The U.S. Senate’s education committee voted Wednesday to keep dedicated funding for after-school and summer programs, which initially was not included in its proposed reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), also known as No Child Left Behind.

The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee voted to amend the reauthorization bill to include funding for the 21st Century Community Learning Centers. California received more than $127 million in federal funding in 2014-15 to provide before- and after-school and summer programs. Across the country, about 1.6 million students participate in programs funded by community center grants.

The decision “is a huge victory for the nation’s children and families,” said Jodi Grant, executive director of the Afterschool Alliance, a nonprofit advocacy group based in Washington, D.C. The support for the bill, which crossed party lines, “is powerful evidence that senators on both sides of the political aisle understand the vital role that high-quality after-school, before-school and summer learning programs play in the lives of our children, families and communities,” she said in a prepared statement.

The programs offer tutoring, physical activities and hands-on enrichment opportunities in areas such as science, technology and the arts. To qualify for the grants, providers must offer expanded day programs that total at least 300 hours over the course of a school year.

However, “today’s victory does not mean that after-school funding is out of danger,” Grant said, noting that the funding must still survive votes on the Senate floor and then a conference committee between the two legislative branches.

The initial U.S. House of Representatives’ version of the reauthorization bill also eliminated funding for after-school programs, but that bill was withdrawn.

 

SHARE ARTICLE

Comments

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments Policy

The goal of the comments section on EdSource is to facilitate thoughtful conversation about content published on our website. Click here for EdSource's Comments Policy.

  1. Don 2 years ago2 years ago

    look in

  2. Jim Mordecai 2 years ago2 years ago

    Do the math. This means that inadequate Title I funding will be reduced by amount for privatizing after school programs. Public education dollars are allocated to private interests in this provision. Remember that the agreement on NCLB between Senator Kennedy and President Bush was sealed with acceptance of after school program Title I money. But, because Title I money was increased overall it was easy for many to accept small fraction … Read More

    Do the math. This means that inadequate Title I funding will be reduced by amount for privatizing after school programs. Public education dollars are allocated to private interests in this provision. Remember that the agreement on NCLB between Senator Kennedy and President Bush was sealed with acceptance of after school program Title I money. But, because Title I money was increased overall it was easy for many to accept small fraction of the money being privatized.

    Now privatization of public education dollars has grown with charter schools. At the signing of NCLB the number of charter schools was very small.

    When the reauthorization passes, and it will, how will the seven CORE Waiver districts, who took over control of the Title I funded after school programs, and spent it on whatever they decided, will now have a cut in their budgets if they return no longer have an ESEA Title I waiver. But, it is not clear that after reauthorization that the CORE Waiver will continue.

    Anyone have a clue on the status of CORE Waivers of ESEA Title I. In addition to the private corporation CORE, waivers of ESEA Title I, Arne Duncan and Department of Education issued waivers to several states. And, what will happen to those state waivers? Does anyone know?

    Replies

    • Manuel 2 years ago2 years ago

      Jim, as far as I know, the seven CORE Waiver districts get their Title I funds from the state, not directly from the feds. How the state decides what they are entitled to, I just don't know for a fact. It could be the the money is distributed in a per capita way given that LAUSD's Board complained about the rumor pushed by the White House that the new ESEA would take away money from … Read More

      Jim, as far as I know, the seven CORE Waiver districts get their Title I funds from the state, not directly from the feds. How the state decides what they are entitled to, I just don’t know for a fact. It could be the the money is distributed in a per capita way given that LAUSD’s Board complained about the rumor pushed by the White House that the new ESEA would take away money from poor districts and give it to rich districts without offering proof of how they knew this would happen.

      Also, because of the waiver, Deasy put aside roughly $50 million of the district’s $290 million allocation for 2013-14 to pay for “intervention” during Spring and Summer. That did not happen and more than $63 million were carried over into the 2014-15. How they got away with it is a mystery to me since the carryover is limited to 15%. Plus those funds are still sitting in some “reserve” because they are not showing up as spent in the second interim financial report.

      So the answer to your question might be: they got what the state gave them regardless of what deal they did with Duncan. And there is no reason to believe that they spent it wisely, or even if they did spend it. Moreover, until the state’s Title I allocation gets cut because of NCLB non-compliance, these seven districts will continue to get the funds while invoking greater flexibility for spending them (or not!). Arne can’t take them away, as far as I can tell.

      But what do I know? I am just an outside observer.

      • navigio 2 years ago2 years ago

        you can apply for a carryover waiver. not sure whether lausd did that, but their core waiver did exempt them from the 20% dedicated to supplemental services. not sure that would impact the calculation of carryover though. in theory, the state can take the amount over 15% and distribute it to other districts. but since title I carryover is an art akin to black magic anyway, i expect they dont even know about it.

      • Don 2 years ago2 years ago

        Carryovers are limited to once in three years. I guess you’d like in the CARS.