on:

Overweight or
Obese Juveniles
(b)

Young people who
did not graduate
high school (c)

Adults on probation, incarcerated,
or on parole (d)

United States
26,022,688
Alabama
394,240
X
X
Alaska
64,938
X
X
Arizona
526,399
X
Arkansas
231,008
X
X
California
3,370,138
X
Colorado
407,687
X
Connecticut
284,309
Delaware
73,864
X
X
X
District of Columbia
66,085
X
X
X
Florida
1,405,581
X
X
Georgia
804,432
X
X
X
Hawaii
109,167
Idaho
129,081
X
Illinois
1,146,888
X
Indiana
529,827
X
X
Iowa
267,945
Kansas
256,328
Kentucky
333,529
X
Louisiana
412,130
X
X
X
Maine
98,540
Maryland
475,265
X
Massachusetts
582,311
X
Michigan
852,183
X
Minnesota
443,624
X
Mississippi
267,566
X
X
Missouri
490,125
Montana
83,280
Nebraska
163,232
Nevada
185,725
X
X
New Hampshire
104,165
New Jersey
672,771
New Mexico
177,608
X
X
New York
1,748,230
X
X
North Carolina
772,531
X
X
North Dakota
72,259
Ohio
945,976
X
X
Oklahoma
323,492
Oregon
295,723
Pennsylvania
1,052,849
X
Rhode Island
100,132
X
South Carolina
383,160
X
X
South Dakota
72,469
Tennessee
481,510
X
X
Texas
2,146,654
X
X
X
Utah
288,222
Vermont
53,938
Virginia
672,031
Washington
533,776
X
West Virginia
138,161
X
Wisconsin
484,398
Wyoming
47,206
Some states with more undereducated, physically unfit, or criminally-involved young adults than the national average will have more than 75
percent of their young people who cannot join the military. Other states will have fewer.
For state-specific data see the following pages, or the sources below:
a) United States Census: http://www.census.gov/popest/states/asrh/SC-EST2008-01.html
b) Trust for America's Health: http://healthyamericans.org/states/states.php?measure=overwieght (no data is available for 17-24 year olds.)
c) Department of Education: See table 3 page 9, http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2010/2010313.pdf
d) Pew Center on the States: See the table on the last page, http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/PSPP_1in31_report_FINAL_WEB_3-26-09.pdf

(Statewide data is unavailable for juveniles, but since most adults in the adult system are young adults, this gives some relative sense of how crime may impact recruitment.)

6

7

Ready, Willing, and Unable to Serve

!"#$"%&'()'*+,"-#+(./0'1%'0&-&"+'''
(#')"/"#-..,+)2%/"/'3#"+41%/"#5-#&"%'
1%'6778'9:,'0&-&";<='

**#$

JDC15=21$
\C=7691$
@.4;$K67A6>61$
K.72=>;$
[.=7A61$
V.U14$
-./$Z=7D$
@64N=>46>$
L=F;5$P17=C6>1$
Y=F6461>1$
?17MC1>9$
<CC6>=64$
B7D1>414$
T.>;FNDM$
?16>.$
:-<VXH$LVBVXL$
?6N56A1>$
-./$W.74.M$
?6446446336$
V.>>.44..$
-./$?.U6N=$
-=7;5$P17=C6>1$
T1>414$
P=>>.NSNF;$
<=/1$
R.>>4MC81>61$
P=C=719=$
P1C6Q=7>61$
J56=$
-=7;5$H1D=;1$
?1441N5F4.O4$
@M=26>A$
L=F;5$H1D=;1$
K67A6>61$
J7.A=>$
?=>;1>1$
B76I=>1$
BC1G121$
H.C1/17.$
-.G714D1$
?644=F76$
E5=9.$<4C1>9$
BC14D1$
@1456>A;=>$
01/166$
?6>>.4=;1$
<>961>1$
<915=$
:;15$
-.8191$
-./$01234567.$

,&#$
)'#$
)'#$
)!#$
''#$
'&#$
'!#$
'"#$
'"#$
&(#$
&*#$
&*#$
&,#$
+(#$
+*#$
+,#$
+,#$
+,#$
+&#$
+&#$
+&#$
+%#$
+"#$
+"#$
%*#$
%*#$
%)#$
%)#$
%)#$
%'#$
%'#$
%'#$
%'#$
%&#$
%%#$
%!#$
%!#$
%!#$
%!#$
%!#$
%"#$
%"#$
!(#$
!'#$
!'#$
!&#$
!&#$
!%#$
!%#$
!"#$

"#$

%"#$

&"#$

)"#$

*"#$

!""#$

$$$$$$$$$$-1S=>1C$<>4S;F;.$Q=7$X17CM$X9FN1S=>$E.4.17N5$]%""(^$

!"#$"%&'()'*&+,"%&*'
'-.(')/01'&('2#/,+/&"''
(%'34"'567'*&/&"8'

&&#$
&+#$
&!#$
&!#$
&)#$
&,#$
&,#$
&"#$
&"#$
&"#$
&"#$
&(#$
&(#$
&(#$
+*#$
+*#$
+&#$
+&#$
+&#$
++#$
++#$
++#$
++#$
+'#$
+'#$
+'#$
+!#$
+!#$
+%#$
+%#$
+%#$
+%#$
+)#$
+)#$
+)#$
+,#$
+"#$
+"#$
+(#$
'*#$
'&#$
'&#$
'&#$
''#$
'%#$
')#$
')#$
'(#$
!&#$
!&#$
!%#$
!"#$

U.>J968$
253C96356$
A566.3980$
P9@0$
-.@$\.>3.V$
-9>84$:0L980$
[.663V?/0650$
<9=84$:0L980$
A5339=>5$
;966.CZC=8$
-.@$T0JE345>.$
-.I>03L0$
A968060$
A0330C4=3.Y3$
P1049$$
A0>V?061$
P??56953$
W06303$
S459$
A056.$
X491.$P3?061$
2.38$U5>75650$
SL?049J0$
A5C45706$
Q804$
;9?9>019$
W.68=CLV$
2V9J567$
U5>75650$
T0@055$
S>.796$
2034567896$
H>L06303$
Q-POR:$<OHOR<$
P615060$
O.66.33..$
O.B03$
:.?0@0>.$
;0?5N9>650$
H>5M960$
H?03L0$
-.@$K9>L$
-9>84$;0>9?560$
H?0I0J0$
G?9>510$
F.9>750$
A5335335EE5$
D9=535060$
-.@$A.B5C9$
<9=84$;0>9?560$
2034567896$:;$
-./010$

*#$

+*#$

!*#$

)*#$

$$$$$$Q]<]$:.E0>8J.68$9N$R1=C0Z96$^+**(_$

Early Education Investments in America

!"#$"%&'(")*+),-.,/)
0"'#.*123)45*)4"#")
*6"#4"7(5&)*#)*8"3")
7%)9--/):80)3&'&";<-$)
-.11.11.KK.$
Q8@4/141$
\0289.4$
T0/3=;@B$
V0//01100$
QG4U4C4$
[2=.1.4/4$
A013$F.89./.4$
?.138.;3$2P$:2G=CU.4$
DGG./2.1$
>0M4H4$
QG41@4$
I2=36$:482G./4$
>2836$:482G./4$
76.2$
?0G4E480$
ZG28.H4$
>0E$Y28@$
>0E$-0X.;2$
V0X41$
5>DVW?$IVQVWI$
>0U841@4$
T4/141$
F.89./.4$
>0E$S0810B$
-.112=8.$
-.;6.94/$
Q8.R2/4$
:4G.P28/.4$
O62H0$D1G4/H$
-4114;6=10N1$
D/H.4/4$
L0//1BGM4/.4$
A416./932/$
7@G462C4$
>0E$J4CK16.80$
-48BG4/H$
J4E4..$
I2=36$?4@234$
-4./0$
A.1;2/1./$
DH462$
:2G284H2$
F08C2/3$
D2E4$
AB2C./9$
>2836$?4@234$
:2//0;<;=3$
-2/34/4$
78092/$
5346$
-.//01234$

!"#$%&'()'*+(,-.()/''
0)'1-0$/'0)'*+0&()/''
(+'()'*-+($2'3,4'&%-%2567'

%%#$
"(#$
"'#$
"'#$
"'#$
"&#$
"&#$
"&#$
",#$
",#$
"%#$
"%#$
"%#$
"%#$
""#$
""#$
""#$
""#$
""#$
"!#$
"!#$
"!#$
"+#$
"+#$
"+#$
"+#$
"+#$
"+#$
"+#$
"*#$
"*#$
"*#$
"*#$
"*#$
"*#$
!)#$
!)#$
!)#$
!(#$
!(#$
!(#$
!(#$
!'#$
!'#$
!'#$
!&#$
!&#$
!&#$
!&#$
!%#$
!"#$
!"#$

#&"
In Georgia, one in
#!"
every 13 adults is
(#"
on probation, in
(("
jail, in prison, or
(%"
on parole.
('"
($"
($"
($"
($"
($"
(+"
(+"
(!"
(*"
(*"
In the United
&)"
States, one in
&#"
every 31 adults is
&#"
on probation, in
&("
jail, in prison, or
&("
on parole.
&&"
&&"
&&"
&'"
&'"
&'"
&$"
&$"
&$"
&!"
&!"
&!"
&!"
&!"
&*"
%)"
%)"
%("
%%"
%%"
%$"
%$"
%!"
'&"
'&"
'%"
$&"
$%"
$!"
!#"

\->6<50"
AE04>"
?53:[">P"M>HJ1F50"
K-R03"
70330L4J3-Z3"
G45>"
Y4>E-"A3H08E"
7588-3>:0"
X>J535080"
A8E5080"
?-H0.06-"
75L45<08"
706NH08E"
W-883NHD0850"
M>H>60E>"
O6@08303"
903458<:>8"
=,AKV?"IKOKVI"
UH>65E0"
/0.055"
OH0F010"
G6-<>8"
M>88-LTLJ:"
O65S>80"
,-."7-R5L>"
,-."Q-63-N"
B-8:JL@N"
7533>J65"
M0H5P>6850"
OH03@0"
9N>158<"
I>J:4"M06>H580"
,>6:4"M06>H580"
75335335225"
AHH58>53"
953L>8358"
K-88-33--"
I>J:4"?0@>:0"
G@H04>10"
,-F603@0"
7>8:080"
;56<5850"
;-61>8:"
,-D0E0"
,-."C>6@"
B08303"
A>.0"
,>6:4"?0@>:0"
=:04"
9-3:";56<5850"
7058-"
,-."/0123456-"

!!"

)"

*#$

+*#$

!*#$

"*#$

%*#$

()"

%)"

$)"

!)"

#))"

,*#$

V8=13$P28$QC08.;4]1$J04G36$^!**)_$

""U-E-60H"]J6-0J">P"A8D-3T<0T>8"08E"W-."M-8:-6">8":4-"I:0:-3^"())+"E0:0"

8

9

Ready, Willing, and Unable to Serve

Endnotes
1 Jack Dilbeck, Research Analyst, United States Army Accessions
Command, Fort Knox, KY. Personal Communication on May 14,
2009.
2 Lee, J., Grigg, W., & Donahue, P. (2007). The Nation’s Report
Card: Reading 2007 (NCES 2007–496). National Center for
Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S.
Department of Education. Washington, D.C.
Lee, J., Grigg, W., & Dion, G. (2007). The Nation’s Report Card:
Mathematics 2007 (NCES 2007-494). National Center for Education
Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of
Education, Washington, D.C.
3 Jack Dilbeck, Research Analyst, United States Army Accessions
Command, Fort Knox, KY. Personal Communication on May 14,
2009.
4 Jack Dilbeck, Research Analyst, United States Army Accessions
Command, Fort Knox, KY. Personal Communication on May 14,
2009.
5 Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2008). Crime in the United States
2007. Washington,D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved on
June 26, 2009 from http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/data/table_29.
html
6 Pew Center on the States. (2009). One in 31: The long reach
of American corrections. Washington, D.C.: Author. Retrieved
on June 26, 2009 from http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/
uploadedFiles/8015PCTS_Prison08_FINAL_2-1-1_FORWEB.pdf
7 Office of Justice Programs. (2009). Statistical briefing book.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved on October
5, 2009 from http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/ojstatbb/ezaucr/asp/ucr_display.
asp
8 Jack Dilbeck, Research Analyst, United States Army Accessions
Command, Fort Knox, KY. Personal Communication on May 14,
2009.
Asch, B.J., Buck, C., Klerman, J.A., Kleykamp, M., & Loughran,
D.S. (2009). Military enlistment of Hispanic youth: Obstacles and
opportunities. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. Retrieved
on May 27, 2009 from http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2009/
RAND_MG773.pdf
RAND reports that each service has different weight standards.
For example, the Air Force would not accept a six-foot tall male
weighing over 205 pounds. The Marines would admit heavier
individuals, but a six-foot tall male would have to slim down to 213
pounds in order to actually ship out.
9 Niebuhr, D.W., Bedno, S.A., Cowan, D.N., Datu, B.D., Federici,
R.J., & Han, W. (2008). Report of 2007 attrition and morbidity data
for 2006 accessions: Annual report 2007. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Defense. Retrieved on June 26, 2009 from http://www.
amsara.amedd.army.mil/reports/AMSARA_Annual_Report_2007.pdf
10 Engelhard, C.L., Garson, A., & Dorn, S. (2009). Reducing
obesity: Policy strategies from the tobacco wars. Washington, D.C.:
Urban Institute. Retrieved on August 13, 2009 from http://www.
urban.org/uploadedpdf/411926_reducing_obesity.pdf
11 Jack Dilbeck, Research Analyst, United States Army Accessions
Command, Fort Knox, KY. Personal Communication on May 14,
2009.Twenty-seven percent of young Americans are too heavy to join
the military. Nineteen percent have weight as the only issue keeping
them out. The others also have other health problems or other
problems, as well as being overweight.

12 House Report 109-089 – National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2006, http://thomas.loc.gov/cgibin/cp
query/?&sid=cp109q4Kjj&refer=&r_n=hr089.109&db_
id=109&item=&sel=TOC_706500&
13 Vogel, S. (May 11, 2009). Military recruiting faces a tight
budget. The Washington Post. Retrieved on May 27, 2009 from
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/10/
AR2009051002172.html; Under Secretary of Defense, Personnel
& Readiness. (2008). Recruit quality – by year since FY 1973.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Defense. Retrieved on May
26, 2009 from http://www.defenselink.mil/prhome/docs/Page.htm
14 Jack Dilbeck, Research Analyst, United States Army Accessions
Command, Fort Knox, KY. Personal Communication on May 14,
2009.
15 Gilroy, C. (March 3, 2009). Prepared statement of Dr. Curtis
Gilroy, director for asscessions policy, office of the undersecretary of
defense for personnel and readiness before the House Armed Services
Subcommittee “Recruiting, retention, and end strength overview.”
Retrieved on May 27, 2009 from http://armedservices.house.gov/
pdfs/MP030309/Gilroy_Testimony030309.pdf
16 Giedd, J.N., Shaw, P., Wallace, G., Gogtay, N., & Kenroot, R.K.
(2006). Anatomic brain imaging studies of normal and abnormal
brain development in children and adolescents, in Ciccchetti, D., &
Cohen, D.J. (Eds). Developmental psychopathology, second edition,
volume two: Developmental neuroscience. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley
Publishers.
17 Shonkoff, J.P., & Phillips, D.A. (2000).From neurons to
neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development.
Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
18 Heckman, J.J., Masterov, D.V., (2004). The productivity argument
for investing in young children. Invest in Kids Working Group,
Working Paper 5. Washington, D.C. Committee for Economic
Development.
19 Reynolds, A.J. Temple, J.A., Ou, S., Robertson, D.L. Mersky,
J.P. Topitzes, J.W., et al. (2007). Effects of a school-based, early
childhood intervention on adult health and well-being. Archives of
Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 161(8), 730-739; Schweinhart,
L.J., Montie, J., Xiang, Z., Barnett, W.S., Belfield, C.R., & Nores,
M. (2005). Lifetime effects: The High Scope Perry Preschool
study through age 40. Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press; Campbell,
F.A., Pungello, E.P., Miller-Johnson, S., Burchinal, M., & Ramey,
C.T. (2001). The development of cognitive and academic abilities;
Growth curves from an early childhood educational experiment.
Developmental Psychology, 37(2), 231-242.
20 Despite all the efforts to increase graduation rates underway, in a
literature review of research on those programs, only five programs
had the quality of research design and then the subsequent results
to be sure they delivered increases in graduation rates; and two of
those five programs that worked were early education programs.
(The others were a comprehensive high school reform effort, raising
teacher salaries by 10 percent, and greatly reducing class sizes.)
Levin, H., Befield, C., Muennig, P., & Rouse, C. (2007). The costs
and benefits of an excellent education for all of America’s children.
New York: Columbia University, Teacher’s College. Retrieved on
May 26, 2009 from http://www.cbcse.org/media/download_gallery/
Leeds_Report_Final_Jan2007.pdf
21 Schweinhart, L. J., Barnes, H. V., & Weikart, D. P. (1993).
Significant benefits: The High/Scope Perry Preschool study through
age 27. Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press; Schweinhart, L.J.,Montie,
J.,Xiang,Z.,Barnett,W.S., Belfield, C.r., & Nores, M. (2005). Lifetime

Early Education Investments in America

effects: the High Scope/Perry Preschool Study through age 40.
Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press.
22 Schweinhart, L. J., Barnes, H. V., & Weikart, D. P. (1993).
Significant benefits: The High/Scope Perry Preschool study through
age 27. Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press; Schweinhart, L.J.,Montie,
J.,Xiang, Z., Barnett,W.S., Belfield, C.r., & Nores, M. (2005).
Lifetime effects: the High Scope/Perry Preschool Study through age
40. Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press.
23 In the past, the military would sometimes allow waivers for some
felonies, but they are currently not accepting anyone with felonies
into the Army. Vogel, S. (May 11, 2009). Military recruiting faces a
tight budget. The Washington Post. Retrieved on May 27, 2009 from
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/10/
AR2009051002172.html
24 Reynolds, A.J., Temple, J.A., Ou, S., Robertson, D.L., Mersky,
J.P., Topitzes, J.W., et al. (2007). Effects of a school-based, early
childhood intervention on adult health and well-being. Archives of
Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine, 161(8), 730-739.
25 These results were marginally significant. Reynolds, A.J., Temple,
J.A., Robertson, D.L., & Mann, E.A. (2001). Long-term effects of an
early childhood intervention on educational achievement and juvenile
arrest. Journal of the American Medical Association, 285(12), 23392380; Reynolds, A.J., Temple, J.A., Ou, S., Robertson, D.L., Mersky,
J.P., Topitzes, J.W., et al. (2007). Effects of a school-based, early
childhood intervention on adult health and well-being. Archives of
Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine, 161(8), 730-739.
26 Barnett, W.S., & Masse, L.N., (2007), Comparative benefit-cost
analysis of the Abecedarian program and its policy implications,
Economics of Education Review, 26, 113-125.
27 Lally, J. R., Mangione, P. L., & Honig, A. S. (1988). The
Syracuse University Family Development Research Program: Longrange impact of an early intervention with low-income children and
their families. In Powell, D. R. (Ed.), Parent education as early
childhood intervention: Emerging directions in theory, research, and
practice (pp. 79-104). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
28 See for example: Campbell, N.E., Appelbaum, J.C., Martinson,
K., & Martin, E. (2000). Be all we can be: Lessons from the military
for improving our nation’s child care system. Washington, D.C.:
National Women’s Law Center. Retrieved on May 27, 2009 from
http://www.eric.ed.gov:80/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_
storage_01/0000019b/80/16/3a/f7.pdf
29 Cohen, M., & Piquero, A.R. (2008). New evidence on the
monetary value of saving a high risk youth. Journal of Quantitative
Criminology, 25, 25-49.
30 Pew Center on the States. (2009). One in 31: The long reach
of American corrections. Washington, D.C.: Author. Retrieved
on June 26, 2009 from http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/
uploadedFiles/8015PCTS_Prison08_FINAL_2-1-1_FORWEB.pdf
31 Anderson, D.A. (1999). The aggregate burden of crime. Journal
of law and economics, 62, 611-642.
32 Nores, M., Belfield, C.R., Barnett, W.S., & Schweinhart, L.
(2005). Updating the economic impacts of the High/Scope Perry
Preschool Program. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,
27(3), 245-261.
33 Reynolds, A.J., & Temple, J.A., (2006). Prevention and costeffectiveness in early intervention: A 20-year follow-up of a
Child-Parent Center Cohort. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs,
University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
34 McMichael, W.H. (October 15, 2009). Economy fueled recruiting
gains in FY09, Army Times. Retrieved on October 29, 2009 from

10

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/10/military_recruiting_
retention_101309w/
35 In 2004, state and federal governments were paying over $23
billion a year. Scarcella, C.A., Bess, R., Zielewski, E.H., & Geen,
R. (2006). The cost of protecting vulnerable children V. Washington,
D.C.: The Urban Institute.
36 Barnett, W.S., Epstein, D.J., Friedman, A.H., Boyd, J.S., &
Hustedt, J.T. (2008). The state of preschool 2008: State preschool
yearbook. New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute of Early Education.
37 Barnett, W.S., Epstein, D.J., Friedman, A.H., Boyd, J.S., &
Hustedt, J.T. (2008). The state of preschool 2008: State preschool
yearbook. New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute of Early Education.
38 Head Start serves less than half (46%) of those eligible. The
percentage of income-eligible children who are enrolled in Head
Start was computed by dividing the number of 3-and 4-year-old
children served in 2008 (n= 790,318) by the number of 3-and
4-year-old children in poverty 2007 (n=1,708,000). The number of
3- and 4-year-old children served was calculated by multiplying
the total number of children enrolled in Head Start and Early Head
Start (n=908,412) in 2008 by the percentage of children aged 3 and
4 enrolled in Head Start (87%). For the number 3-and 4-year-old
children served by Head Start, see Head Start Bureau. (2009). Head
Start program fact sheet – Fiscal year 2008. Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Retrieved on June
16, 2009 from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ohs/about/fy2008.
html; For the number of 3-and 4-year-old children in poverty, see:
U.S. Census Bureau. (2008). Current Population Survey – Annual
social and Economic (ASEC) Supplement. Washington, D.C.: Author.
Retrieved on June 16, 2009 from http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/
poverty/detailedpovtabs.htm0l
Early Head Start serves less than 4 (3.36) percent of those eligible.
The percentage of income-eligible children who are enrolled in Early
Head Start was computed by dividing the number of 0, 1 and 2-yearold children served in 2008 (n=90,841) by the number of 0-, 1-, and
2-year-old children in poverty in 2007 (n=2,698,000).   The number
of children in Early Head Start was calculated by multiplying the
total number of children enrolled in Head Start and Early Head Start
(n=908,412) in 2008 by the percentage of children aged 0-2 enrolled
in Early Head Start (10%). For the number of children enrolled in
Early Head Start, see Head Start Bureau. (2009). Head Start program
fact sheet – Fiscal year 2008. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services. Retrieved on June 16, 2009 from
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ohs/about/fy2008.html; For the
number of 3-and 4-year-old children in poverty, see: U.S. Census
Bureau. (2008). Current Population Survey – Annual social and
Economic (ASEC) Supplement. Washington, D.C.: Author. Retrieved
on June 16, 2009 from http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/
detailedpovtab
39 Many states have only recently begun to serve more children.
This includes state-funded pre-kindergarten, Head Start, and stateand federally-funded early special education for children with
developmental delays.
40 Data is not available for 17- to 24-year-olds, but this shows which
states have more overweight youth.
41 Ten percent of young Americans cannot join the military because
of convictions. Most offenders under correctional control are young
adults. Arrest data is not fully available for all states. But corrections
data gives some sense of the burden of crime and punishment in
different states.

11

Ready, Willing, and Unable to Serve

Early Education Investments in America

12

Acknowledgements
Mission: Readiness is the nonpartisan, nonprofit, national security organization of more than 80 retired
generals, admirals, and other senior military leaders. The military leaders of Mission: Readiness call on all
policy-makers to ensure America’s security and prosperity by supporting interventions proven to help
America’s youth succeed academically, stay physically fit, and abide by the law.
Mission: Readiness is supported by tax-deductible contributions from foundations, individuals, and
corporations. Supporters include:
•	 The Pew Charitable Trusts and Pre-K Now, a campaign of the Pew Center of the States. Pre-K Now    
collaborates with organizations and policy-makers to lead a movement toward high-quality, voluntary
pre-kindergarten for all 3- and 4-year-olds.
•	 Birth To Five Policy Alliance.
Mission: Readiness accepts no funds from federal, state, or local governments.
The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Pew
Charitable Trusts.
This report was authored by William Christeson, Amy Dawson Taggart, and Soren Messner-Zidell.
Ted Eismeier, Saif Khan, Matt Lambert, and Stephanie Schaefer also contributed to this report.

©2009: Mission: Readiness

1212 New York Avenue NW, Ste 300
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 464-5224
www.MissionReadiness.org