The House Education and Workforce Committee is
considering a new education initiative called the Dollars to the
Classroom Act (H.R. 3248). Sponsored by Representative Joseph Pitts
(R-PA) and Senator Tim Hutchinson (R-AR), this bill would shift
power and funding for local schools from Washington to the states
and would guarantee that at least 95 percent of existing federal
funds reach the classroom.
If
adopted, H.R. 3248 would represent a major policy change for
Washington. It would block grant to the states the funding for 35
K-12 education programs, sending $3.37 billion in tax dollars to
their governors. No more than 5 percent of this money could be used
for paperwork and administration. Targeted programs would include
Goals 2000, School-to-Work programs, and most programs under the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). H.R. 3248 would not
involve Title I, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA), or vocational education funds. The constitutional right of
the states to make their own decisions on how to use the funds
would be protected, but the bill would set a precedent by requiring
that states reserve most federal tax dollars for specific classroom
expenditures. A "hold harmless" provision would guarantee that
states receiving formula-based grants could not receive less than
the amount they would have received to carry out those programs
under previous statute for that fiscal year, beginning in FY
1999.
The
Dollars to the Classroom Act could be one of the first truly
"child-centered" education initiatives ever enacted by Congress.
Instead of funneling billions of tax dollars to bureaucratic school
systems, the bill would ensure that money reaches teachers,
students, and principals who make schools succeed.
HOW DOLLARS TO THE CLASSROOM WOULD
WORK
As a
policy change, the Dollars to the Classroom initiative would:
- Channel more money to classroom
needs. Despite limitations and variations in the
information states provide concerning what constitutes a "classroom
expenditure," according to an April 1998 report by the U.S.
Department of Education, around 84 percent of federal elementary
and secondary education funds is used for instruction. This supports
earlier findings by The Heritage Foundation published in December
1996 in a report on "Where the Money Goes." For every dollar sent to
Washington, states receive back on average about 80 cents, losing
nearly 20 cents to paperwork and administration. The amount varies
from state to state. The Heritage study found that Connecticut and
Nevada receive only 39 cents for each dollar they send to
Washington, while Alaska receives $3.12.
According to a recent Congressional
Research Service (CRS) report, programs block granted under the
Dollars to the Classroom Act would shift from 30 percent to 40
percent in additional funding directly to America's
classrooms. The CRS also notes that the
greatest increase in program funds used "in the classroom" would
come from programs that now serve local education agencies
indirectly (such as the Eisenhower Professional Development
Program, School-to-Work Opportunities Program, Safe and Drug Free
Schools Program, and Education Research, Development, and
Dissemination programs).
- Reduce the
regulatory and bureaucratic burden. The high costs of
administering federal programs often fall on the states. The
regulatory and bureaucratic burdens that federal education programs
impose on school districts increase the number of paperwork hours
needed to apply for and accept federal dollars and to comply with
requirements. The U.S. Department of Education estimates that it
takes approximately 48.6 million paperwork hours--the equivalent of
almost 25,000 employees working 40 hours a week for a full year--to
complete the paperwork involved in administering federal education
programs. Consider some of the burdens at the state level:
-
In 1990, Ohio calculated that over 50
percent of its paperwork burden was related to federal education
programs, although only 5 percent of its education revenues came
from federal sources.
-
Dr. Charles Garris, Superintendent of
the Unionville-Chadds Ford School District in Pennsylvania, stated
in supporting documentation for his 1997 testimony before the
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the House Committee
on Education and the Workforce that he had to spend over $2,400 to
receive federal funding in the 1997-1998 school year. This was
nearly 13 percent of the $21,796 in funding for which he was
applying. He predicted that, once he received the funding, he would
have to spend another 25 percent on administrative costs. Dr.
Garris decided it was no longer cost-effective to apply for certain
federal programs.
-
Florida Education Commissioner and
Education Leaders Council (ELC) President Frank T. Brogan would
agree. Testifying before the House Education and Workforce
Committee on May 5, 1998, Brogan said that "Six times as many
people are required to administer a federal dollar as a state
dollar."
-
Georgia's Superintendent of Schools and
ELC member Linda Schrenko pointed out at the same hearing that
"Georgia's total education budget from all sources for the 1996-97
school year was about 9.45 billion dollars, of which about 6.4
percent, slightly over 600 million dollars, came from the federal
government. In that same year the Georgia Department of Education
had 322 employees, of whom 93 worked full-time administering the
federal programs." She estimated that it took four
and one-half hours to administer a federal dollar for every hour
needed to administer a state dollar.
According to these education officials and
many of their colleagues in other states, if federal tax dollars
for state education are going to be used, Congress should give the
states the power and the dollars to reform education and should
require that most of the taxpayers' money be spent in the
classroom.
- Boost
accountability. Currently, little is known about what
happens to federal tax dollars for education programs once they
leave Washington. Few school districts, parents, and taxpayers have
accurate data with which to determine exactly how many cents of
each dollar paid actually reach their classrooms. Data released by
New York City's public schools, for instance, reveal that only 43
percent of the city's total education funds has been used directly
for classroom expenditures. H.R. 3248 would encourage the states to
determine what a "classroom expenditure" is and would ensure that
at least 95 percent of the federal funds they receive under the
Dollars to the Classroom Act is spent on classroom activities.
Under this bill, the governors of each
state would be required to tell Congress what classroom services
are being provided to children in their states. The bill also would
require the Secretary of Education to report to Congress how
regulations would be cut and bureaucracy eliminated so that 95
percent of grant awards could be made available to states for use
in the classroom.
CONCLUSION
The
President views hiring more teachers, building more schools,
hooking up more classrooms to the Internet, and offering states
more "flexibility" on how they spend federal funds as key
components of education reform. Under provisions like those in the
Dollars to the Classroom Act, such goals would become reality
without increasing spending, infringing on state and local
authority, or wasting money on bureaucracy in Washington, D.C., or
state education offices. This modest effort would offer principals
additional funding to purchase the materials they deem necessary
for their classrooms, be it books or extra tutors in reading and
mathematics.
Congress has an opportunity to change
current federal education policy to one that is more truly
child-centered. Legislation like H.R. 3248 offers Congress a
tangible way to get more education dollars into America's
classrooms, where the real learning occurs, instead of wasting them
on administrative paperwork in distant government offices.
Nina H. Shokraii is Education Policy Analyst at
The Heritage Foundation
Endnotes