FY 2001 Budget Summary - February 2000

Section A. Elementary and Secondary Education



The 2001 budget for elementary and secondary education includes significant increases to support key priorities in the Educational Excellence for All Children Act of 1999?the President's proposal for reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Combined with "tax expenditures" for the President?s School Modernization Bonds proposal, the request demonstrates the continued Administration commitment to school reform and improvement by helping States and localities to reduce class sizes, build and renovate schools, ensure that every student is taught by a well-qualified teacher, and enable every child to learn to challenging academic standards. The total request for discretionary elementary and secondary education programs is $17.2 billion, an increase of $2.8 billion or 19.5 percent over the 2000 level. Highlights of the request for elementary and secondary programs include:

[TOP]School Construction and Renovation

In response to the urgent need for school renovations and additional classrooms in communities across the Nation, the President?s budget includes School Renovation and School Modernization Bond proposals to repair existing facilities and build new ones. The Administration also encourages local communities to use Federal school construction funds to support livability and community partnership efforts.

The request includes $1.3 billion in discretionary budget authority for a School Renovation program that would support a total of almost $6.7billion to help local educational agencies repair and renovate their schools. The $1.3 billion total includes $50 million in grants to 119 LEAs with at least 50percent of their children residing on Indian lands, $125million in grants to other high-need local educational agencies, and $1.125 billion that would subsidize an estimated $6.5 billion in 7-year, no-interest loans. The program would fund renovations such as roof or plumbing repairs and upgrade of climate-control systems.

The President is again seeking approval for his School Modernization Bonds proposal, which would provide tax credits to eliminate the interest costs of construction bonds. The Federal Government would subsidize the issuance of $22 billion in special 15-year bonds over the next two years—$11 billion in 2001 and $11 billion in 2002. One-half of this bond authority would be allocated by formula to the States and one-half to the 100-125 local educational agencies with the largest number of poor children. In addition, the Secretary of the Interior would allocate $200 million in bond authority each year to tribes for renovations and repairs to Indian schools.

School Modernization Bonds would be modeled after the Qualified Zone Academy Bonds program enacted by Congress in the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997. That program subsidizes bonds issued by school districts for the purpose of school renovations and repairs, as well as equipment purchases and both curriculum and professional development. The bonds can be used for schools that are in Empowerment Zones and Enterprise Communities, or in which at least 35percent of students are eligible to participate in the school lunch program. The total amount of bonds issued under the Qualified Zone Academy program is currently capped at $400 million in each of calendar years 2000 and 2001. The Administration is proposing to extend the Qualified Academy Zone Bonds by authorizing an additional $1 billion in bonding authority in 2001 and $1.4 billion in 2002.

[TOP] 21st Century Community Learning Centers

BA in millions$200.0$453.4$1,000

The request more than doubles funding for this program to significantly expand Federal support for extended learning opportunities for nearly 2.5million children. This request, along with a proposed 50 percent matching requirement, will support approximately 1,360 new awards to help districts create or expand some 6,400 school-based centers that provide academic and recreational services to students and other members of the community. Including continuation grants for the centers funded in the 1999 and 2000 competitions, the program would support a total of 10,000 centers.

In 2001, the Administration plans to give priority to schools serving students most in need of extended learning opportunities—those that have been identified as failing or in need of improvement. The request provides sufficient funds to give students in all low-performing schools the opportunity to attend after- or summer school programs to help improve their academic achievement.

[TOP] Class Size Reduction

BA in millions$1,200.0$1,300.0$1,750.0

The Class Size Reduction program helps school districts improve education in the early elementary grades by providing funds to hire highly qualified teachers and reduce class sizes. The initiative responds to research documenting the learning gains produced by smaller classes in the early grades. For example, in the most extensive research, students in smaller classes in Tennessee outperformed their peers on every achievement measure in every year of the study. These gains were particularly strong for minority and inner-city students (although all types of students in all types of communities benefited).

Class Size Reduction was first funded in 1999 under Title VI of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Each State receives a formula allocation and, in turn, distributes the money to local educational agencies (LEAs) by formula. LEAs use the funds to recruit, hire, and train new teachers, and may also use up to 25 percent of their allocations to test and provide professional development to teachers. An LEA that has reduced class size to no more than 18 students per class in the early grades may use its funds to make further reductions in those grades, to reduce class sizes in other grades, or to carry out additional testing and professional development activities.

The President has set a goal of hiring 100,000 new teachers by fiscal year 2005. The 2000 appropriation will pay for more than 29,000 teachers. The 2001 request would sustain momentum toward the 100,000 goal with a $450 million increase and by requiring?through language in the Administration's reauthorization bill?that school districts provide a 35 percent match for any funds they receive in excess of their 1999 allocations. The funding increase and the match would combine to pay for hiring about 49,000 teachers. Districts with large concentrations of poor children would be exempt from the matching requirement.

[TOP] Technology Literacy Challenge Fund

BA in millions$425.0$425.0$450.0

The Technology Literacy Challenge Fund helps States put into practice strategies to enable all schools to integrate technology into school curricula, so that students can become more technologically literate and develop the math, science, and high-order thinking skills needed to succeed in the Information Age. Since a growing number of classrooms now have computers connected to the Internet, experts have emphasized the importance of ensuring that teachers are well trained to integrate technology into instruction.

The program provides formula grants to States based on their share of ESEA Title I allocations; States then award competitive grants to local school districts. States have a great deal of flexibility in determining how to accomplish program goals.

The $25 million increase requested for 2001 would support the Administration's proposal to refocus the Challenge Fund on increasing the capacity of teachers in high-poverty, low-performing schools to use technology effectively in their classrooms. Under this proposal, States would give priority to partnerships that include at least one high-poverty, high-need district. An example of a partnership would be a "technology-poor" district working with a "technology-rich" district that provides mentoring and other assistance. There is substantial evidence to justify Federal support to upgrade educational technology in high-poverty, low-performing schools. For example, students in high-poverty schools are less likely to have access to multimedia computers and the Internet in their classrooms and at home than are students in low-poverty schools. In addition, poor urban and rural students are less likely to be exposed to higher-order uses of computers, which are positively related to academic achievement in mathematics, than are non-poor and suburban students.

The Technology Literacy Challenge Fund has supported recent advances in access to technology in schools. For example, between 1994 and 1998, the percentage of schools connected to the Internet rose from 35 percent to 89 percent, and the proportion of classrooms connected rose from 3 percent to 51 percent. The 2001 request would help sustain these advances.

[TOP]Title I: Education for the Disadvantaged
(dollars in millions)

Grants to LEAs $7,732.4$7,941.4$8,357.5
Capital Expenses for Private School Children 24.012.0--
Even Start135.0150.0150.0
State Agency Programs:
    Neglected and Delinquent40.3
Total8,293.918,509.01 8,929.51

1 Total does not include funding for the Comprehensive School Reform Demonstrations program.

Title I provides supplemental programs to enable educationally disadvantaged children, particularly those attending schools in high-poverty areas, to learn the core subjects to high standards. With Title I, low-achieving children have the benefit of more individualized instruction, fundamental changes in the school to improve teaching and learning, and preschool education. Children of migrant agricultural workers and students in State institutions for neglected and delinquent children and youth also benefit from Title I.

The 2001 request includes $8.4 billion, a $416 million increase, for Grants to Local Educational Agencies. The number of children served by this program has increased rapidly in recent years, as more schools have elected to establish schoolwide Title I programs. The Department estimates that in 2001 these grants will serve more than 13 million students in 46,500 schools. The budget will help these schools continue to implement major reforms intended to help reduce the gap between the educational achievement of disadvantaged children and that of their more advantaged peers.

Reflecting the Administration?s commitment to helping States and local educational agencies turn around low-performing schools, the 2001 request for Title I puts a special emphasis on educational accountability. The budget would provide States with $250 million in accountability funds, a $116 million increase over the 2000 level, for identifying and improving weak schools through actions that range from intensive teacher training to required implementation of proven reforms to school takeovers. All schools in corrective action would be required to provide their students the opportunity to transfer to better schools.

The Department also is proposing to channel Title I funds to the schools where those funds are most needed by allocating almost $1.7 billion through the Targeted Grants formula. This formula provides more funding per child than the Basic Grants formula to school districts that have higher percentages or numbers of children from low-income families.

In addition to Grants to Local Educational Agencies, Title I includes several other programs:

Even Start supports local projects that blend early childhood education, parenting instruction, and adult education into a unified family literacy program. The request includes $150 million, the same level as 2000, to support more than 900 projects nationwide—including nearly 200 new awards—that make these services available to eligible families.

The budget provides a $25.3 million increase for Migrant Education to meet the unique needs of the children of highly mobile migrant agricultural workers and bring about better coordination of the resources available for serving migrant students. In particular, the increase will help States expand their efforts to identify migrant children, pay the higher costs often associated with serving those children, and employ methods such as distance-learning to reach migrant farmworker communities. The budget also supports inter-State coordination activities, including grants to consortiums of States to reduce administrative costs and increase the amount of funds available for direct services. The request will enable States to identify and serve more than 760,000 students, up from 718,00 in 1999 and 2000. The Title I Neglected and Delinquent (N&D) program would receive level funding to maintain services to children and youth in State-operated institutions.

The Administration's reauthorization proposal would replace the separate authorization of appropriations for Title I evaluation activities with a provision that permits the Secretary to reserve for evaluation, data collection, and other national activities up to .3 percent from funds appropriated for Title I programs. The 2001 request assumes that the Secretary will reserve approximately $22.5 million.

Finally, the request would not fund Capital Expenses for Private School Children. This program has helped school districts meet the extra costs of including private school children in Title I programs under the terms mandated by the original Aguilar v. Felton decision in 1985, which prohibited provision of services at religious schools. Funds have been used to pay for portable vans, leasing of neutral sites, and other costs of off-site services. However, in a 1997 decision supported by the Administration, the Supreme Court reversed its original ruling, and districts are now allowed to provide on-site instruction at religious schools. Subsequent appropriations then helped districts and private schools make the transition back to on-site services, for instance by funding the remaining costs of long-term leases. This transition is now largely completed, and the Administration?s reauthorization bill would repeal the Capital Expenses program.

[TOP]Demonstrations of Comprehensive School Reform
(BA in millions)

Title I Demonstrations$120.0$170.0$190.0
Fund for the Improvement of Education25.0

This program helps schools develop, or adapt, and implement comprehensive school reform programs that are based on reliable research and effective practices. The $20 million increase, combined with funds available after the completion of the first round of three-year awards made in 1998, would support grants to approximately 1,900 new schools. In addition, the budget would continue support for an estimated 675 schools expected to receive awards in 2000.

In 1998, Congress recognized that a number of schools across the country were achieving impressive gains in student achievement by using new, comprehensive models for schoolwide change, rather than a piecemeal, fragmented approach to reform. The resulting Comprehensive School Reform Demonstrations (CSRD) initiative gives more schools the opportunity to examine successful models of reform and adapt them to their own needs.

The program requires participating schools to structure reforms around nine elements that, among other things, call for a design employing innovative strategies and methods for student learning, teaching, and school management that are based on reliable research and effective practices. Reforms must be aligned with the regular school program and with a school needs assessment. Grantees must also utilize outside expertise on schoolwide reform and improvement.

Title I CSRD funds are allocated by formula to States on the basis of each State?s share of prior-year Title I Basic Grants. The States then make three-year competitive subgrants to schools participating in Title I programs. States are encouraged to give a priority to low-achieving schools that are in Title I "school improvement" status. Additional funds appropriated through the Fund for the Improvement of Education (FIE), which are allocated to States according to their respective shares of school-aged children, may be subgranted to non-Title I schools.

[TOP] Recognition and Reward

BA in millions----$50.0

This new program would give financial rewards to States that demonstrate significant statewide gains in student achievement. In 2001, funds would be used to reward States that (1)demonstrate significant statewide gains in student achievement, and (2) reduce the achievement gap between high- and low-performing students as measured by the National Assessment of Educational Progress.

[TOP] High School Equivalency Program and
College Assistance Migrant Program

(BA in millions)

High School Equivalency Program$9.0$15.0$20.0
College Assistance Migrant Program4.0

The High School Equivalency Program (HEP) funds projects to help low-income migrant and seasonal farm workers gain high school diplomas or equivalency certificates. The College Assistance Migrant Program (CAMP) provides stipends and special services such as tutoring and counseling to migrant students who are in their first year of college. Both programs have demonstrated high success rates. In 1997-98, approximately 72 percent of HEP participants completed their GED and 88 percent of CAMP students completed their first year of college in good standing; almost 74 percent of CAMP participants eventually graduate from college.

In light of these successes, the Department proposes an $8million or 36 percent increase for the HEP and CAMP programs. The request would enable HEP to serve an additional 2,100 students for a total of almost 8,500, while the number of CAMP participants would grow by nearly 500 to 1,660.

[TOP] Reading and Literacy Grants

BA in millions$260.0$260.0$286.0

This program helps to ensure that all children can read well and independently by the end of the third grade by making competitive grants to States that have established statewide literacy partnerships and have strategies in place for improving reading instruction. States then make subgrants to communities for activities such as extra support in reading to children in the early elementary grades and improving reading instruction in elementary schools. The States also may use up to 15 percent of their grant funds to make "Tutorial Assistance Grants" that support after-school tutorial programs for children in need of assistance in reading.

The authorizing legislation for this program permits a State to receive a single, three-year competitive grant. The Department made 17 State grants in 1999 and expects to make 12 in 2000. The 2001 request would support grants to an additional 27 States and raise the estimated number of children served to approximately 3 million.

[TOP] Teaching to High Standards State Grants
(BA in millions)

Teaching to High Standards State Grants----$690.0
Eisenhower Professional Development
    State Grants
Goals 2000 State Grants461.0458.0--

The request supports the Administration's ESEA proposal to create a new standards-based reform grant program, Teaching to High Standards State Grants, that would build on the former Eisenhower Professional Development State Grants program and Title III of Goals 2000. The program will help educators improve classroom-based teaching and learning by supporting local efforts to align instruction, curricula, assessments, and professional development with challenging academic standards. Resources will be focused on sustained, intensive, content-based, and collaborative professional development in core content areas. Both research and reports from teachers show that this kind of professional development has the greatest impact in improving the quality of teaching.

School districts are just beginning the challenging process of reforming curricula and professional development for teachers in order to bring standards-based reform to the classroom. This program would support those efforts, and also help States to improve the standards and assessments that help shape those reforms. High-quality professional development is a central and indispensable element of the larger effort to help all students meet challenging standards. Research indicates that high-quality professional development, especially when it is focused on academic content, can contribute to improvements in teachers' skills and practice and thereby raise student achievement.

States would use up to 10 percent of their awards to continue to develop or revise academic standards, develop assessments, and support other State reforms, and $60 million will be allocated to State agencies for higher education for competitive grants. The remaining funds would be distributed to local districts, 50 percent by formula and 50 percent through a grant competition.

[TOP] School Leadership Initiative

BA in millions----$40.0

The capacity of a school or district to improve teaching and learning is dependent to a great extent upon the quality of the leadership exercised by its principal or superintendent. The School Leadership program would provide current and prospective superintendents and principals—particularly individuals who serve in high-poverty, low-performing districts and schools—with sustained and intensive training to improve their capacity to serve as effective leaders and successfully implement standards-based reforms in their schools and classrooms.

As proposed in the Administration?s ESEA reauthorization bill, this program would establish 20 State or regional leadership development centers that would provide professional development opportunities for approximately 10,000 current or prospective school administrators a year. Professional development activities offered by each center would vary according to the needs of the areas served by each grant, but would be geared to helping sitting and prospective superintendent and principals meet the new demands of the job. Centers would be operated by consortia involving school districts (including at least one high-poverty district), State educational agencies, higher education institutions, businesses, and other organizations with the expertise to provide professional development to school administrators.

[TOP]Teacher Quality Initiatives
(BA in millions)

Hometown Teachers----$75.0
Higher Standards, Higher Pay----50.0
Teacher Quality Incentives----50.0

These three new initiatives, which would be authorized under the Administration's ESEA reauthorization proposal, would help expand the supply of teachers and build a strong teaching force, especially in high-poverty areas.

The Hometown Teachers initiative would make competitive grants to approximately 100 high-poverty school districts to develop comprehensive approaches to teacher recruitment and retention, including efforts to create pipeline-style methods of recruitment and retention to address longstanding teacher shortages. The program could, for example, fund college scholarships for graduating high school students, incentives to major in high-need subject areas, and strategies to retain new teachers recruited through the program, including mentoring programs and bonuses.

The Higher Standards, Higher Pay initiative would award competitive grants to help 10-12 high-poverty school districts attract and retain high-quality teachers and principals through better pay. In order to be eligible for funding, partnerships involving school districts, local businesses, and teachers? unions would be required to develop and implement reforms to raise teacher performance. Such reforms would include regular, rigorous peer evaluations of every teacher using student performance as one measure; professional development and intensive support to help all teachers and principals succeed; and streamlined but fair systems to improve or remove teachers identified as low-performing by their peer evaluation. Participating partnerships would have to agree on steps to recruit talented new teachers, evaluate new teachers, reward good teaching, provide mentors for new teachers and principals, and adopt better ways to identify and to improve or remove low performing teachers.

The Teacher Quality Incentives competitive grant program would reward high-poverty school districts that demonstrate the largest improvements in both increasing the percentage of certified teachers and decreasing the percentage of secondary teachers who are teaching out-of-field. Districts would compete against other districts of similar size, and those districts in each of three size categories that had made the most progress over a specified time period would receive grants.

[TOP] Transition to Teaching: Troops to Teachers

BA in millions----$25.0

This proposal would continue and expand on the Troops to Teachers model that, since 1994, has recruited former members of the military services and placed them as teachers in high-need subject areas and school districts. Since 1994, more than 3,300 former military personnel have been hired as teachers in 48 States and the District of Columbia, and more than 83percent of the participants are still in the classroom today. Teachers recruited through Troops to Teachers are twice as likely as traditional public school teachers to teach in such high-need subject areas as mathematics, science, and special education. Also, the program has been successful in placing high-quality teachers in high-need geographic areas.

The Administration's proposal builds on the success of the Troops to Teachers program by expanding it to recruit individuals from civilian fields whose knowledge and experience can help them become successful teachers in the Nation's neediest schools. For example, in addition to retired military personnel, the program would recruit career-changing engineering and science professionals from the corporate world.

The program would make awards to institutions of higher education, public agencies, and nonprofit organizations to recruit, prepare, place, and support mid-career professionals for teaching positions in high-poverty school districts. Program participants would be eligible for up to $5,000 in training stipends and other incentives.

[TOP] Early Childhood Educator Professional Development

BA in millions----$30.0

This program would help improve the school readiness of children, especially in high-poverty communities, by creating high-quality professional development opportunities to improve the knowledge and skills of early childhood educators and caregivers, including staff working in TitleI preschools, Head Start, Even Start, and public day care programs.

Considerable research shows that early childcare experiences have a significant impact on later educational achievement. In particular, high-quality childcare can help prevent reading and other problems often seen in children from poor families with little education.

The proposal calls for grants to partnerships of higher education institutions or other organizations, with a priority to consortia including local educational agencies that operate early childhood education programs in "high-need" communities. High-need would be defined as communities where at least 50 percent of children live in poverty or the 10 percent of communities with the greatest number of poor children in a State.

Grant funds would be used for such activities as familiarizing early childhood educators and caregivers with research on language and literacy development, training them to work with children with special needs and to work with parents to reinforce early learning, and supporting early childhood educators during their first three years in the field.

[TOP] Goals 2000 State and Local Education Systemic Improvement

BA in millions$461.0$458.0--

The request includes no funding for Goals 2000 because States and school districts will continue Goals 2000 activities under the Administration's reauthorization proposal for Title II Teaching to High Standards State Grants. Goals 2000 has been an important factor in promoting State and local reform efforts and helping all 50 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico to make significant progress in establishing high standards in the core academic subjects. The Administration's reauthorization proposal would build on and expand these efforts to help advance the implementation of standards-based reforms in every classroom, through intensive professional development and other improvements to align curriculum with State standards.

[TOP]Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities
(BA in millions)

Safe and Drug-Free Schools
   State Grants$441.0$439.2$439.2
   National Programs125.0160.8200.8
   Project SERV--

America?s students cannot be expected to learn in schools threatened by drug abuse and violence. The Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities program is designed to help make our schools safe and drug-free by supporting comprehensive, integrated approaches to drug and violence prevention. The program provides significant resources to motivate our youth to reject illegal drugs as well as the use of alcohol and tobacco, which is Goal Number 1 of the National Drug Control Strategy. Toward this end, the budget would provide $650 million for this program, a $50 million increase over the 2000 level.

The request includes level funding of $439 million for State Grants, which are distributed by formula to State educational agencies (SEAs) and Governors and then subgranted to local educational agencies (LEAs) and other entities. To improve the effectiveness of this program, under the President's reauthorization proposal SEAs would be required to award at least 70 percent of their funds competitively to LEAs on the basis of district need and program quality, in amounts sufficient to support effective programs. This proposal reflects findings that funds are spread too thinly under current law to make a real difference. The reauthorization proposal also incorporates "principles of effectiveness" governing program expenditures that, in combination with the change to competitive grants, should have a significant positive impact on program results.

The request for National Programs would provide $122 million, a $40 million increase, for the Safe Schools/Healthy Students initiative, a joint effort of the Departments of Education, Justice, Health and Human Services, and Labor. This initiative helps school districts and communities develop and implement comprehensive, community-wide strategies for creating safe and drug-free schools and for promoting healthy childhood development. The Education request, combined with the budgets of other participating agencies, would invest a total of $247 million in Safe Schools/Healthy Students, an increase of more than $100 million over the 2000 level. The request would fund new projects in approximately 40 communities while supporting ongoing projects in roughly 70 communities across the Nation. A portion of the increase also would support a new interagency research initiative on youth violence.

National Programs also includes $50 million for continuation awards under the Middle School Coordinator Initiative, which supports drug and violence prevention coordinators in middle schools with significant drug and violence problems. Coordinators help schools analyze their crime and drug problems, select and implement the most appropriate and effective interventions to address those problems, and work with the outside community to ensure that school programs are linked with all available community resources. The 2001 request would bring the total number of coordinators hired under this program to more than 800 assisting more than 1,300 middle schools.

Finally, the budget includes $10 million for Project SERV (School Emergency Response to Violence). Under this initiative, the Department would partner with other Federal agencies in providing emergency assistance to schools affected by serious violence or other traumatic incidents.

[TOP] Small, Safe and Successful High Schools

BA in millions--$45.0$120.0

This new initiative—an expansion of activities funded by the Fund for the Improvement of Education in fiscal year 2000 under the Smaller Learning Communities program—would help high schools implement smaller, safer learning environments.

In 1997, almost half of the Nation's high school students attended schools that enrolled more than 1,500 students, and three-fourths of urban high school students attended schools of that size. Students often feel disconnected and alienated from adults and from each other in such large schools?an environment that can prevent progress toward the National Education Goals on raising graduation rates and helping all students attain world-class standards.

The request would support the restructuring—through such strategies as schools-within-schools, career academies, and magnet schools—of approximately 700 high schools to create learning environments of no more than 600 students. Grantees would be expected to demonstrate improvement in student achievement, graduation rates, postsecondary enrollment rates, safety, and dropout and retention rates.

[TOP] Charter Schools

BA in millions$100.0$145.0$175.0

The Charter Schools program stimulates comprehensive education reform and public school choice by supporting the planning, development, and initial implementation of public charter schools. Charter schools are public schools that are exempted from most education rules and regulations so as to permit more flexible and innovative methods of achieving educational excellence. In exchange for this greater independence, charter schools are held accountable for improving student performance. A total of 36 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico now have charter schools laws, and the number of charter schools has increased from 250 to almost 1,700 in the past four years. The Administration?s goal is to provide Federal support for the creation of some 3,000 charter schools across the Nation. The $175 million request would support the Administration?s objective of expanding public school choice options by funding an estimated 700 new charter schools and some 1,000 existing charter schools.

[TOP] Magnet Schools Assistance

BA in millions$104.0$110.0$110.0

The budget includes level funding to make approximately 62 new and continuation grants to local educational agencies to operate magnet schools that are part of a court-ordered or federally approved desegregation plan to eliminate, reduce, or prevent minority group isolation in elementary and secondary schools. Magnet schools address their desegregation goals by providing a distinctive educational program that attracts a diverse student population.

[TOP] Opportunities to Improve Our Nation's Schools (OPTIONS)

BA in millions----$20.0

The budget includes funding to initiate this flexible new public school choice authority proposed under the Administration's ESEA bill to complement the Magnet and Charter Schools programs. The OPTIONS program would support the Administration's policy that public school choice, in coordination with other school reform efforts, can be an effective way to respond to the need for change and innovation in the public school system. Public school choice also can help promote high standards and continuous improvement for all children, especially children who have traditionally been the least well-served.

The request would support about 40 grants to States and local school districts to implement new approaches to public school choice, including interdistrict programs and public schools at work sites and on college campuses.

[TOP] Strengthening Technical Assistance Capacity
(BA in millions)

Strengthening technical assistance capacity grants----$38.0
Comprehensive regional assistance centers$28.0$28.0--

The request supports a new technical assistance strategy, proposed in the Administration's ESEA reauthorization bill, that would replace the current network of Comprehensive Regional Assistance Centers with a demand-based system. Under the new system, States and large school districts would receive direct formula grants to purchase technical assistance that best fits their needs and to strengthen their capacity to acquire and use technical assistance to improve teaching and learning. The proposal would direct about one-third of funding to the 100 school districts with the largest numbers of poor children, and two-thirds to States based on their relative shares of Title I Basic Grants. The Secretary would also reserve funds to provide information on the quality and effectiveness of technical assistance to help States and districts make informed choices in selecting technical assistance activities and providers.

[TOP] Parent Information Resource Centers

BA in millions$30.0$33.0$33.0

The request includes level funding for these Centers, which would be reauthorized to focus on providing technical assistance and support to States, districts, and schools to help them remove barriers to parent involvement in their children's education.

[TOP] Education for Homeless Children and Youth

BA in millions$28.8$28.8$31.7

This program provides formula grants to States to carry out activities to ensure that all homeless children have access to a free, appropriate public education. States also make subgrants to local educational agencies for tutoring, transportation, and other services that help homeless children to enroll in, attend, and succeed in school.

Since this program began in 1988, nearly all States have revised their laws, regulations, and policies to improve educational access for homeless students. States have typically eased residency requirements, and some have made great strides in changing transportation and immunization policies to ensure greater access for the homeless. Nevertheless, homeless children and youth continue to be a population at significant risk of educational failure and, because of their mobility, are often underserved by programs that are designed to prevent that failure, such as Head Start, special education, and bilingual education. The $31.7 million request for this program, a $2.9 million increase, would help States improve services to homeless children and increase the number of students served.

[TOP] Inexpensive Book Distribution

BA in millions$18.0$20.0$20.0

This program is administered through a contract with Reading Is Fundamental, Inc. (RIF), a nonprofit organization affiliated with the Smithsonian Institution. RIF allocates funds to local community associations that select and distribute inexpensive books to children free-of-charge. RIF currently reaches more than 3.4 million children through 5,600 local projects. Since 1994, legislation has required RIF, in selecting new local projects, to give priority to those that will serve children who are low-income, disabled, homeless, or have other special needs.

[TOP] Arts in Education

BA in millions$10.5$11.5$23.0

This program supports student competency in the arts by encouraging the integration of arts education into elementary and secondary school curricula. The Department awards funds to the VSA arts organization, which develops programs that integrate the arts into the general education of children with disabilities and the lives of adults with disabilities, and to the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts education program, which supports a variety of arts education activities with States and schools.

The request would expand funding from $1 million to $2.5 million for a program launched in fiscal year 2000 to help at-risk youth interpret media images as a way of preventing youth violence, delinquency, and substance abuse. In addition, the request would provide $10 million for a new grant competition?in collaboration with the National Endowment for the Arts?that focuses on the arts, including the visual arts, music, dance, and theater, as part of the education of students in high-need schools, including those with high rates of poverty and youth violence.

[TOP] Women's Educational Equity

BA in millions$3.0$3.0$3.0

The Women's Educational Equity program promotes educational equity for girls and women through grants to public agencies, private nonprofit organizations, and individuals. The Administration's reauthorization proposal would make the program more flexible, with the amount of funds for local implementation projects and research and development projects based on national and local needs and priorities. Under current law, at least two-thirds of funds support local implementation of gender-equity policies and practices, through such activities as teacher training, to ensure gender equity in the classroom, and guidance and counseling to increase opportunities for women in fields in which they are traditionally underrepresented. The remaining funds support dissemination through a national resource center and research and development grants. Level funding in 2001 would provide sufficient funds for both new and continuing awards.

[TOP] Training and Advisory Services (Title IV of the Civil Rights Act)

BA in millions$7.3$7.3$7.3

This program supports 10 regional Equity Assistance Centers that provide services to school districts on issues related to desegregation based on race, gender, and national origin. Typical activities include disseminating information on successful practices and legal requirements related to nondiscrimination, providing training to educators to develop their skills in specific areas, such as identification of bias in instructional materials, and technical assistance on selection of instructional materials.

[TOP]Education for Native Hawaiians
(BA in millions)

Family-Based Education Centers$7.2$8.9$8.9
Higher Education2.72.7--1
Gifted and Talented2.02.22.2
Special Education2.02.22.2
Curriculum Development, Teacher
   Training, and Recruitment
Community-Based Centers1.01.11.1
Native Hawaiian Education Councils0.30.40.4
Consolidated program grants0

1 Under the Administration's reauthorization proposal, new awards could be made in areas authorized by the current statute. The request assumes that grants made in previous years under the seven programs would be continued, and these are shown on the table above; new awards would be made under the Administration's proposed consolidated program authority.

These programs provide educational services for Hawaiian Natives, many of whom continue to perform below national norms on achievement tests of basic skills in reading, science, math, and social science. Hawaiian Natives also experience higher than average rates of absenteeism and grade retention, are disproportionately identified as disabled, and have a low rate of postsecondary participation. The Education for Native Hawaiians programs address each of these issues, and have demonstrated significant progress in such areas as early childhood education and higher education. In recent years, at the instruction of Congress, the Department has funded new projects in such areas as aquaculture education, Hawaiian language revitalization, and prisoner education.

The Administration's reauthorization proposal would consolidate the seven programs into one comprehensive authority that would permit projects funded under the program areas currently authorized by the statute or in additional areas identified by the Secretary or the Congress. The requested level assumes that grants made in previous years under the separate programs would be continued. Because many projects conclude their funding in 2000, level funding would support new awards under the consolidated authority.

[TOP] Alaska Native Education Equity
(BA in millions)

Educational Planning, Curriculum
    Development, Teacher Training,
    and Recruitment
Home-based Education for
    Pre-School Children
School Enrichment1.5

These programs provide educational services to meet the special needs of Native Alaskan children. Recent studies have shown that 60 percent of Alaska Natives entering high school in urban areas do not graduate, and Alaska Natives trail other students on tests of educational proficiency. In 2000, funding for these programs increased by 30 percent. The 2001 request includes level funding for continuation of projects that address the barriers preventing Alaska Native children from achieving to higher academic standards.

The Administration's reauthorization proposal for this program would consolidate the three programs into one comprehensive program, while allowing continuation of the full array of current program activities and retaining most current emphases and priorities. However, consolidated awards would not be made until 2002, when current grants expire.

[TOP] Advanced Placement Incentives

BA in millions$4.0$15.0$20.0

This program awards grants to States to enable them to cover part or all of the cost of advanced placement (AP) test fees of low-income students who are enrolled in an advanced placement course and intend to take an advanced placement test. The program thus provides an incentive for districts serving low-income students to offer advanced placement courses and for students to take those courses. Passing the AP tests can then result in students earning college credits and reducing their postsecondary education costs.

As reauthorized in 1998, the program also supports other activities to make advanced placement and other challenging courses available to students from low-income families and, thus, upgrade the high school curriculum available to those students. States in which low-income students pay no more than a nominal fee to take AP tests can use program funds for such activities as development of curriculum for advanced placement courses and training of teachers to teach in those courses.

The 33 percent increase requested for 2001 would help bring challenging courses to high schools serving concentrations of low-income students. New funds would support State efforts to make high-level, challenging courses more widely available. For example, States could use the Internet or other technologies to establish advanced placement distance learning programs in small or isolated high-poverty schools that cannot currently provide access for their students to such classes. The request would also pay test fees for low-income students taking approximately 75,000 Advanced Placement tests.

[TOP] Indian Education
(BA in millions)

Grants to LEAs$62.0$62.0$92.8
Special Programs for Indian Children 3.313.220.0
National Activities0.7

The Department?s Indian Education programs supplement the efforts of State and local educational agencies, and Indian tribes, to improve educational opportunities for Indian children. The programs link these efforts to broader educational reforms underway in States and localities to ensure that Indian students benefit from those reforms and achieve to the same challenging academic standards as other students.

American Indians continue to be disproportionately affected by poverty and low educational achievement. The request provides a $38.5 million increase for Indian Education, including a $30.8 million or 50 percent increase for Grants to Local Educational Agencies, which provide funds to public and BIA-supported schools for activities to improve the educational achievement of Indian students. These activities must be linked to student performance goals based on challenging State or local standards, and the districts must report periodically to their communities on progress toward these goals.

The request also provides a $6.7 million increase for Special Programs for Indian Children, including $5 million to fund new awards for school readiness demonstrations and educator professional development projects.

In addition, the request responds to President's 1998 Executive Order on Indian Education, which commits the Federal Government to developing a comprehensive response to the national need for better education of Indians. Efforts are focused on improving reading, mathematics, science, postsecondary attendance and completion rates, and ensuring that Indian students have access to strong, safe, and drug-free school environments. Initiatives in the 2001 budget supporting the Executive Order include (1) continuation of the $10 million Indian Teacher Corps, which will train 1,000 Indian teachers over a five-year period to take positions in schools that serve concentrations of Indian children; (2) a new $5 million American Indian Administrator Corps proposal, which would recruit, train, and provide in-service professional development to American Indians to become effective school administrators in schools with high concentrations of American Indian students; and (3) $2.7 million to support a comprehensive Federal research agenda on Indian education.

[TOP] Impact Aid
(BA in millions)

Payments for Federally Connected Children:
   Basic Support Payments$704.0$737.2$720.0
   Payments for Children with Disabilities50.050.040.0
   Payments for Heavily Impacted Districts70.072.2--
Facilities Maintenance5.05.05.0
Payments for Federal Property28.0

The Impact Aid program provides financial support to school districts affected by Federal activities. The 2001 request would target funds to those school districts most genuinely burdened by the presence of federally connected children. Categories of eligible children would include (1) children living on Indian lands and (2) children who live on Federal property and who have a parent on active duty in the uniformed services, in civilian Federal employment, or in the employ of a foreign military service. The Administration believes that other federally connected children, the so-called "b" children who generally live on or have a parent working on Federal property (but not both), do not create a significant financial burden on school districts.

The $720 million request for Basic Support Payments, although $17.2 million less than the 2000 amount, would increase the average per-child payments on behalf of eligible children by 7 percent. No payments would be made for "b" children.

The $40 million request for Payments for Children with Disabilities, while a $10 million reduction, would increase the average per-child payment for the categories of children proposed for eligibility by 4percent. These funds provide additional support for certain federally connected children who are eligible for services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. As under Basic Support Payments, no payments would be made on behalf of "b" children.

The request would provide no funding for Payments to Heavily Impacted Districts. While this authority was originally designed to assist school districts that have large concentrations of federally connected children and limited fiscal capacity to educate those children, the funding rules recently adopted by Congress do not target funds effectively to such districts.

The Department of Education owns and must maintain 50 school facilities that serve large numbers of military dependents. The budget includes $5 million for Facilities Maintenance to pay for essential repairs to these facilities and allow the Department to continue to upgrade and transfer school facilities to local educational agencies.

The $5 million request for Impact Aid Construction, although $5.1 million less than the 2000 amount, would provide an 8percent increase in per-child payments distributed by formula to meet the school construction needs of local educational agencies with large proportions of federally connected children living on Indian lands.

No funds are requested for Payments for Federal Property, which are made to school districts without regard to the presence of federally connected children. Approximately one-third of currently participating districts receives funds based on exceptions to the basic eligibility criteria under the authorizing statute. That is, one-third of those districts have not had a loss of tax base of at least 10 percent of assessed value due to the acquisition, since 1938, of real property by the United States Government.

[TOP] Innovative Education Program Strategies State Grants

BA in millions$375.0$365.8--

The request includes no funding for this program, also known as Title VI block grants, because it would be repealed under the Administration's ESEA reauthorization proposal. The program is not well designed to support real improvements in teaching and learning, and the Department believes that these funds are better spent on comprehensive, standards-based educational improvement and reform.

[TOP] Ellender Fellowships

BA in millions$1.5$1.5--

The Ellender Fellowships program, administered by the Close Up Foundation of Washington, D.C., provides financial aid to enable low-income students and their teachers to participate in week-long seminars on government in Washington. A separate program is designed to increase understanding of the Federal Government among older Americans, recent immigrants, and children of migrant parents.

A 1992 study of the Ellender Fellowship program found that, despite a pattern of increasing Federal funding for the program and significant increases in private-sector support for the Close Up Foundation, the number of fellowships had steadily declined. In 1996, at the request of Congress, the Department and Close Up developed a plan for the Foundation to continue its activities without Federal support. Under this plan, the Foundation pledged to expand its private development activities, including, for the first time, reaching out to the nearly 500,000 Close Up alumni. The Department believes that these activities make further Federal funding unnecessary. The Administration?s ESEA reauthorization bill would repeal the program and instead support the expansion of civics education through the Fund for Improvement of Education and the Civic Education program (See Educational Research and Improvement).

Direct any questions to Martha Jacobs, Budget Service


[Summary of the 2000 Budget]
[Table of Contents]
[Section B - Bilingual and Immigrant Education]