BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 1221
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 6, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
SB 1221 (Hancock) - As Amended: July 2, 2014
Policy Committee: EducationVote:6-1
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill modifies eligibility, types of grants, amount of
grants, and outcome measures of the After School Education and
Safety (ASES), the 21st Century Community Learning Centers (21st
CCLC), and the 21st Century After School Safety and Enrichment
for Teens (ASSETs) programs. Specifically, this bill:
1)Replaces "supplemental grant" funding with "summer grant"
funding to fund programs that operate in excess of 180 regular
schooldays or during any combination of summer, intersession,
or vacation periods. Clarifies an annual maximum grant amount
of $33,750 for each elementary school and $45,000 for each
middle or junior high school
2)Makes changes to data collection and reporting requirements.
For example, programs would no longer be required to report
outcomes on STAR tests, positive behavioral changes, homework
completion rates, or skill development and instead requires
programs to submit evidence of a data-driven program quality
improvement process, based on CDE guidance.
3)Makes changes specific to the ASES program as follows:
a) Authorizes provision of a minimum grant for sites that
serve 20 children or less.
b) Authorizes additional funding, not to exceed $15,000 per
site, per school year, to be provided for transportation in
programs located in an area that has a population density
of less than 11 persons per square miles. Requires
programs to submit to the California Department of
Education (CDE) for consideration evidence of the need for
SB 1221
Page 2
after school transportation funds. Authorizes
transportation funds to be used to supplement, but not
supplant, local transportation services.
4)Makes changes specific to the 21st CCLC as follows:
a) Reduces funding for family literacy services from 10% to
5% of total grant funding.
b) Gives priority to grant applications that will provide
year-round expanded learning programming. Defines
"year-round expanded learning programs" as any combination
of an applicant that offers summer programming to
complement existing after school programs, or an applicant
that offers after school programs to complement existing
summer programs. Specifies that the applicant is not
required to be the same entity that operates the existing
program but the applicant must identify the grantee
providing year round programming. Further, gives priority
for funding to programs that previously received funding
rather than priority for programs that serve pupils
attending low performing schools.
c) Requires the CDE to submit a biennial report to the
Legislature related to the students attending expanded
learning programs and the quality of those programs.
d) Revises the purpose of the ASSETs program from assisting
pupils with passage of the high school exit exam to instead
focusing on supporting college and career readiness.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)Potential loss of General Fund/Proposition 98 savings in the
range of $10 million to $12 million annually. The policy
changes in this bill will likely result in less ASES funding
reverting to the General Fund, which has been used for other
education priorities in prior years. For example, the 2014-15
Budget Act re-appropriated $22.5 million from unspent ASES
funds to support other educational priorities, including the
Emergency Repair Program and the California School Information
Services.
2)Proposition 98/General Fund cost pressure, potentially in the
millions of dollars, to provide minimum grant funding,
SB 1221
Page 3
transportation grant funding and year-round expanded learning
programs, to the extent existing state and federal after
school funds do not cover these costs. Although the ASES
program reverts unused funding annually to the General Fund,
it is not clear if the policy changes in this bill will result
in expenditures that exceed these annual reversions.
Currently, demand for federal 21st CCLC funding exceeds
available resources.
3)Minor General Fund administrative cost savings to the extent
new reporting requirements streamline the California
Department of Education's (CDE) grant monitoring activities.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose . In 2002, voters approved Proposition 49 which
triggered an increase in funding for before and after school
programs from $122 million to $550 million annually. These
funds are provided to schools on top of the Proposition 98
minimum guarantee and provided through a continuous
appropriation.
According to the co-sponsors, the Superintendent of Public
Instruction Tom Torlakson and the Partnership for Children and
Youth, before and after school programs grew rapidly with the
passage of Proposition 49. The before and after school
program administrators have since identified more effective
ways to administer these programs. Additionally, the sponsors
contend research on student learning loss in the summer
suggests year-round and summer learning opportunities are
essential to close the achievement gap. This bill seeks to
improve administration of the 21st CCLC and ASES programs and
maximize the impact of expanded learning programs on students
by supporting high-quality, year-round programming.
2)Background . The 21st CCLC and ASES programs are both
school-site based programs operating outside of school hours,
and are administered by the CDE. The 21st CCLC is a federally
funded before and after school program that provides
disadvantaged K-12 students with academic enrichment and
support. It is very similar to the state-funded ASES program,
and 21st CCLCs often operate in tandem with ASES programs.
Programs are funded through a competitive grant process.
According to CDE, in 2013-14, applicants requested over $122
SB 1221
Page 4
million in federal 21st CCLC program funding, and a total of
$22 million was awarded. Of the 122 applications submitted, 30
applications were funded (operating at 172 school-sites).
ASES programs receive direct state grants, where attendance is
projected and grants are funded up-front, in three one-year
increments. Each school that establishes an ASES program is
eligible to receive a three-year direct grant that is awarded
in three one-year increments and is subject to semiannual
attendance reporting and other requirements. In 2013-14, the
state funded nearly 500 grants totaling nearly $540 million.
3)New grant funding . This bill creates three new types of grant
funding within the 21st CCLC and ASES programs.
a) Minimum grants . This bill sets a funding floor for each
program based on the attendance rate for 20 students,
regardless of the number of students that actually attend.
According to the sponsor, this change would enable programs
that serve less than 20 students to receive grant funding
sufficient to cover their relatively higher overhead costs.
Currently, there are 25 base grant recipients that serve
less than 20 students. It is likely, however, that
provision of minimum grant funding would result in
additional grant applications from programs that could not
have afforded to operate otherwise. This could create
additional cost pressure on ASES funds.
b) Transportation grants . The second type of new grant is
the authorization for ASES funding to be used for
"transportation grants" of up to $15,000 for each
qualifying rural school-site. Dedicated transportation
funding will likely allow more isolated programs to
generate higher attendance, and more remote school-sites to
be able to offer ASES programs. It is unclear the degree to
which these grants will put cost pressure on program funds.
c) Summer grants . The third type of new grant is the
authorization of applicants for 21st CCLC grants to apply
for summer-only program funding. This change will result in
additional grant applications that were previously not
allowed, by permitting funding for a summer program that is
not tied to a school-year program. Because the bill
specifies that priority will be given to programs that
SB 1221
Page 5
offer school-year and summer programs (which are the only
allowable summer grantees), the effect of this change is
unclear.
4)Priority for year-round programs . This bill gives priority
for 21st CCLC grant funding to grantees that provide
year-round expanded learning programs. The bill allows
applicants to coordinate with existing providers to fill a
gap. For example, a school may operate an after school
program, but not a summer program. A separate organization
may submit an application to provide the summer program. As
noted above, the number of applicants for 21st CCLC grants far
exceeds available resources. It is not clear to what extent
these new requirements will change grant award outcomes for
existing program providers.
Analysis Prepared by : Misty Feusahrens / APPR. / (916)
319-2081