BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  SB 798
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   June 16, 2010

                           ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
                                Julia Brownley, Chair
                 SB 798 (DeSaulnier) - As Amended:  January 11, 2010

           SENATE VOTE  :   31-6
           
          SUBJECT  :   Before and after school programs

           SUMMARY  :   Specifies that in any fiscal year in which the total  
          amount appropriated for the federal 21st Century Community  
          Learning Centers (21st CCLC) Program for that fiscal year  
          exceeds the total amount appropriated for the 2008-09 fiscal  
          year (FY), the excess amount shall be allocated on a priority  
          basis for direct grants to community learning centers as  
          follows:

          1)35% to community learning centers serving high school pupils;

          2)50% to community learning centers serving elementary and  
            middle school pupils; and,

          3)15% to summer programs serving elementary and middle school  
            pupils.

           EXISTING LAW  :

          1)Establishes the After School Education and Safety (ASES)  
            Program through the 2002 voter approved initiative,  
            Proposition 49, which funds the establishment of local after  
            school education and enrichment programs, which are created  
            through partnerships between schools and local community  
            resources to provide literacy, academic enrichment and safe  
            constructive alternatives for students in kindergarten through  
            ninth grade.  (Education Code (EC) 8482-8484.6)

          2)The federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act authorizes funding  
            for the 21st CCLC program.  Specifies that the requirements of  
            the ASES program apply to the 21st CCLC program with specified  
            exceptions. (EC 8484.7)

          3)Establishes the 21st Century High School After School Safety  
            and Enrichment for Teens (High School ASSETs) program and  
            specifies that the purpose of the program is to create  








                                                                  SB 798
                                                                  Page  2

            incentives for establishing locally driven after school  
            enrichment programs that partner schools and communities to  
            provide academic support and safe, constructive alternatives  
            for high school pupils in the hours after the regular  
            schoolday, and that may assist pupils in passing the high  
            school exit exam.  (EC 8421)

           FISCAL EFFECT :  According to the Senate Appropriations  
          Committee, this bill directs federal funds and therefore has no  
          new costs.  

           COMMENTS  :   21st CCLC program  .  The state receives approximately  
          $130 million annually in federal funds for the 21st CCLC  
          program, which provides funding for before and after school  
          activities to pupils in kindergarten through grade 12.  The  
          state has chosen to implement this program almost identical to  
          the state's ASES program, passed by voters through Proposition  
          49 in 2002, which provides almost $550 million for before and  
          after school programs for 400,000 students in kindergarten  
          through grade 9.  Existing law (EC 8484.8) specifies that 40% of  
          the 21st CCLC funds shall be allocated for programs serving  
          elementary and middle school pupils and 50% shall be allocated  
          for direct grants to community learning centers serving high  
          school pupils.  The remaining 10% is used for direct grants to  
          community learning center programs to provide equitable access  
          and to provide family literacy services.  Per pupil rates for  
          serving elementary and middle school pupils is $7.50 per day for  
          after school programs and $5 per day for before school programs.  
           Elementary and middle school programs receive grants up to a  
          maximum of $225,000 and $300,000, respectively, per year and  
          must provide academic assistance, educational enrichment and  
          family literacy services.  Federal requirements give priority  
          for funding to programs serving Title 1 kids (low-income kids  
          eligible for free and reduced-priced meals).  The 21st Century  
          High School ASSETs program provides grants between $50,000 to  
          $250,000 per school site based on $10 per student per day, and  
          requires the following elements:

          1)An academic assistance element that includes at least one of  
            the following:  preparation for the high school exist exam,  
            tutoring, homework assistance, or college preparation; and,

          2)An enrichment element that may include, but is not limited to,  
            community service, career and technical education, job  
            readiness, opportunities for mentoring and tutoring younger  








                                                                  SB 798
                                                                  Page  3

            pupils, service learning, arts, computer and technology  
            training, physical fitness and recreation activities.

          This bill proposes to, for any funds over the fiscal year  
          2008-09 allocation, change the allocation formula of federal  
          21st CCLC funds as follows:

             a)   High school programs:  from 50% to 35%;

             b)   Elementary and middle school programs:  from 40% to 50%;  
               and, 

             c)   New summer program set aside:  15%.

          The author states that "the original implementation plan did not  
          accommodate the range of needs throughout the year, including  
          services during periods when the school is closed (e.g.,  
          vacation periods, intersession).  Currently children can receive  
          substantial academic and enrichment benefits during the 9 months  
          of the regular school year, then lose ground during the 2 -3  
          months of summer vacation."

          The following chart provided by the CDE shows the amount of  
          funding the state has received over the last four years:


           ---------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |            |  2006-07   |  2007-08   |  2008-09   |  2009-10   |
          |------------+------------+------------+------------+------------|
          |Federal     |   $131.3   |   $127.7   |   $132.4   |   $130.9   |
          |Allocation  |  million   |  million   |  million   |  million   |
          |------------+------------+------------+------------+------------|
          |Grant       |   $79.8    |   $127.3   |   $149.7   |   $150.7   |
          |Awards      |  million   |  million   |  million*  |  million*  |
           ---------------------------------------------------------------- 
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          | *increased using carry over funds                               |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 

          Due to prior unallocated amounts, the program currently has  
          almost $90 million in carryover dollars.  The CDE indicates that  
          over the last couple of years, it has had to use carryover funds  
          to backfill demand in excess of the annual allocations, and  
          projects spending down the carryover funds within the next few  
          years.  21st CCLC funds are currently allocated according to the  








                                                                  SB 798
                                                                  Page  4

          number of Title 1 students.  There is a proposal in Congress to  
          change the allocation to a competitive grant, which, if enacted,  
          will give the state no guarantee that it will continue to  
          receive current level of funding.  

           Need for Summer programs  .  The sponsor, the Partnership for  
          Children and Youth, states that demand for high school programs  
          have decreased while fewer summer programs are available due to  
          budget cuts.  The Partnership states, "Research is very clear  
          about the negative impacts that occur when children lack  
          learning opportunities during the months when they are not in  
          school.  This phenomenon called 'Summer Learning Loss' or  
          'Summer Slide' disproportionately affects low-income children  
          and is also cumulative over time.  Some researchers attribute as  
          much as 2/3 of the achievement gap to a lack of summer learning  
          opportunities.  In addition, research also shows that children  
          gain weight more rapidly in the summer if they don't have access  
          to organized recreational or physical activity programs.  Nearly  
          all children enrolled in publicly funded after school programs  
          also receive free or reduced price meals during the school year,  
          and without those meals in the summer, many are receiving  
          lower-quality foods that are causing weight gain."

          There is no statewide data available on the number and adequacy  
          of summer programs.  The CDE does not require local educational  
          agencies (LEAs) to report this data.  A 2009 survey by Public  
          Agenda found that 59% of parents either did not enroll their  
          child in a summer program in 2009 or enrolled their child in a  
          summer program for less than half the summer.  The survey  
          results found that finances and lack of available programs were  
          factors that prevented participation in summer programs.  Budget  
          cuts over the last few years have likely decreased availability  
          of summer programs.  The CDE recently released results from a  
          survey that shows that 26% of LEAs reported cutting summer  
          schools.  

          21st CCLC funds are authorized to be used for summer programs.   
          Grantees can request a supplemental grant that can be used for  
          summer, intersession or vacation periods.  Summer school  
          programs can also be funded through Supplemental Instruction  
          funds of $335 million (FY 2010-11), but the FY 2009-10 budget  
          agreement gave LEAs the flexibility to use funds from 39  
          categorical programs for any educational purposes for FY 2008-09  
          through 2012-13 (SBX3 4 (Ducheny), Chapter 12, Statutes of the  
          2009-10 Third Extraordinary Session).  Summer school fund is  








                                                                  SB 798
                                                                  Page  5

          part of the flexibility authorization and in a recent  
          Legislative Analyst's Office survey, 60% of district respondents  
          indicated that they had shifted supplemental funds for other  
          uses.   

          Using any amount over the $132.4 million received by the state  
          in 2008-09, this bill proposes to redirect 15% of the funding  
          for high school programs to summer programs.  The CDE does not  
          have data readily available on the number of eligible  
          applications that have not received funding.  While it is more  
          difficult to recruit high school pupils to attend after school  
          programs, the 21st CCLC is the only source of funding for high  
          schools; ASES serves students up to the ninth grade.  The  
          Committee should consider whether funds for high school programs  
          should be diverted for other uses.  Rather than establish a new  
          formula for a marginal amount of funds, the author may wish to  
          consider simplifying the bill by setting aside 15% of increased  
          funds over the FY 2008-09 level for summer programs and  
          eliminating the formula for elementary/middle and high schools.   
          The remaining amount would be added to the base federal  
          appropriation and allocated according to existing law.  

          The bill does not specify how the summer programs funds will be  
          allocated.  Supplemental grants can be used for summer programs,  
          but programs during intersession and vacations are also  
          authorized uses.  The author may wish to consider clarifying the  
          process for allocating summer program funds.  

          The California Right to Life Committee, Inc. opposes the bill  
          and states, "This bill is a drain on the economy, a meaningless  
          environment for our children and merely provides money in the  
          pockets of professional babysitters.  This is not education;  
          this is behavior modification and it is a blemish on the face of  
          education in our state."

           Technical amendment  .  The bill references an appropriation but  
          does not specify which appropriation.  Staff recommends  
          clarifying that the appropriation cited in the bill is the  
          federal appropriation.  

           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :

           Support 
           
          Partnership for Children and Youth (sponsor)








                                                                  SB 798
                                                                  Page  6

          California Alliance of Boys and Girls Clubs
          California School-Age Consortium 
          Children Now
          League of California Afterschool Providers
          Los Angeles County Office of Education
          Sacramento City Council member Sandy Sheedy
          Woodcraft Rangers (Los Angeles)
           
            Opposition 
           
          California Right to Life Committee, Inc.

           Analysis Prepared by  :    Sophia Kwong Kim / ED. / (916) 319-2087