Increasing Resources for Adult Education

Amy-Ellen DukeThe Center for Law and Social PolicyWorking Poor Families Project MeetingState Policy Academy on Adult EducationJune 2007 aduke@clasp.org

Federal AEFLA funded activities

Adult education and literacy services, including workplace literacy

English literacy programs for individuals with limited English proficiency

Family literacy services, including between parents and their children, training for parents so they can help teach their children, parent literacy training that leads to economic self-sufficiency, etc.

FY2006 Federal AEFLA Expenditures: $585 million ($68 million on EL Civics

AEFLA Funding

Combination of federal and state funds 25% state match requirement (cash or in-kind) Bulk of federal funds distributed to states through a

formula based on number of adults 16 and older who are not enrolled or required to be enrolled in secondary school and who do not have a secondary school credential

Federal funds represent about 25% of total spending 7 states account for roughly 80% of the total state

investment in adult education EL/Civics funding distributed using separate formula that

takes into account immigration patterns

AEFLA Funding

States funding comes from state general revenue, sometimes state has counties or localities provide funding to meet match.

Amount of state funds varies, so per-pupil costs vary Average yearly total cost per student: $812 Median yearly total cost per student: $645 Miscellaneous states (FY 2003):

MI: $2,178, MA: $1,781, CO: $567, MS: $347

Federal Requirements related to AEFLA Funding

Maintenance of effort requirement on states on spending per student and aggregate spending

States required to distribute 82.5% of their allocation through competitive grants and contracts to local providers based on state-established criteria (some using performance-based criteria)

States may not use: More than 10% of funds for corrections education More than 12.5% of funds for state leadership activities More than 5% for administrative costs

Maximizing Resources

Access other federal and state funding sources for direct and supportive services Diversity of federal resources provides states with

numerous options for gathering or leveraging large sums and can create diverse political bases of support

AEFLA match Is state reporting entire match? If over 25%—can

separate money so can use more flexibly Explore waivers of state plan that will allow more

flexible use of money

Policies that Promote Blending and Coordinating Funding Streams

Brings two sources of funding that serve the same target population together into one coordinated service activity Look for program legislation that allow funds to be used to

Support basic skills development Provide other services that would enhance participation

(e.g., child care, transportation) Fund complementary services (e.g., occupational

training, pre-employment training) Encourage coordination with adult education Include same target populations as those served by adult

ed/ESL

Benefits of Blending and Coordinating Funding Streams

Augments funds Leads to contextualized learning--customization of

basic skills to support goals of both agencies Helps partner agency meet performance standards

(e.g., TANF participation rates) Allows holistic, wrap-around services Feds support such efforts: Interagency

Coordination Group for Adult Education includes 9 departments

WIA Title I

Title II programs are mandatory partners Populations: Adults, Dislocated workers, Youth Basic skills instruction authorized in Title I if delivered as

part of “intensive services”: short-term prevocational instruction or in combo with another authorized training activity Illinois funding bridge programs through Title I

When Title I funds are used for basic skills instruction, providers are subject to employment-oriented performance measures of Title I

WIA Title I (cont’d)

WIA discretionary funds (15%) Not subject to performance measures and often

used for innovation, such as career pathways, sector strategies or partnership activities, all of which can that include basic skills and ESL

Challenge: Title I job training services primarily funded through vouchers, while Title II education services funded by contracts; can make it difficult to jointly fund programs

TANF

Funds can be used to support: Basic skills instruction, ESL, GED, wrap-around support services (child care, transportation)

Vocational education training can count toward a recipient’s work requirement for up to 12 months

Basic skills and ESL are allowable in the following contexts: Non-Core: Education directly related to employment (GED) can

only count toward the work requirement of an adult high school dropout or teen parent, job skills training, and high school completion

Vocational education: Preamble to TANF regulations says: basic skills training may be counted as vocational education training “as long as it is of limited duration and is a necessary or regular part of vocational education training”

Trade Adjustment Assistance

Funds substantial training with per-worker benefits that allow for training up to two years in length Participants requiring remedial ed to complete occupational

training may be eligible for an additional 26 weeks Pays for income support while workers are in training (up to

78 weeks, after exhausted UI) Allowable types of training: OJT, classroom training,

customized training, and basic or remedial ed (including literacy or ESL)

Gaining certification difficult; eligibility criteria narrow

Carl Perkins ActCareer & Technical Education

Goal: Programs should integrate academic, vocational, and technical training

Targeted population includes LEPs and those with other barriers to educational achievement

Roughly 40% of Perkins funding goes to postsecondary institutions; depends on state

New law opportunity for states to think more inclusively Minnesota interpreting high school to college transitions to

include career pathways, technical skill and academic attainment, include multiple entry/exit points, and meeting the needs of adult learners and transitioning them to the workforce (2 of 5 goals address adults)

Performance measures include adults

Other Federal Funding Sources

Food Stamps Employment and Training Social Services Block Grant Community Services Block Grant Community Development Block Grant Employment and training activities carried out by

the Dept. of Housing and Urban Development Vocational Rehabilitation Pell Grants

Other Federal Funding Sources

Family Literacy Corrections Education Even Start (cut over 50% in recent years) Head Start Migrant Education: High School Equivalency Program 21st Century Community Learning Centers Grants to States for Incarcerated Youth Juvenile Delinquency & Delinquency Prevention (DoJ) Refugee and Entrant Assistance Special Education funds

State Funding Sources

State incumbent worker training programs Massachusetts Workforce Development Fund Minnesota Job Skills Partnership

State customized training programs Economic development funds

Community Benefit Agreements can include provisions for basic skills, ESL and GED for residents

State elementary and secondary school department Postsecondary education department

State Allocations

Many states lack stable funding for adult ed Fluctuations based on overall state funding Soft funding of many adult ed programs leads to

insecurity and lack of long-term investment Variety of funding formulas State allocations can be influenced by historical

state funding patterns for adult ed services Update allocation formulas regularly Some states use different formula to distribute funds

than feds do

What Would Additional Funding Buy?

More capacity: shorter or no waiting lists Higher quality, more intensive instruction

Great variations in amount spent/pupil; some states spend hundreds of dollars more per pupil

Debate over serving fewer students more intensively (MA model), but research shows more hours lead to greater outcomes

Wrap-around supports

What Would Additional Funding Buy?

More professional teaching corps Most adult educators are part-time (roughly 50%

nationwide), which impacts the number of hours which can be provided and quality of instruction

For instance, over 85% of Arizona adult ed providers are part-time and don’t receive benefits

Most adult educators lack formal training or opportunities for professional development

High turnover due to low salaries

State policies for expanding resources

Pursue general increase in state funding Seek increase to expand particular purposes of

adult ed/ESL Consider targeting funding increases

Higher quality instruction, professional development Wrap-around supports Serving particular populations

Ensure basic skills/ESL an allowable use of state training programs, such as incumbent worker programs

State policies for expanding resources

Support blending funding streams Ease interagency transfer of funds Establish interagency practitioner workgroup to

advise state agencies on how to maximize funding