Federal, State & Local Strategies to Support Extended Learning Opportunities

A Forum — June 22, 2001

The renewed interest in extended learning opportunities for children and youth is a response to three very real social and public policy issues: 1) the extra supports students require to meet higher education standards; 2) a shifting workforce requiring employment of both parents; and 3) safety concerns for students left alone between the end of the school day and the end of their parents’ work day. Addressing those needs is increasingly considered a joint responsibility of families, communities and government. These concerns underlie a new collaboration of national organizations representing state and local governing bodies. With support from the Charles Stewart Mott foundation, the After-School Technical Assistance Coalition (ATAC) has organized to help further best practices in and access to after-school programs. The American Youth Policy Forum brought ATAC members representing the governors, chief state school officers and mayors and researchers together for a discussion with policymakers on Capitol Hill about federal, state and local efforts and initiatives in this area.

Adriana de Kanter, Partnership Liaison, with the U.S. Department of Education, provided the context for the growing extended-day movement, discussing the leadership provided by the federal government and the Mott Foundation. According to de Kanter, the federal government ratcheted up its commitment to after-school programs with the 21st Century Learning Community legislation passed in 1998. Federal funding for these initiatives rose from $50 million in 1998 to $846 million dollars in 2001. To date, the U.S. Department of Education has awarded more than 1600 grants to support after-school programs in every state and territory in America. This federal commitment dovetails with a commitment from the Mott foundation of $100 million dollars to support training of after-school program staff over a seven-year period from 1999 to 2006. The initiatives funded by Mott and the Department of Education must meet quality criteria in several areas:

• Planning for sustainability
• Mission and management with a vision
• Diverse, well-trained staff
• Safety and health priorities
• Effective partnerships between schools, foundations and community-based organizations
• Family involvement
• Rigorous evaluation to assess program impact

Federal legislation now pending could change the funding structure of 21st Century Learning Communities, moving it from a local competitive grant program to one administered through the state education agencies. Mark Emery, a Project Director for the Council of Chief State School Officers, discussed the current legislative debates at the federal level, concluding that the House and Senate versions of the reauthorization of 21st Century Learning Communities share more similarities than many observers realize reflecting a common vision of federal support. Both houses of Congress believe that such initiatives should have an academic focus, an evaluation component, partnerships with other local agencies, support for transportation, federal funds that supplement (but do not supplant) current funding, and an emphasis on sustainability. Whatever the final bill looks like, Emery is sure that it will rely heavily on state departments of education to take the lead on providing technical assistance and disseminating funds. CCSSO has shown leadership in this area, making extended learning and development a component of its 1999 Council priority—Students Continually Learning—along with priorities of early childhood care and education, and student motivation.

Karen Johnson, Program Director with the National Conference of State Legislatures, and Sharon Deich, Program Manager with the Finance Project, focused on actions of state legislatures. According to Johnson, 20 states have proposed or passed legislation to support extended learning opportunities. Two state leaders are Maryland and California, with well-established support programs for after-school initiatives. Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut also have solid support for such initiatives in their legislatures. According to Deich, there are currently 232 state statutes funding after-school programming. This number is growing rapidly, with 32 new bills passed in the 1998-99 legislative sessions and 62 passed in the 1999-00 sessions. These bills primarily fund the services provided by traditional after-school initiatives running from 3:00 PM to 6:00 PM and many require re-appropriation from year to year. The concern, however, is that this legislation does not include funding for infrastructure improvements such as facilities maintenance and construction, data management, program evaluation, and staff training. Deich believes that long-term funding and support for the infrastructure of after-school programming is crucial for program sustainability.

Theresa Clarke, Policy Analyst with the National Governors Association, related findings from surveys and interviews to determine the level of interest and support for after-school initiatives among governors and their staff. Twenty-six of the 43 state executives surveyed indicated plans to press for increased funding of after-school programs. The survey revealed that a majority of states currently support academic enrichment programs after school. Two-thirds of these programs are administered by the state Departments of Education, half are funded exclusively by the state, and more than three-quarters of these programs serve a mix of elementary and middle-school youth. More detailed information about individual state initiatives can be found in the National Governors Association publication "Expand Learning: Make Every Minute Meaningful."

Audrey Hutchinson, Program Director with the National League of Cities, described her organization’s initiative to provide technical assistance to cities already working with after-school programs. Sixty-two cities applied to participate in the technical assistance initiative, but only eight have been selected to receive direct support: Charlotte, NC; Fort Worth, TX; Fresno, CA; Grand Rapids, MI; Indianapolis, IN.; Lincoln, NE; Spokane, WA; and Washington, DC. Hutchinson and her staff are assisting these cities in developing action plans and creating a peer network for local directors of after-school programs. For the other 54 cities, regional meetings will be organized for program directors to support their technical assistance needs.

The Mott Foundation, through support to the above organizations, has been instrumental in fostering vertical integration of a community that had been previously fragmented into federal, state, and local spheres of influence. Through ATAC, policymakers and program directors have been able to come together to push for a common vision of extended learning opportunities, but more work remains to be done. Some advocates believe that all youth should have access to after-school programs, while others feel that we should target limited resources to the youth most in need of these programs. Philosophical differences like this one are reflected in the very terminology of the field, with policymakers pushing for "after-school programs," "extended learning opportunities," and "extra-school time." ATAC is working on these issues, by facilitating conversations to air differences as well as align program and policy goals.

American Youth Policy Forum   1836 Jefferson Place NW,  Washington DC 20036
Telephone 202-775-9731      |      Fax 202-775-9733      |     Email aypf@aypf.org