Analysis of Public Funding Sources for Out of School Time in Texas

Transcription

1 Analysis of Public Funding Sources for Out of School Time in Texas Prepared by Texas Partnership for Out of School Time, July 2013

2 Table of Contents Introduction... 2 Summary... 3 Federal Funding Streams... 4 State Funding Streams Other Funding Sources Recommendations Notes Selected Bibliography

3 Introduction The mission of the Texas Partnership for Out of School Time (TXPOST) is to increase the quality and availability of out of school time programs in the State of Texas. TXPOST s work focuses in three strategic areas: partnerships, public policy, and professional development & program quality. TXPOST serves as a resource to all Texans, providing information on the landscape of before school, after school, weekend and summer programs for Texas youth. The availability of out of school time (OST) programming is directly related to the availability of consistent, sustainable funding sources. This report establishes a baseline for public funding levels for out of school time initiatives in Texas. The information in this report is intended to be used to track funding levels and monitor overall spending for federal and state programs in subsequent years. In some cases, funding levels have been estimated based on formulas cited in other fiscal analysis reports. All information reflects the most recent data available.. Several resources were used to model a basic framework for conducting fiscal mapping research, including The Finance Project s Follow the Money (2009) and fiscal resources analyses conducted in Colorado, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota. 1 This report defines an out of school time program as one which regularly provides adult supervision of school-age children for at least two hours a day, four days a week for a total of at least 10 hours per week during the school year and/or summer. School and community sports programs and single-subject providers are excluded by this definition. While there are a vast number of public funding sources that may include school-age OST programming as an allowable activity, reporting requirements often make it difficult to determine how the funds were ultimately expended. For the purposes of this report, only programs for which OST activities were explicitly mentioned as expenditures in Texas are included. Fischer, Adrienne et al. Analysis of Public Funding Sources for Out of School Time in Texas. Texas Partnership for Out of School Time: July Center for Public Private Sector Cooperation and Center for Education Policy Analysis, University of Colorado at Denver. Funding Map for After- School Programs in Colorado. July 2007; Pennsylvania General Assembly Legislative Budget and Finance Committee. Afterschool Programs in Pennsylvania. May 2009; Minnesota Department of Education. Minnesota Out-Of-School Time Primary Funding Streams. March

4 Summary Several types of funding were examined for inclusion in this report. Federal funding is by far the largest source of OST support in Texas, accounting for $290 million in By comparison, state funds accounted for only $23.4 million, or approximately 7% of the total contribution. Funding from local governments, private foundations, and fee collection were excluded from the total calculation due to the difficulty in obtaining comprehensive information. In 2011, $313 million in state and federal funds were dedicated to OST programs in Texas. Is $313 million enough to provide OST opportunities to Texas children? Using estimates from the 2009 Afterschool Alliance Texas After 3pm survey, an estimated 15% of Texas K-12 children attend structured afterschool programs offering an enrichment curriculum, while up to an additional 12% attend traditional child care centers. 2 Based on 2011 Census estimates, this constitutes between 750,000 and 1.4 million children, or $224 to $417 in public OST funding spent per current participant each year. 3 Program cost estimates are dependent upon a cadre program size, and services provided; the total cost of high-quality OST programming can range from $3,000 to $5,000 per participant each year. 4 These numbers highlight the barriers affecting both financial support for current OST programs and participants and any attempt to expand service provision. of variables, including program location, ages served, 2 America After 3pm: Texas After 3pm. Afterschool Alliance, October U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. 4 Grossman, Jean Baldwin et al. The Cost of Quality Out-of-School-Time. Public/Private Ventures and The Finance Project for The Wallace Foundation: January

5 Federal Funding Streams Texas out of school time initiatives received $290 million in federal funding in While only the 21st Century Community Learning Centers (CCLC) program is established specifically for OST programming, many other federal funding streams include money for school-age OST programs. Some of these funding sources include OST programs as an allowable use, thus leaving the allocation of funds to some extent at the discretion of each state pass-through entity. The amount allocated to OST programs are based on statewide spending plans that are written in accordance with federal and state policies. Other federal funding sources include discretionary grants, which are awarded on a competitive, non-formula basis. Each of these funding sources is discussed in this section

6 21st Century Community Learning Centers While many federal funding streams include out of school activities for youth as permissible expenditures, the U.S. Department of Education s 21st Century Community Learning Centers (CCLC) is the only federal funding stream dedicated specifically to out of school time. The Texas Education Agency uses this funding for its Afterschool Centers on Education (ACE), a competitive grant program which served over 220,000 students in Since its inception in 2002, the funding level has more than quadrupled, although it has leveled out in recent years. Texas received more than $104 million in 21st CCLC funding for fiscal year However, due to sequestration requirements the program allocation for The President s proposed FY 2014 Budget includes a $100 million increase in 21st CCLC funding that would be designated specifically for a competitive grant program for extended school day and year models. In the president s budget, the total federal contribution for existing uses (i.e. traditional afterschool models) would remain at the pre-sequester FY 2013 level. Texas has also applied for a waiver from the No Child Left Behind provisions of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act that govern the 21st CCLC program. The Texas Education Agency indicated in its waiver application that it would seek flexibility for 21st CCLC, enabling grantees to use funds for activities during the school day. fiscal year 2013 dropped to an estimated $101 million. On a national scale, the 21st Century CCLC program made up less than 2% of the U.S. Department of Education s discretionary budget in The program is expected to continue, but funding levels are projected to remain relatively level and changes to the funding structure and usages have been proposed. 7 5 Naftzger, Neil et al. Texas 21st Century Community Learning Centers Interim Evaluation Report. American Institutes of Research for Texas Education Agency: April U.S. Department of Education, 2012 Budget. 7 Office of Management and Budget, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year

7 Child Care Development Fund The Child Care Development Fund (CCDF) is a formulabased federal funding stream administered by the Administration of Children and Families within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. CCDF is intended to provide child care assistance to lower-income families. Most CCDF expenditures are for waivers or vouchers awarded to families for direct service provision, but small amounts are also set aside for programs to undertake quality improvement activities. Funds for direct child care services are distributed by the state CCDF reporting does not include estimates of funding amounts for each age group served by CCDF, but the Administration of Children and Families estimates that 30% of children served by CCDF in Texas in FY 2011 are between 6 and 13 (CCDF does not serve children over 13). 9 Using a modified formula from Padgette (2003), it can be estimated that approximately 16% of CCDF funds were spent on the 30% of Texas school-age CCDF recipients. 10 For fiscal year 2011 this estimate is $100 million. pass-through agency the Texas Workforce Commission (TWC). Independent local workforce development boards then determine families eligibility for subsidized child care based on federal and state guidelines. Program quality spending is also directed by federal and state guidelines: at least 4% of total CCDF funds are required to be used for quality activities, and another portion of funds are specifically earmarked for child care resource and referral/school-age activities, infant and toddler care, and general quality expansion for all age groups. Texas CCDF expenditures exceeded $600 million in U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration of Children and Families. 9 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration of Children and Families. Child Care and Development Fund Average Monthly Percentages of Children In Care By Age Group. 10 Padgette, Heather Clapp. Finding Funding: A Guide to Federal Sources for Out-of-School Time and Community School Initiatives. The Finance Project, January

8 Federal Nutrition Programs Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Title I Three federal programs offer reimbursement for out of school time meals. The National School Lunch Program (NSLP), a project of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, provides afterschool snacks and, in some cases, suppers. The Child and Adult Food Care Program (CACFP) provides afterschool snacks to program applicants who are located in areas identified as at-risk as well as other outside school hours recipients. The Summer Food Service Supplemental Services 10% Federal regulations require that some Title I funds be set aside for Supplemental Educational Services (SES). These funds may be used for a variety of services provided outside of the traditional classroom, including tutoring or more structured afterschool activities. In 2011, an estimated $3.7 million in SES funds were expended on out of school time programs in Texas. 13 Program (SFSP) provides meals to summer programs at both closed and open sites. In fiscal year 2011, Texas received more than $42 million in federal reimbursements for nutrition programs in out of school time programs. 11 It should be noted that this estimate is low as it only includes funds that could be traced directly to programs that serve primarily school-age children. For example, the SFSP provides reimbursement to both closed and open sites during the summer; open sites operate within Grants to LEAs 1% Title I Grants to LEAs are formula-based funds provided for schools with students who have the highest risk of failing. The overwhelming majority of Title I funding is used for basic improvements and classroom activities, but funds can also be used for out of school time services. An estimated $14.5 million of Title I Grants to LEAs were expended on out of school time programs in neighborhoods serving any and all, but closed sites serve only specific programs applying to the program Figures are based on information provided by the Texas Department of Agriculture. 12 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. 13 See Finding Funding: A Guide to Federal Sources for Out-of-School Time and Community School Initiatives by Heather Clapp Padgette, The Finance Project, January Ibid

9 Community Development Block Grant Social Security Act, Title IV-B The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program is a federally-funded formula grant program awarded on an entitlement basis to cities and counties. Allowable grants activities are varied, but priority is given to activities that primarily benefit low- and moderate-income students. 15 Several disbursement categories fund activities related to out of school time, but without project descriptions it is difficult to The Administration of Children and Families within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services provides funding for programs serving at-risk youth and families. The Promoting Safe and Stable Families block grant program (Title IV-B, Subpart 2 of the Social Security Act) awarded $3 million to Texas in This funding was used for community-based delinquency prevention and family engagement activities. 18 pinpoint those projects which benefit only schoolage children in OST settings. Texas CDBG recipients in Program Year 2010 were awarded more than $9 million for grant activities that directly or indirectly benefit school-age children outside school hours. 16 Americorps The Corporation for National and Community Service awards grants to states through the Americorps program to serve a variety of community needs. In Texas, these state grants are administered by the governor-appointed OneStar Foundation. Texas grantees providing out of school time services were awarded $7.5 million in U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. programs. 16 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Community Planning and Development. Integrated Disbursement and Information System Expenditure Report. 17 OneStar Foundation. 18 Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, August Legislative Appropriations Request for Fiscal Years 2014 and 2015, Volume I

10 Discretionary Grants Community Services Block Grant Discretionary grants are awarded on a competitive, nonformula basis. As such, funding levels will vary each year. Many federal discretionary grant programs have been discontinued in recent years due to budget constraints. Below are examples of discretionary awards in Texas. The Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) program is another federally-funded formula grant program administered by the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (TDHCA). Allowable activities include youth services and potentially out of school time programs, but only one 2011 CSBG grantee in Texas Research on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings (National Science Foundation) $2.4 million in 2012 for out of school time programs focusing on STEM activities. 19 was identified by TDHCA as providing out of school time services. The $218,000 award comprises less than 1% of the total CSBG allocation for Texas in Carol M. White Physical Education Grants (U.S. Department of Education) $529,000 in 2011 for out of school time programs focusing on innovative physical education H Youth Development The 4-H Youth Development program is funded through the Cooperative Extension, a joint partnership between the U.S. Department of Agriculture and land-grant universities in every state and territory. The Texas A&M University System serves as the state s university partner. 4-H receives both federal and state funding; in 2011 the Texas AgriLife Extension Service received $1.7 million in federal funds for 4-H Youth Development Program National Science Foundation, Directorate for Education and Human Resources U.S. Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education Texas AgriLife Extension Service, August Legislative Appropriations Request for Fiscal Years 2014 and Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, Community Services Section

11 State Funding Streams In 2011 Texas contributed $23.4 million from the general revenue fund to out of school time initiatives. While Texas does not have any funding streams dedicated entirely to OST funding, there are several funding sources that contribute to OST programs. Some of these funds are maintenance of effort (MOE) requirements for federal programs, but for the purpose of this report any funds from general revenue are considered state funding of OST

12 4-H Youth Development The 4-H Youth Development program is funded through the Cooperative Extension, a joint partnership between the USDA and land-grant universities in every state and territory. 4-H receives both federal and state funding; in 2011 the Texas AgriLife Extension Service received $8 million in state funds for 4-H Youth Development. 23 Department of Family and Protective Services The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) operates the Community Youth Development Program. State general revenue funds for this program provide a state match for the Promoting Safe and Stable Families block grant program (Title IV-B, Subpart 2 of the Social Security Act). In 2011 $3 million in state funds was dedicated to the program. This funding was used for community-based delinquency prevention and family Texas Workforce Commission engagement activities. 25 In addition to its role as the state CCDF administrator, the Texas Workforce Commission (TWC) also budgeted more than $32 million in general revenue funds to child care services in 2012, with an estimated $5.4 million dedicated to school-age care. 24 The Texas Statewide Youth Services Network (TEXSYN) also targets youth under 18 for programs that increase youth resiliency and prevent juvenile delinquency. TEXSYN was allocated $1.9 million in state funds for FY This brings the total DFPS contribution to OST programs to $5 million. 23 Texas AgriLife Extension Service, August Legislative Appropriations Request for Fiscal Years 2014 and Texas Workforce Commission, December Operating Budget for Fiscal Year Figure is calculated using formula based on Padgette (2003). 25 Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, August Legislative Appropriations Request for Fiscal Years 2014 and 2015, Volume I. 26 Ibid

13 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Department of Agriculture Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) is a federal block grant program that provides basic services to low-income families. The funds may be used for a variety of welfare services, including cash assistance, work activities, and child care. Although TANF is a federal program, Texas must also spend a proscribed amount The Texas Department of Agriculture (TDA) awards competitive discretionary grants for a variety of purposes. The 3E Grant Program provides grants for health and nutrition education and awareness, especially targeting school-age children. In 2012 TDA awarded $339,000 in funding to OST providers. 29 of state general revenue for its federally-mandated maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement. In 2011 Texas contributed more than $26 million in state MOE funds to TANF child care. School-age child care can be estimated to comprise $4.5 million of this amount. 27 Texas is one of only 10 states to spend less than 5% of TANF on child care in 2011; the average contribution is 16.5% Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Data on State TANF Spending Trends. Figure is calculated using formula based on Padgette (2003). 28 Schott, Liz et al. How States Have Spent Federal and State Funds Under the TANF Block Grant. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, August Texas Department of Agriculture Public Information Office

14 Other Funding Sources Much of the focus on out of school time funding tends to center on federal and state contributions, but city and county governments have been involved in supporting OST programs for many years. In addition to local funding, most OST programs rely at least partially on private donations and fee collection for sustainability. In a 2005 nationwide survey of high-quality programs conducted by The Finance Project, OST providers indicated that parent fees accounted for less than 9% of their total funding. Public and private funds accounted for 32% and 39%, respectively, and in-kind contributions made up the remainder. 30 While a comprehensive examination of local, private, and fee-based funding sources in Texas was not included as part of this study s analysis, below is a brief overview. 30 Grossman, Jean Baldwin et al. The Cost of Quality Out-of-School-Time. Public/Private Ventures and The Finance Project for The Wallace Foundation: January

15 Local Public Funding Private Funding and Fee-based Revenue Many Texas cities, counties, and school districts provide funding to out of school time programs. Below are two profiles of local government funding for OST programming. These profiles focus on local entities general revenue contributions to OST programs; the projects cited may draw additional public funding from state or federal grants. Information regarding private contributions to OST program providers is not readily available to the public, but foundation support is a vital component of OST sustainability. For example, the Cooperative for After- School Enrichment (CASE) has benefited from annual support from the Houston Endowment, a private grantmaking foundation based in the Houston area, since CASE was awarded a $2 million grant to San Antonio fund OST initiatives in the school year. 33 The San Antonio Department of Human Services administers the After School Challenge Program at 132 area school sites. The city contributed $2.8 million to the program from its general revenue fund in Some programs charge fees for their services, but there is no single database for accessing this information. This information is also potentially duplicative, as many providers accept child care Harris County The Harris County Department of Education operates the Cooperative for After-School Enrichment (CASE), subsidies in the form of CCDF or TANF waivers. Approximately two-thirds of licensed child care centers in Texas are classified as accepting subsidies. 34 a multi-faceted approach to OST in the Houston area. CASE partners with state and federal agencies as well as community and nonprofit organizations to administer a variety of OST programs at more than 100 sites. In addition to other funding from both public and private sources, CASE received $171,000 from the Harris County general revenue fund in City of San Antonio Adopted Annual Operating and Capital Budget, Fiscal Year 2012; City of San Antonio Department of Human Services Harris County Department of Education Budget Book for the Fiscal Year Houston Endowment Texas Department of Family and Protective Services. Search for Child Care Center or Home

16 Recommendations Sustainability is of paramount importance to OST providers; without sufficient funding, provision of service at current levels cannot be maintained and expansion or improvements in the quality of service are unfeasible. Below are recommendations for further action identified in the course of this study. Private Funding Survey A statewide survey of OST providers could provide a comprehensive snapshot of private and fee-based support for OST programs in Texas. The 2005 nationwide survey conducted by The Finance Project indicates that private funding may account for the largest portion of funding for many OST providers. A statewide survey of providers 2011, the Texas Hunger Initiative partnered with the Texas Department of Agriculture and Share Our Strength to focus on increasing participation in summer meals programs. 36 A similar initiative to boost participation in the Afterschool Snacks program of the National School Lunch Program might yield additional OST funding. could determine the trends in private funding for OST in Texas and analyze the ways in which providers are maximizing funding opportunities. Maximize Public and Private Funding Public assistance programs rely on providers to apply for funding at their own initiative, but many OST providers may be unaware of the programs for which they are qualified. In particular, many OST programs are likely qualified for federal nutrition programs for both afterschool snacks and summer meals. According to the Food Research and Action Center, Texas forfeited more federal funding for summer nutrition than any other state. In 2011 Texas failed to provide summer meals to 715,768 children who were qualified for the programming, As noted previously, Texas is one of only 10 states that spends less than 5% of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) funds on child care. States are permitted to transfer up to 30% of TANF funds to the Child Care Development Fund (CCDF); the average contribution is 16.5%. While TANF has many other vital programs, an examination of state policy regarding TANF contribution to CCDF may be warranted. While it may be contingent upon a statewide survey, TXPOST should attempt to analyze best practices for engaging private funding, both through foundations and corporate philanthropy. If public funding remains at or near current levels, private funding will continue to play a vital role in OST sustainability. thus forfeiting $46 million in federal funds. 35 In October 35 Cooper, Rachel et al. Hunger Doesn t Take a Vacation: Summer Nutrition Status Report Food Research and Action Center: June Share Our Strength, No Kid Hungry Center for Best Practices

17 Needs Assessment Any attempt to quantify the gap between current funding sources and the expectation of future demand must be accompanied by a detailed needs assessment of OST in Texas. This must be a comprehensive examination of not only current service and unmet demand for service, but also the potential effects of population changes on future needs. children living with a single parent increased by 53% between 2000 and 2010, an increase of nearly 600,000 children. These demographic shifts present a daunting challenge to meet the needs of children across the state, but by creating a framework for an integrated, statewide approach to out of school time we can identify the steps that must be taken to ensure that every child has access to quality programming with a sustainable financial structure. Since 2000, Texas has experienced dramatic growth across the board, but nowhere is this more pronounced than in the 0-12 age group. The population grew by 17.2% over a ten-year period and accounted for more than half of the total growth in the nation for this age group. According to a research report authored by former State Demographer Steve Murdock from the Hobby Center for the Study of Texas, this growth is expected to continue: Even if Texas experiences slower numerical and slower rates of growth from 2010 to 2015 than from 2000 to 2010, growth in the child population [will be] larger than the numerical increase that occurred in any other state in the United States from 2000 to The biggest obstacle preventing a comprehensive out of school time strategy is lack of information. The Ray Marshall Center for the Study of Human Resources at the University of Texas LBJ School recently released a report assessing child care needs in Texas. The researchers concluded that there is no data source identifying all programs providing school-age care and were unable to provide an assessment of needs for this age group. 38 TXPOST commissioned a program mapping study in 2012; subsequent barriers to collecting comprehensive data identified during the course of the study will inform future program mapping efforts in Texas. Answering these critical questions about school-age care is imperative to identify An overall increase in the childhood population will gaps in service and formulate strategies to meet needs. obviously necessitate a corresponding increase in child care services across all age groups, but other factors will exacerbate that need. For example, the number of 37 Murdock, Steve et al. Change in the Early Childhood and School Age Population in Texas, 2000 to 2010, and Projected to Hobby Center for the Study of Texas: September Schexnayder, Deanna et al. Texas Early Childhood Education Needs Assessment: Gaps Between Need and Availability of Early Care and Education. Ray Marshall Center for the Study of Human Resources: October

18 Notes While compiling information for this report, barriers to accessing relevant data became apparent. First, many funding streams that support services for school-age children in OST programs do not require reporting that includes an age breakdown that would help to determine with precision the amount of funding directed to school-age children. Second, while there are a vast number of public funding sources that may include school-age OST programming as an allowable activity, reporting requirements in some cases are such that it is difficult to determine how the funds were ultimately expended. For the purposes of this report, only programs for which OST activities were explicitly mentioned as expenditures in Texas were included in calculations. Future additions to this research should re-examine funding sources not included herein, as some defunded programs may be restored, and other programs may be newly established or have modified uses. Methodology Potential sources of public funding were identified using The Finance Project s Follow the Money (2009) and fiscal resources analyses from Colorado, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota. Once contributing programs and agencies were identified, funding levels were obtained through online research, analyzing line-item budgets and legislative appropriations requests, and submitting public information requests as necessary. Unless otherwise noted, all figures reflect fiscal year 2011 funding levels. Formulas were applied and modified to provide estimates of school-age expenditures as noted. Recommendations for next steps and further research were identified and developed by the author s analysis over the course of the research period. Acknowledgment Technical assistance for this report was provided by Shawn Stelow Griffin of The Finance Project

19 Selected Bibliography Afterschool Programs in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania General Assembly Legislative Budget and Finance Committee: May America After 3pm: Texas After 3pm. Afterschool Alliance: October Connors-Tadros, Lori and Silloway, Torey. Fiscal Mapping Analysis of the Resources to Support Children and Youth in New York, Draft for Discussion. The Finance Project for The Campaign for Educational Equity at Teachers College: November Cooper, Rachel et al. Hunger Doesn t Take a Vacation: Summer Nutrition Status Report Food Research and Action Center: June Funding Map for After-School Programs in Colorado. Center for Public Private Sector Cooperation and Center for Education Policy Analysis, University of Colorado at Denver: July Dobbins-Harper, Dionne and Bhat, Soumya. Finding Funding: A Guide to Federal Sources for Youth Programs. The Finance Project: January Gager, Jennifer. Follow the Money: A Tool for Mapping Funds for Out-of-School Time Initiatives. The Finance Project: November Grossman, Jean Baldwin et al. The Cost of Quality Out-of-School-Time. Public/Private Ventures and The Finance Project for The Wallace Foundation: January Minnesota Out-Of-School Time Primary Funding Streams. Minnesota Department of Education: March Murdock, Steve et al. Change in the Early Childhood and School Age Population in Texas, 2000 to 2010, and Projected to Hobby Center for the Study of Texas: September Naftzger, Neil et al. Texas 21st Century Community Learning Centers Interim Evaluation Report. American Institutes of Research for Texas Education Agency: April Padgette, Heather Clapp. Finding Funding: A Guide to Federal Sources for Out-of-School Time and Community School Initiatives. The Finance Project: January Schexnayder, Deanna et al. Texas Early Childhood Education Needs Assessment: Gaps Between Need and Availability of Early Care and Education. Ray Marshall Center for the Study of Human Resources: October Schott, Liz et al. How States Have Spent Federal and State Funds Under the TANF Block Grant. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities: August

20 Texas Partnership for Out of School Time (TXPOST) is a statewide network of nonprofit, public and private sector partners dedicated to increasing the quality and availability of out of school time opportunities for Texas Youth. PO Box 2687 Austin, Texas info@txpost.org www. facebook.com/texaspartnershipforoutofschooltime twitter.com/tx_post