Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?
                                                        Calendar No. 491

------------------------------------------------------------------------
106th Congress                       SENATE                       Report
  2d Session                                                     106-261
________________________________________________________________________




 
                     EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES ACT

                               ----------                              

                              R E P O R T

                                 of the

                    COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION,
                          LABOR, AND PENSIONS
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                              to accompany

                                  S. 2

                             together with

                     ADDITIONAL AND MINORITY VIEWS




                 April 12, 2000.--Ordered to be printed




                                                       Calendar No. 491

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
106th Congress                                                   Report
 2d Session                      SENATE                         106-261
_______________________________________________________________________





                     EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES ACT

                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 of the

                    COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION,

                          LABOR, AND PENSIONS

                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                              to accompany

                                  S. 2

                             together with

                     ADDITIONAL AND MINORITY VIEWS




                 April 12, 2000.--Ordered to be printed

                                -------                                

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
63-748                     WASHINGTON : 2000       





                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
   I. Purpose and summary........................................     1
  II. Background and need for the legislation....................    36
 III. History of the legislation and votes in committee..........    37
  IV. Explanation of the bill and committee views................    51
   V. Cost estimate..............................................    82
  VI. Regulatory impact statement................................   105
 VII. Application of law to the legislative branch...............   105
VIII. Section-by-section analysis................................   105
  IX. Additional views...........................................   190
   X. Minority views.............................................   197
  XI. Changes in existing law....................................   228



                                                       Calendar No. 491

106th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 2d Session                                                     106-261

=======================================================================




                     EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES ACT

                                _______
                                

                 April 12, 2000.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

   Mr. Jeffords, from the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
                   Pensions, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                     ADDITIONAL AND MINORITY VIEWS

                          [To accompany S. 2]

    The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, to 
which was referred the bill (S. 2) to extend programs and 
activities under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
1965, and for other purposes, having considered the same, 
reports favorably thereon with an amendment in the nature of a 
substitute and recommends that the bill (as amended) do pass.

                         I. Purpose and Summary


                                Purpose

    It is the purpose of the Educational Opportunities Act, S. 
2, to reauthorize and improve programs under the Elementary and 
Secondary Education Act of 1965 for the next 5 years. The 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) provides the 
authority for virtually all Federal support provided for 
elementary and secondary education, and ESEA programs currently 
receive about $15 billion in Federal funding. Nearly half of 
these funds are used on behalf of disadvantaged children under 
the title I program. Other activities supported through ESEA 
include professional development, literacy, safe and drug-free 
schools, bilingual education, impact aid, aid to special 
populations, and technology.
    The primary objectives of this reauthorization bill are to: 
(1) maintain and strengthen the title I reform process 
initiated in 1994 which emphasizes the establishment of high 
standards and aligned assessments designed to measure progress 
towards those standards; (2) promote the sustained professional 
development of teachers and school leaders; (3) help assure 
that students are provided a safe and drug-free learning 
environment; (4) place an emphasis on getting results by 
insisting that activities and programs supported with federal 
funds are based on theory, research, and evaluation showing 
them to be effective in meeting their objectives; and (5) 
increase State and local flexibility in the use of Federal 
funds in exchange for greater accountability for improving 
student performance.

                                Summary


                     Educational Opportunities Act


      Title I--Helping Disadvantaged Children Meet High Standards


Part A--Basic Programs

                                overview

    The purpose of this title is to provide opportunities for 
those students served by title I activities to meet challenging 
State performance and content standards. To achieve this 
purpose, both the current law and the reauthorization bill 
provide greater decisionmaking authority and flexibility to 
schools and teachers in exchange for increased responsibility 
for student performance. The last reauthorization of title I, 
which occurred in 1994, made major changes in the program 
regarding standards, assessment, and professional development 
and set out a seven-year timetable for achieving them. Most of 
these changes have been retained, and several additional 
provisions have been added which build upon the reform 
activities established under the 1994 reauthorization. The key 
changes are outlined below.
    State Plan: New provisions include--
          Coordination: Title I activities, where appropriate, 
        will be coordinated with activities in other Federal 
        education programs, including the Individuals with 
        Disabilities Education Act and the Carl D. Perkins 
        Vocational and Technical Education Act;
          Adequate Yearly Progress: Adequate Yearly Progress 
        will be defined in a manner--
                  (i) that is sufficient to achieve the goal of 
                all children served under part A meeting the 
                State's proficient and advanced levels of 
                performance within 10 years;
                  (ii) that results in continuous and 
                substantial academic improvement for all 
                students, including economically disadvantaged 
                and limited English proficient students, except 
                that this provision will not apply if the State 
                demonstrates to the Secretary that the State 
                has an insufficient number of economically 
                disadvantaged or limited English proficient 
                students;
                  (iii) that is based primarily on State 
                standards and assessments and will include 
                specific State determined yearly progress 
                requirements in subjects and grades included in 
                the State assessments; and
                  (iv) that is linked to performance on the 
                assessments and also permits progress to be 
                established through other factors which are 
                determined by the State.
          Parental Involvement: Each State plan will describe 
        how the State will disseminate effective parental 
        involvement practices to local educational agencies and 
        schools.
          State Reports: Each State educational agency (SEA) 
        will prepare and disseminate an annual performance 
        report about each local educational agency (LEA).
    Local Educational Agency Plan: New provisions include--
          Coordination: Title I activities, where appropriate, 
        will be coordinated with activities in other Federal 
        education programs, including the Individuals with 
        Disabilities Education Act and the Carl D. Perkins 
        Vocational and Technical Education Act.
          Plan Elements: New plan elements include providing 
        detailed descriptions of how the local educational 
        agency plan will implement professional development and 
        parental involvement activities and take into account 
        the effectiveness of model programs for possible 
        replication.
          Local Reports: Each local educational agency will 
        prepare and disseminate an annual performance report 
        which presents information about each school.
    Schoolwide Programs: New provisions include--
          Eligibility: A local educational agency may use funds 
        for a schoolwide program to upgrade its entire 
        educational program if the LEA serves an eligible 
        school attendance area in which not less than 40 
        percent of the children are from low-income families or 
        not less than 40 percent of the children enrolled in 
        the school are from such families.
          Fiscal Accounting: Any school that is using funds 
        from more than one Federal education program in the 
        operation of its schoolwide program will not be 
        required to maintain separate fiscal accounting records 
        by program, so long as the school maintains records 
        that demonstrate that the schoolwide program addresses 
        the intent and purpose of each Federal program for 
        which funding is consolidated.
    Pupil Safety and Family School Choice: New provisions 
include--
          Conditions for Student Participation:
                  (a) Any title 1 student who is a victim of a 
                violent criminal offense on public school 
                grounds shall be allowed to transfer to another 
                public school or charter school in the same 
                State, unless allowing such transfer is 
                prohibited under State or local law; or
                  (b) If the school the student attends 
                receives title 1 funds and the school has been 
                designated as unsafe, then the local 
                educational agency may allow such student to 
                transfer to another public or charter school in 
                the same State.
                  State Educational Agency Role: The State 
                educational agency will determine, based on 
                State law, what constitutes a violent criminal 
                offense and will determine the schools that are 
                unsafe public schools.
          Transportation Costs:
                  (a) The local educational agency serving the 
                school in which a violent criminal offense 
                occurred or which is determined to be unsafe 
                may use title I funds for the transportation 
                costs of a student who transfers to another 
                school.
                  (b) The amount of assistance provided for 
                transportation with title I funds may not 
                exceed the per pupil costs for elementary or 
                secondary students as provided by the local 
                educational agency that serves the school 
                involved in the transfer.
    School Improvement: Key provisions include--
          How a School Is Identified for School Improvement: A 
        local educational agency will identify any school that 
        for 2 consecutive years failed to make adequate yearly 
        progress.
          For a targeted assistance program, a local 
        educational agency may review the progress of only 
        those students in the school being served.
          School Plan: For each identified school, the school 
        will revise their school plan which will--
                  (i) describe the specific achievement 
                problems to be solved;
                  (ii) describe how research-based strategies 
                will be employed to improve the student 
                performance;
                  (iii) address the need for high quality 
                professional development;
                  (iv) identify specific goals and objectives 
                the school will undertake for making adequate 
                yearly progress;
                  (v) specify the responsibilities of the 
                school and the local educational agency; and
                  (vi) describe strategies to promote effective 
                parental involvement.
          Technical Assistance: The local educational agency 
        will provide technical assistance to the schools 
        identified for school improvement.
    Corrective Action:
          (A) Local Educational Agency--Consistent with State 
        and local law, the local educational agency, after 
        providing technical assistance, shall take not less 
        than 1 of the corrective actions listed below. (The 
        local educational agency will continue to provide 
        technical assistance while implementing corrective 
        action.) Such corrective actions include:
                  (i) Instituting and fully implementing a new 
                curriculum that is based on State and local 
                standards, including appropriate research-based 
                professional development for all relevant staff 
                that offers substantial promise of improving 
                educational achievement for low performing 
                students.
                  (ii) Restructuring the school, such as by--
                          (a) making alternative governance 
                        arrangements (such as the creation of a 
                        public charter school); or
                          (b) creating schools within schools 
                        or other small learning environments.
                  (iii) Developing and implementing a joint 
                plan between the localeducational agency and 
the school that addresses specific elements of student performance 
problems and that specifies the responsibilities of the local 
educational agency and the school under the plan.
                  (iv) Reconstituting the school staff.
                  (v) Decreasing decision making authority at 
                the school level.
          (B) Consistent with State and local law, the local 
        educational agency may take the following corrective 
        actions:
                  (i) Deferring, reducing, or withholding 
                funds.
                  (ii) Restructuring or abolishing the school.
          (C) A local educational agency may delay corrective 
        action, for up to one year, if the local educational 
        agency believes that the school is meeting the adequate 
        yearly progress requirements.
          (D) The local educational agency will publish and 
        disseminate to parents and the public information about 
        any corrective action taken.
    Public School Choice Related to Schools Identified for 
Corrective Action and School Improvement: Key provisions 
include--
          Conditions for Student Participation: Not later than 
        6 months after date of enactment of this Act, a local 
        educational agency shall provide all students enrolled 
        in a school identified for corrective action and school 
        improvement with an option to transfer to any other 
        public school or charter school within the local 
        educational agency or to transfer to a public school or 
        charter school in another local educational agency 
        (unless this practice is prohibited by State or local 
        law).
          Transportation--
                  (a) A local educational agency serving 
                schools identified for school improvement may 
                use title 1 funds to pay the transportation 
                costs of students transferring from those 
                schools.
                  (b) A local educational agency serving 
                schools identified for corrective action is 
                required to use title 1 funds to pay the 
                transportation costs of students transferring 
                from those schools to schools not identified 
                for school improvement or corrective action.
                  (c) The amount of assistance provided for 
                transportation with title I funds may not 
                exceed the per pupil costs for elementary or 
                secondary students as provided by the local 
                educational agency that serves the school 
                involved in the transfer.
          Continued Public School Choice Option: Once a school 
        is no longer identified for school improvement, the 
        local educational agency must continue to provide 
        public school choice as an option to students in such 
        school for not less than 2 years.
    State Educational Agency Corrective Action:
          (A) Consistent with State and local law, the State 
        educational agency shall, after providing technical 
        assistance, shall take not less than 1 of the 
        corrective actions listed below. (The State educational 
        agency will continue to provide technical assistance 
        while implementing corrective action.) Such corrective 
        actions include:
                  (i) Instituting and fully implementing a new 
                curriculum that is based on State and local 
                standards, including appropriate research-based 
                professional development for all relevant staff 
                that offers substantial promise of improving 
                educational achievement for low-performing 
                students.
                  (ii) Restructuring the local educational 
                agency.
                  (iii) Developing and implementing a joint 
                plan between the State educational agency and 
                the local educational agency that addresses 
                specific elements of student performance 
                problems and that specifies the 
                responsibilities of the State educational 
                agency and the local educational agency under 
                the plan.
                  (iv) Reconstituting school district 
                personnel.
                  (v) Making alternative governance 
                arrangements.
          (B) Consistent with State and local law, the State 
        educational agency may take one of the following 
        actions--
                  (i) Deferring, reducing, or withholding 
                funds.
                  (ii) Restructuring or abolishing the local 
                educational agency.
                  (iii) Removing particular schools from the 
                jurisdiction of the local educational agency 
                and establishing alternative arrangements for 
                public governance and supervision of such 
                schools.
                  (iv) Appointing a receiver or trustee to 
                administer the affairs of the local educational 
                agency in place of the superintendent and 
                school board.
          (C) Prior to implementing any corrective action, the 
        State educational agency willhold a hearing for the 
affected local educational agency.
          (D) The State educational agency will publish and 
        disseminate to parents and the public information about 
        any corrective action taken.
          (E) A State educational agency may delay corrective 
        action, up to one year, if the SEA believes the local 
        educational agency is meeting the adequate yearly 
        progress requirements.
    Assessments/School Improvement/Awards: Under current law, 
States may reserve up to \1/2\ percent of the funds that they 
receive under parts A, C, and D of title I for corrective 
action, school improvement, and awards to distinguished schools 
and educators. The reauthorization bill continues this practice 
with regard to funds from parts C and D and current services 
levels of funding for part A. In addition, the bill allows the 
Secretary to reserve 50 percent of part A funds in excess of 
current services levels of funding for allocation to the States 
for support of these activities. Funds may be utilized by the 
State to assist schools in performing all activities authorized 
under subsections 1111(b), 1116(c), and (d), and section 1117.
    Early Childhood Education: A local educational agency may 
use title 1, part A funds for preschool services. Early 
childhood education programs may jointly operate with Even 
Start, Head Start, or State-funded preschool programs.
    Child Centered Program: The bill establishes a new child 
centered program. Key provisions include--
          Eligibility: Up to 10 States and up to 20 local 
        educational agencies located in States which do not 
        participate may participate in the child centered 
        program. The program operates for a period of 5 years.
          Funding: Participating States and local educational 
        agencies shall use funds made available under part A of 
        title I for the child centered program. In addition, 
        $500 million is authorized for this program in fiscal 
        year 2000--with ``such sums as may be necessary'' 
        authorized in the 4 succeeding fiscal years.
          Program Requirements and Use of Funds:
                  (a) The participating State or local 
                educational agency must establish a per-pupil 
                amount based on the number of eligible title I 
                children.
                  (b) The per-pupil amount is distributed to 
                the public schools in which eligible children 
                are enrolled to be used for supplemental 
                education services provided by the school or by 
                another entity for those children. Funds may be 
                used for schoolwide programs in schools where 
                50 percent of the children enrolled are title 
                I-eligible.
                  (c) The participating State or local 
                educational agency must operate an open 
                enrollment program in the State or school 
                district (if space is available and the child 
                meets attendance qualifications), unless the 
                agency can demonstrate that sufficient options 
                are already available. The per-pupil amount 
                will follow each eligible child who transfers 
                to another school.
                  (d) Eligible children enrolled in private 
                schools are to receive supplemental education 
                services in the same manner as such services 
                are provided under the regular title I program.
                  (e) Participating schools must provide 
                information about the child centered program 
                and annual school report cards to parents of 
                eligible children, which shall include an 
                annual meeting with those parents.
          Program Administration:
                  (a) A State may reserve 2 percent of funds 
                and a local educational agency may reserve 5 
                percent of funds for administration of the 
                child centered program, which may include the 
                provision of technical assistance.
                  (b) Each participating State and local 
                educational agency must submit an annual report 
                to the Secretary of Education regarding the 
                performance and achievement of children 
                receiving supplemental education services under 
                the program.
                  (c) Three years after a child center program 
                is established, the Secretary of Education will 
                review the performance of a participating State 
                or local educational agency and may terminate 
                the program if the agency has not made progress 
                towards meeting its objectives.
          Evaluation: The Comptroller General will contract for 
        an annual evaluation of child centered programs. The 
        evaluation will include information regarding program 
        implementation, parental involvement and satisfaction, 
        and student educational achievement. The Comptroller 
        General will submit an interim report to Congress 3 
        years after enactment and a final report by March 1, 
        2006.
    Funding: $15 billion is authorized to carry out all title 
I, part A activities for fiscal year 2001, with ``such sums as 
may be necessary'' authorized in the 4 succeeding fiscal years.

Part B--Even Start Family Literacy Program

    The Even Start Family Literacy program is designed to 
improve the educational opportunities for low-income families 
by integrating early childhood, adult basic education, and 
parenting 
education into a unified family literacy program. The Secretary 
of Education awards grants to State educational agencies 
through a formula allocation. The State educational agencies 
distribute the funds to local educational agencies that form a 
collaboration with a community based organization, an 
institution of higher education, or another agency or nonprofit 
organization. This collaboration will provide joint education 
programs to serve children and their parents.
    Even Start program services must include adult literacy 
instruction, early childhood education, instruction to help 
parents support their child's education, staff training, and 
home-based instruction. Child care and transportation may be 
provided if these services are necessary and other funding 
sources are not available.
    Even Start grants are geared for areas with high rates of: 
poverty, illiteracy, unemployment, families of limited-English 
proficiency, or disadvantaged children. Grants are awarded for 
a 4-year period and may be renewed for up to 4 additional 
years. In 1998, several changes were made to the Even Start law 
as part of the Reading Excellence Act. The changes primarily 
focused on improving coordination between Even Start and other 
literacy and early childhood programs.
    The reauthorization bill strengthens current law by:
          (a) increasing the authorization level to $500 
        million for fiscal year 2001;
          (b) strengthening family literacy provisions;
          (c) encouraging year-round programs; and
          (d) conducting research on family literacy programs 
        and disseminating best practices information.

Part C--Education of Migratory Children

    The Migrant Education program provides grants to State 
educational agencies to develop or improve educational programs 
for migrant students. Most migrant programs are administered by 
local educational agencies and operate during both the regular 
school year and in the summer. Priority for services is given 
to current migrant students and to students who are failing, or 
at greatest risk of failing, to meet State performance 
standards.
    Funds are distributed through a formula which is based on 
the number of migrant children residing in the State. The 
number is then adjusted to the average per-pupil expenditure 
for both the State and the United States.
    The bill builds upon current law to ensure that migratory 
children have the opportunity to attain high levels of 
educational excellence. The reauthorization bill:
          (a) includes language ensuring that migratory 
        children who move among the States are not penalized in 
        any manner by disparities among the States in 
        curriculum, graduation requirements, and State student 
        performance and content standards;
          (b) adds a provision which ensures that migratory 
        children receive full and appropriate opportunities to 
        meet the same challenging State content and performance 
        standards that all children are expected to meet;
          (c) includes a requirement to have joint planning 
        efforts between migrant education programs and 
        bilingual education;
          (d) includes provisions emphasizing the importance of 
        parental involvement and the parent advisory councils;
          (e) establishes a national system for electronically 
        exchanging migrant student information which shall 
        include: immunization records and other health 
        information; elementary and secondary academic history 
        (including partial credit); credit accrual; and results 
        from State assessments; other academic information 
        essential to ensuring that migrant children achieve 
        high standards; and eligibility for services under the 
        Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
    A funding level of $400 million is authorized in fiscal 
year 2001 to carry out title I, part C activities. Such sums as 
may be necessary are provided for the 4 succeeding fiscal 
years.

Part D--Parental Assistance

    Purpose: It is the purpose of this part to provide 
leadership, technical assistance, and financial support to 
nonprofit organizations and LEAs to help implement successful 
and effective parental involvement policies, programs, and 
activities; strengthen partnerships among parents, teachers, 
principals, administrators, and other school personnel; develop 
and strengthen the relationship between parents and the 
schools; further the developmental progress primarily of 
children assisted in this part; and coordinate activities for 
improved parental involvement.
    Grant Program: The Secretary is authorized to award 
competitive grants (while ensuring geographic distribution of 
grants) to nonprofit organizations, or consortia of nonprofits 
and LEAs to establish school-linked or school based parental 
information and resources centers to provide training, 
information, and support to parents of elementary and secondary 
school students and to individuals who work with parents and 
organizations that carry out parent education and family 
involvement programs. School-linked and school-based programs 
are not precluded from meeting with parents at sites off school 
grounds. Nor does it preclude Parental Information and Resource 
Centers from working with other agencies that serve families. 
Agencies or organizations seeking grants must submit an 
application to the Secretary which must include a broad range 
of assurances. Each organization or consortium receiving a 
grant will be government by a board of directors which includes 
parents or organizations that represent parents. Grant funds 
shall be used: to assist parents in participating effectively 
in their children's education; to obtain information about the 
range of options, programs, services, and resources available 
at all levels of government to assist parents and school 
personnel who work with parents; and to help parents learn and 
use technology applied in their children's education. At least 
one-half of the overall funding provided each fiscal year must 
serve areas with high concentrations of low-income families. 
The bill provides for continuation grants for currently funded 
programs under the existing authority. Each grant recipient is 
required to submit information to the Secretary, on an annual 
basis, with information concerning the parental information and 
resource centers assisted under this part.
    Funding: A funding level of $50 million is authorized for 
FY 2001 to carry out all title I, part D activities. Such sums 
as may be necessary are provided for the 4 succeeding fiscal 
years.

Part E--Evaluations and Demonstrations

    The reauthorization bill retains the current law 
provisions.

Part F--Comprehensive School Reform

    The reauthorization bill includes the Comprehensive School 
Reform program, often referred to as ``Obey-Porter.'' It 
authorizes the Secretary to award grants to SEAs by formula to 
enable them to make competitive grants to LEAs.
    SEAs must submit applications to the Secretary that 
describe items such as: process and selection criteria; how the 
SEA will ensure that reforms are research-based programs; how 
the SEA will evaluate the implementation of reforms and link 
the reforms to student achievement; and how the SEA will make 
available technical assistance to LEA or consortia. Subgrants 
to LEA must be of sufficient size and scope to support the 
initial costs for the plan selected or designed, in an amount 
not less than $50,000, and renewable for two additional one-
year periods. The SEA must give priority consideration to LEAs 
that plan to use the funds for schools identified as being in 
need of improvement or corrective action and demonstrate a 
commitment to assist schools with budget, professional 
development, and other strategies to ensure reforms are 
properly implemented and sustained. In order to receive funds, 
LEAs must submit applications to the SEA for consideration. 
LEAs shall provide funds to schools eligible for assistance 
under part A to support a variety of reform activities.
    Funding: A funding level of $200 million is authorized for 
FY 2001 to carry out all title I, part F activities. Such sums 
as may be necessary are provided for the 4 succeeding fiscal 
years.

Part G--General Provisions

    The reauthorization bill retains the current law general 
provisions, with minor modifications.

Part H--Assistance to Address School Dropout Problems

    Purpose: The bill establishes a new State formula grant 
program designed to address school dropout problems. State 
funds are to be awarded competitively to local schools to 
support dropout prevention programs, to assist school reentry, 
and to raise the academic achievement of all students.
            Subpart 1--Coordinated National Strategy
    The Secretary of Education is authorized to conduct 
national activities including: (1) data collection regarding 
participation in Federal dropout prevention and school reentry 
programs; (2) establishment of an interagency working group to 
address dropout prevention and school reentry issues; and (3) 
creation of a national recognition program for schools that 
have made extraordinary progress in lowering dropout rates.
            Subpart 2--National School Dropout Prevention Initiative
    State Formula Grants: Funds will be allocated to States 
based on the title I formula. States receiving part H funds 
must provide dropout rate information to the Secretary, 
establish attendance-neutral funding policies, and adopt 
suspension and expulsion policies.
    States may award grants to public middle or secondary 
schools that have dropout rates that are in the highest third 
of dropout rates in the State for the purpose of supporting 
dropout prevention programs. Eligible schools must serve 
students 50 percent or more of whom are low-income or must 
participate in a schoolwide program.
    Grants may be awarded for up to five years. First-year 
grants to schools may not be less than $50,000 or more than 
$100,000--with grant amounts declining during each year of 
participation in the program. Schools which create smaller 
learning communities are eligible for a 10-percent increase in 
the amount of their grant.
    Strategies and Capacity Building: Schools must use grant 
funds for research-based, sustainable, and widely replicated 
strategies for dropout prevention and school reentry programs 
serving the entire school population. The Secretary is to award 
up to five contracts for a capacity building and design 
initiative to increase these types of strategies. In addition, 
the Secretary is authorized to offer support to entities with 
experience in providing training and related assistance to 
offer such assistance to schools receiving grant funds.
            Subpart 3--Definitions; Authorization of Appropriations
    A funding level of $5 million is authorized for fiscal year 
2001 to carry out the national activities under Subpart 1. A 
funding level of $145 million is authorized in fiscal year 2001 
to carry out the national school dropout prevention initiative 
authorized under Subpart 2--with $125 million to be used for 
State formula grants and the remaining $20 million to be used 
for strategies and capacity building initiatives. Such sums as 
may be necessary are provided for the 4 fiscal years.

                       Title II--Teacher Quality


Part A--Teacher Empowerment

    Purpose: To assist the efforts of States and local 
educational agencies to increase student academic achievement 
and student performance by improving teacher quality.
            Subpart 1--Grants to States
    State and Local Grant Funds: States are required to submit 
applications to the Secretary of Education for approval. States 
will receive not less than each received under fiscal year 2000 
appropriations for the current Eisenhower Professional 
Development Program and the Class Size Reduction initiative. 
Funds remaining after meeting the base requirement would be 
distributed by a formula in which 50 percent of the remaining 
funds are distributed based on a State's relative poverty of 
individuals (aged 5-17) and 50 percent based on a State's 
relative school-aged (5-17) population. A State may reserve 10 
percent of funds for State-level activities, and the remaining 
90 percent of funds must be distributed to local educational 
agencies and eligible partnerships. Ninety-five percent of the 
funds made available to LEAs and eligible partnerships shall be 
distributed by formula directly to the LEA, with 75 percent 
based on relative poverty of individuals aged 5-17 and 25 
percent based on relative school-aged population. The remaining 
5 percent will be available to the State Agencies for Higher 
Education (SAHEs) to distribute competitively to eligible 
partnerships.
    State and Local Programs: States must submit an application 
to the Secretary to receive funds under this part. States may 
use funds for a broad range of activities such as: reforming 
teacher certification or licensing requirements; mentoring 
programs; establishing, expanding, or improving alternative 
routes to State certification of teachers; recruiting teachers 
and principals; establishing reciprocity of teacher 
certification among States; providing technical assistance and 
services to LEAs or eligible partnerships; providing services 
through technology and distance learning; supporting activities 
to support teachers seeking national board certification from 
the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards or other 
recognized entities; and providing professional development 
activities involving training in advanced placement 
instruction.
    LEAs must submit an application to the SEA to receive 
funding under this part. LEAs must use a portion of funds for 
professional development in math and science and a portion of 
funds for professional development activities. LEAs may use 
funds to carry out activities such as: recruiting teachers in 
order to reduce class size; recruiting minorities and 
individuals with disabilities into the teaching profession or 
hiring special education teachers; providing signing bonuses; 
establishing retention initiatives; undertaking teacher quality 
initiatives such as professional development activities; and 
providing teacher opportunity payments.
    Professional development activities for teachers, 
paraprofessionals, and principals shall be directly related to 
the curriculum and academic subjects in which a teacher 
provides instruction or be designed to enhance the ability of a 
teacher, paraprofessional, or principal to understand and use 
State standards for the academic subjects in which a teacher 
provides instruction. If a State determines that an LEA has 
failed to make progress during the fiscal year, the State shall 
notify the LEA that the LEA shall be subject to Teacher 
Opportunity Payments. An LEA receiving notice for 2 consecutive 
years shall spend a portion of funds in the next succeeding 
year for Teacher Opportunity Payments. Teacher Opportunity 
Payments provide direct support to teachers to pursue the 
professional development activities of their own choosing.
    Subgrant to Eligible Partnerships: The SAHE, working in 
conjunction with the SEA, shall award subgrants on a 
competitive basis to eligible partnerships. Eligible 
partnerships must include a private or State institution of 
higher education and the division of that institution that 
prepares teachers; a school of arts and sciences; and a high 
need LEA. Eligible partnerships may also include other LEAs, a 
public charter school, a public or private elementary school, 
an educational service agency, a public or private nonprofit 
education organization, other institutions of higher education, 
a school of arts and sciences within such institutions, the 
division that prepares teachers, a nonprofit cultural 
organization, an entity carrying out a pre-kindergarten 
program, a teacher organization, or a business. Partnerships 
shall use funds for professional development for teachers, 
paraprofessionals and, if appropriate, principals. Activities 
must be coordinated with title II of the Higher Education Act, 
if applicable.
    National Activities: The Secretary may make grants to 
eligible consortia on a competitive basis for Teacher 
Excellence Academies; make a grant to the National Board for 
Professional Teaching Standards to enable the Board to complete 
a system of national board certification through fiscal year 
2001; make grants to support activities to encourage and 
support teachers seeking advanced certification or advanced 
credentialing through high quality professional teacher 
enhancement programs designed to improved teaching and 
learning; award grants on a competitive basis to eligible 
entities to support and promote the establishment of teacher 
training programs relating to the core subject areas in math 
and science; award grants or contracts to continue the 
Eisenhower National Clearinghouse for Mathematics and Science 
Education and expand the scope of the Clearinghouse. The bill 
also includes an authorization for the Troops to Teachers 
program.
    Funding: A funding level of $2 billion is authorized for 
this part for fiscal year 2001, of which $40 million will be 
available to carry out subpart 4. The subpart authorizes such 
sums as necessary for the remaining fiscal years 2002 through 
2005.
    General Provisions: This subpart contains definitions for 
``arts and science,'' ``core academic subjects,'' ``highly 
qualified,'' ``high need local educational agency,'' ``out-of-
field teacher,'' ``poverty line,'' and ``State.''

Part B--Leadership Education and Development Program

    The reauthorization bill addresses the national need for 
leadership training by including a competitive grant program 
for leadership education and development and authorizes $100 
million for the initiative. State education agencies, 
institutions of higher education, local educational agencies, 
and nonprofit educational organizations will be eligible to 
apply for grants for the purpose of providing professional 
development services for elementary and secondary school 
educators, principals, superintendents, and others in 
leadership positions within the state to develop and enhance 
their leadership skills. Grant funds shall be used for 
activities thatinclude: providing school leaders with effective 
leadership, management, and instructional skills and practices; 
enhancing and developing school management and business skills; 
improving the understanding of the effective use of technology; 
encouraging highly qualified individuals to become school leaders; and 
establishing sustained and rigorous support for mentorship and 
developing a network of school leaders within the state. In making 
grants, the Secretary must give due consideration to equal 
representation of rural and urban communities and school districts.

Part C--Reading Excellence Act

    The reauthorization bill maintains the current program, 
increases the authorization level to $280 million for fiscal 
year 2001, and extends the authority for this program through 
fiscal year 2005. Currently funded at $260 million, the 
purposes of the program are: to provide children with the 
readiness skills they need to learn to read once they enter 
school; to improve the reading skills of students and the 
instructional practices for current teachers; to expand the 
number of high-quality family literacy programs; and to provide 
early literacy intervention to children who are experiencing 
reading difficulties in an effort to reduce the number of 
students who are inappropriately referred to special education.

Part D--National Writing Project

    The reauthorization bill moves National Writing Project 
from title X, part K, to title II; updates provisions of the 
program; and authorizes $15 million for fiscal year 2001 and 
such sums as necessary for the 4 succeeding fiscal years. 
Currently funded at $9 million, the National Writing Project 
has as its primary purpose improving the quality of student 
writing and learning and the teaching of writing as a learning 
process in the Nation's classrooms. National Writing Project 
has 161 sites in 47 states and has served over 2 million 
teachers.

Part E--The New Century Program for Distributed Teacher Professional 
        Development

    The reauthorization bill moves the current 
``Telecommunications Demonstration Program for Mathematics'' 
(Mathline) from title III, part D, to title II and expands the 
purposes of the program. It provides authority for the 
Secretary to make grants to a nonprofit communications entity 
or partnerships to carry out a national telecommunications-
based program to improve teaching in core curriculum areas. It 
is designed to assist elementary and secondary school teachers 
in preparing students for achieving State content standards. 
The program will provide funds to deliver video and data in an 
integrated service to train teachers in the use of standards 
based curricula material appropriate for each State. The 
Secretary must make grants in at least 15 States. It authorizes 
$20 million for fiscal year 2001 and such sums as necessary for 
the 4 succeeding fiscal years.

Part F--Digital Education Content Collaborative

    The reauthorization bill authorizes a competitive grant 
program to develop, produce, and distribute educational 
material and instructional video programming that is designed 
for use by kindergarten-through-grade-12 schools and is based 
on State standards. The program will facilitate the development 
of educational programming that shall: include student 
assessment tools and built-in teacher utilization and support 
components; be created for or adaptable to State content 
standards; and be capable of distribution through digital 
broadcasting and school digital networks. Authorizes $25 
million for fiscal year 2001 and such sums as necessary for the 
succeeding 4 fiscal years.

                   Title III: Enrichment Initiatives


Part A--21st Century Community Learning Centers

    The reauthorization bill retains current law with respect 
to 21st Century Community Learning Centers and is outlined 
below. The only change made by this bill is an increase in the 
authorized funding level to $500 million for fiscal year 2001 
and such sums as necessary for the 4 succeeding years.
    Purpose: The purpose of this part is to provide local 
public schools with the opportunity to serve as centers for the 
delivery of education and human resources for all members of 
the community in order for schools to become lifelong learning 
centers. Public schools, primarily in rural or inner city 
communities collaborate with other public and nonprofit 
agencies and organizations, local businesses, other educational 
institutions, recreational, cultural, and other community and 
human service entities to meet the needs of and expand the 
opportunities available to, the residents of the communities.
    Program: The Secretary is authorized to award grants to 
rural and inner city public elementary or secondary schools, or 
consortia of such schools, to plan, implement, or expand 
projects that benefit the educational, health, social service, 
cultural, and recreational needs of a rural or inner- city 
community. The Secretary is required to ensure an equitable 
distribution of assistance among the States, among urban and 
rural areas of the United States, and among rural and urban 
areas of a State.
    Application and Use of Funds: The Secretary shall give 
priority to applications describing projects that offer a broad 
selection of services which address the needs of the community. 
Grant funds may be used to plan, implement, or expand community 
learning centers which include not less than 4 of the following 
activities: literacy education programs; senior citizen 
programs; children's day care services; integrated education, 
health, social service, recreational or cultural programs; 
summer and weekend school programs in conjunction with 
recreation programs; nutrition and health programs; expanded 
library service hours to serve community needs; 
telecommunications and technology education programs for 
individuals of all ages; parenting skills education programs; 
support and training for child day care providers; employment 
counseling, training, and placement; services for individuals 
who leave school before graduating from secondary school; and 
services for individuals with disabilities.

Part B--Initiatives for Neglected, Delinquent or At-Risk Students

    The title I, part D, program for youth who are neglected, 
delinquent, or at risk of dropping out primarily serves youth 
who have been assigned to institutional facilities. The purpose 
of the program is to provide those youth with the opportunity 
to make a successful transition from institutionalization to 
further schooling or employment. Most of the current law 
provisions are retained in this bill.

Part C--Gifted and Talented Children

                                Overview

    Under current law, the Javits Gifted and Talented program 
provides grants to State educational agencies, local 
educational agencies, institutions of higher education, and 
other public and private agencies. These grants fund research, 
demonstration projects, and training activities designed to 
meet the special needs of gifted and talented students. The 
present funding level is $6.5 million.
    The reauthorization bill retains language from current law 
regarding the establishment of a National Center for Research 
and Development in the Education of Gifted and Talented 
Children and Youth. Not more than 30 percent of the funds 
appropriated for the overall Javits Gifted and Talented Program 
may be used for the National Center.
    Under the bill, once the appropriation for the Javits 
Gifted and Talented program reaches $50 million, funding for 
the program will be distributed by formula to the States and 
competitively to local educational agencies and schools. If 
funding levels fall below $50 million, the current law 
provisions of the program will remain in effect.
    The following provisions will take effect when funding for 
the program exceeds $50 million:
    Allotment to States: The Secretary will allot funds to each 
State based on a ratio of a State's school-age population to 
the school-age population of all States. A small State minimum 
is also included which is \1/2\ of 1 percent. [When funds 
appropriated for the program are less than $50 million, funds 
shall be awarded on a competitive basis according to the 
current law provisions.]
    Grandfather Clause: All current grantees that have been 
awarded funds under the Javits Gifted and Talented program will 
continue to receive funds under the original terms of the grant 
until the time period for that grant has expired.
    State Applications: Any State seeking a grant must submit 
an application which:
          (1) designates the State educational agency as the 
        agency responsible for the administration of the 
        program, including public dissemination of data;
          (2) contains an assurance that the State educational 
        agency will have the ability to provide matching funds 
        (in cash or in-kind);
          (3) provides for a biennial submission of data 
        regarding the use of gifted and talented funds;
          (4) provides an assurance that the SEA will keep 
        records and provide such information as the Secretary 
        requires;
          (5) contains an assurance that there is compliance 
        with the requirements of this part;
          (6) provides for timely public notice and public 
        dissemination of data.
    State Uses of Funds: A State educational agency may use not 
more than 10 percent of funding for the following activities:
          (1) a peer review process for grant applications;
          (2) supervision of the awarding of funds to 
        elementary schools, secondary schools, or consortia of 
        these schools;
          (3) planning, supervision, and processing of funds 
        made available under this part;
          (4) monitoring, evaluation, and dissemination of 
        programs and activities assisted under this part;
          (5) providing technical assistance; and
          (6) supplementing, but not supplanting, State and 
        local funds for the education of gifted and talented 
        students.
    Parental Support: A State educational agency may use not 
more than 2 percent of funding for support to parents of gifted 
and talented children.
    Distribution to Schools: A State educational agency shall 
use not less than 88 percent of funds to award grants, on a 
competitive basis, to elementary schools, secondary schools, or 
consortia of schools.
    Local Application Contents: Any elementary school, 
secondary school, or consortium seeking a grant will include 
the following information in its application:
          (1) an assurance that funds received under this 
        program will be used to identify and support gifted and 
        talented students, including gifted and talented 
        students from all economic, ethnic, and racial 
        backgrounds, such as students of limited English 
        proficiency and students with disabilities; and
          (2) a description of how the school or consortium 
        will meet the educational needs of gifted and talented 
        students, including the training of personnel in the 
        education of gifted and talented students.
    Local Uses of Funds: A school or a consortium may use their 
grant to carry out one or more of the following activities:
          (1) professional development--developing and 
        implementing programs to address State and local needs 
        for inservice training activities for general 
        educators, specialists in gifted and talented 
        education, administrators, school counselors, or other 
        school personnel;
          (2) identification of students--providing services to 
        gifted and talented students who may not be identified 
        and served through traditional assessment methods--
        including educationally disadvantaged students, 
        students of limited-English proficiency, and 
        individuals with disabilities;
          (3) model projects--supporting and implementing 
        innovative strategies such as cooperative learning, 
        peer tutoring, independent study, and adapted 
        curriculum used by schools or consortia; and
          (4) emerging technologies--assisting schools or 
        consortia that do not have the resources to provide 
        courses through new and emerging technologies, which 
        may include distance learning curriculum. (No funds may 
        be used for the purchase or upgrading of technological 
        hardware).
    Private School Children & Teachers Participation: 
Consistent with current law, where appropriate, the Secretary 
will ensure that there is equitable participation of students 
and teachers in private, nonprofit elementary and secondary 
schools, including the participation of teachers and other 
personnel in professional development.
    Establishment of a National Center: [This provision is also 
contained in current law.]
    National Center Purpose: The purpose of the National Center 
for Research and Development in the Education of Gifted and 
Talented Children and Youth is to develop, devise, disseminate, 
and evaluate model projects and activities that serve gifted 
and talented students; to conduct research; and to provide 
technical assistance.
    Center Establishment: The Secretary shall establish a 
National center through grants orcontracts with 1 or more 
institutions of higher education, State educational agencies, or a 
consortia of such institutions and agencies. The Secretary may not use 
more than 30 percent of funds made available to carry out the National 
Center activities.
    Grandfather Clause: [This is a new provision.] The current 
National Center grantee will continue to be the grantee for the 
duration of the current grant.

Part D--Arts in Education

    Purpose and Program: The Arts in Education program is 
currently funded at $11.5 million. The reauthorization bill 
reauthorizes Subpart 1--Arts Education, and Subpart 2--Cultural 
Partnership for Youth at Risk, and moves these provisions to 
title III, part D. The program will continue to support: 
activities that provide students opportunities to have the arts 
as an integral part of the elementary and secondary school 
curriculum; the important education programs of the John F. 
Kennedy Center and the VSA arts program (formerly Very Special 
Arts); and grants to improve the performance of at-risk youth 
by providing comprehensive and coordinated educational and 
cultural services. The draft proposal authorizes $25 million 
for subpart 1 and $45 million for subpart 2 and maintains the 
reservation of funds for the John F. Kennedy Center and the VSA 
arts programs.

Part E--Advanced Placement Programs

    Part E authorizes the Access to High Standards program, a 
competitive grant program designed to: encourage more students 
(especially low-income students) to take the advanced placement 
(AP) exam; increase the availability of AP courses offered; and 
broaden the range of schools offering AP courses. This program, 
originally authorized as part of the Higher Education 
Amendments of 1998, has been expanded and moved to the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act.
    The Secretary is to give first priority to providing grants 
to State educational agencies to enable them to cover all or 
part of the costs of AP test fees for low-income individuals. 
Seventy percent of any remaining funds will be allocated for 
grants to State and local educational agencies to expand access 
for low-income students to AP programs. Thirty percent of any 
remaining funds will be used for grants to provide students 
with on-line AP courses. A funding level of $50 million is 
authorized for these activities in fiscal year 2001 and ``such 
sums as may be necessary'' in the 4 succeeding fiscal years.

                  Title IV--Safe and Drug Free Schools


Part A--State Grants

    Purpose: The purpose of this part is to support programs 
that: prevent violence in and around schools; prevent the 
illegal use of alcohol, tobacco and drugs; involve parents; and 
are coordinated with related Federal, State, school, and 
community efforts and resources. The goals of the 
reauthorization bill are to: increase accountability and the 
adherence to the Principles of Effectiveness; increase the use 
of researched-based programs; provide States with greater 
flexibility in preventing violence and drug use; increase 
community participation in drug and violence prevention 
programs; and maintain a viable program for all schools willing 
to conduct proven research-based violence and drug abuse 
prevention programs.
    Funding: For fiscal year 2001, the bill authorizes $700 
million for the State Grants Program, $150 million for National 
Programs, and $75 million for the National Coordinator 
Initiative.
    State and Local Grants: States must submit applications to 
the Secretary of Education. The application must include a 
comprehensive plan for use of funds under the Governor's 
program and the State Department of Education's program; a 
needs assessment and results of ongoing State evaluation 
activities; assurances that stakeholders were consulted; 
measurable goals; a description of how the funds will be spent; 
and a comprehensive plan for using and monitoring the funds 
received under this Title. The State plan shall also include a 
comprehensive plan for the Governor's Program by the chief 
executive officer.
    The reauthorization bill reserves 80 percent of the funds 
to be available to States for state support and grants to LEAs. 
State and local programs must implement activities that are 
research-based initiatives, and States are required to 
implement a uniform management and information reporting system 
so that expenditures of these funds can be clearly tracked. 
SEAs may use up to 5 percent of funds for technical assistance 
and up to 5 percent for administration.
    SEAs may choose between two options for allocating 
remaining funds to LEAs: (1) provide at least 70 percent to 
schools based on enrollment and up to 30 percent allocated at a 
State's discretion or to schools the State determines to have 
the greatest need; or (2) provide up to 70 percent on a 
competitive basis to those schools with the greatest need, 
determined by the state, and 30 percent to those schools the 
state determines require additional help to run a program but 
who might not meet ``greatest need'' criteria. This would allow 
states to choose and define a competitive or baseline minimum 
grant system and still allow them help those schools that could 
not compete under that system, if they choose.
    The reauthorization bill reserves 20 percent of a State's 
allocation for Governors Programs of which not less than 95 
percent of the funds must be used for research-based substance 
abuse/violence reduction through a broad range of activities. 
The bill allows Governors to directly add their money to the 
funds being sent to schools and communities to serve out of 
school youth and to undertake community mobilization activities 
related to substance abuse and violence.
    LEAs shall submit an application to the SEA which must 
include a needs assessment; set measurable goals and 
objectives; utilize effective research-based programs; ensure 
participation of community groups; and include a program 
evaluation. Funds shall be used for a comprehensive drug and 
violence prevention program.
    Evaluations and Reporting: The reauthorization bill 
requires the Secretary of Education to consult with a newly 
created National Advisory Committee in creating an evaluation 
and requires the evaluation to determine whether funded 
programs: conform to the Principles of Effectiveness; have 
objectively measurable goals; target research-based programs 
such as risk factors and/or protective factors/buffers or 
assets; and reduce drug use, school violence, and the presence 
of firearms at schools. The bill requires the Department of 
Education, States, and the Governors to implement program and 
financial monitoring and requires State reports every 2 years 
to the Department of Education and annual reports to the States 
from local schools.
    Federal Activities: In addition to provisions contained in 
the current law, the reauthorization bill adds service learning 
programs to the list of uses of funds. The bill includes a new 
section which authorizes the Secretary to award grants to local 
education agencies for the hiring/training of drug prevention 
and school safety program coordinators. In addition, the bill 
creates a Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities Advisory 
Committee to: coordinate Federal drug and violence prevention 
programs, develop core data sets and evaluation programs, 
provide technical assistance and training, provide for the 
diffusion of research-based programs, and review other 
regulations and standards developed under this title. The 
committee will include Department of Education, Center for 
Disease Control, National Institute on Drug Abuse, National 
Institute on Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse, Center for Substance 
Abuse Prevention, Center for Mental Health Services, Office of 
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of National 
Drug Control Policy, and State and local government education 
agency representatives. The committee will annually consult 
with State and local coordinators of school and community-based 
substance abuse and violence prevention programs and other 
interested groups.

Part B--Gun Possession

    The Gun-Free Schools provisions currently contained in part 
F of title XIV are transferred to part B of title IV. These 
provisions require States receiving funds under ESEA to have 
laws requiring local educational agencies to expel from school 
for at least one year any student who brings a weapon to 
school.

Part C--School Safety and Violence Prevention

    Part C includes a number of new provisions and allowable 
uses of funds related to school safety and violence prevention, 
including:
    School Safety and Violence Prevention: Provides that 
federal funds provided under titles IV and VI of ESEA may be 
used for training school personnel to identify potential 
threats; to identify troubled youth; to make comprehensive 
school security assessments; to purchase metal detectors, 
locks, and surveillance cameras; to engage in collaborative 
efforts with community-basedorganizations to reduce violence; 
and to utilize other innovative programs to reduce school violence.
    School Uniforms: Provides that nothing in the ESEA can be 
construed to prohibit schools from establishing a school 
uniform policy and allows funds provided under titles IV and VI 
of ESEA to be used for establishing a school uniform policy.
    Transfer of School Disciplinary Records: Requires States 
receiving Federal funds under ESEA to establish a procedure by 
which local educational agencies must transfer the suspension 
and expulsion records of any student to any private or public 
elementary or secondary school in which that student seeks 
enrollment. This requirement does not apply to private schools.
    Disclaimer on Materials Produced, Procured, or Distributed 
from ESEA Funding: Requires that all materials produced, 
procured, or distributed as a result of Federal funding through 
ESEA contain a statement indicating that it has been made 
available at the expense of the Federal government. The 
statement must also indicate that any individual who objects to 
the material or to representations made in it is encouraged to 
contact the Department of Education. The address of the office 
at the Department assigned to receive comments must also be 
listed. Every 6 months, the Secretary is to summarize the 
comments received and provide them to appropriate congressional 
committees and to House and Senate leadership.
    Background Checks: Amends the National Child Protection Act 
of 1993 to specify that individuals who are employed, or seek 
employment, with schools are included in the provisions of that 
act relating to background checks.
    Constitutionality of Memorial Services and Memorials at 
Public Schools: Provides congressional findings that the saying 
of a prayer, the reading of scripture, the performance of 
religious music, and the design or construction of any memorial 
which includes religious symbols and which is placed on school 
grounds does not violate the First Amendment. In addition, it 
ensures that anyone seeking to challenge such memorials as 
unconstitutional must pay its own attorney's fees, and that the 
Attorney General is authorized to provide assistance to any 
school district defending the legality of the service.

Part D--Environmental Tobacco Smoke

    The bill transfers to the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act the environmental tobacco smoke provisions 
currently contained in part C of title X of the Goals 2000: 
Educate America Act to part D of title IV. These provisions 
prohibit smoking within any indoor facility used for the 
provision of education, routine health care, day care, library 
services, or early childhood development to children.

              Title V--Educational Opportunity Initiatives


Part A--Technology Education

    Purpose: The purpose of this part is to help all students 
develop technical and higher order thinking skills and to 
achieve challenging State academic content and performance 
standards, as well as America's Education Goals, by providing 
support to: help provide all classrooms with access to 
educational technology; help ensure access to and the effective 
use of educational technology in all classrooms through the 
provision of sustained and intensive high quality professional 
development that improves the ability of teachers and 
principals to integrate educational technology effectively into 
the classroom by actively engaging students, teachers, 
paraprofessionals, media specialists, principals, and 
superintendents in the use of technology; help improve the 
capability of teachers and other appropriate school personnel 
to design and construct new learning experiences using 
technology; support efforts by SEAs and LEAs to create learning 
environments designed to prepare students to achieve 
challenging State academic content standards and performance 
standards; support the provision of technical assistance to 
SEAs, LEAs, and communities; support partnerships among 
business and industry and the education community; support 
evaluation and research in the effective use of technology in 
preparing all students to achieve challenging State standards; 
encourage collaborative relationships among the State Agency 
for Higher Education, the State Library Administrative Agency, 
the State telecommunications agency, and the SEA in the area of 
technology support to strengthen the system of education to 
ensure that technology is accessible to and usable by all 
students; to support the development and use of education 
technology to enhance and facilitate meaningful parental 
involvement to improve student learning; and to assist every 
student in crossing the digital divide by ensuring that every 
child is computer literate by the time the child finishes 8th 
grade, regardless of the child's race, ethnicity, gender, 
income geography or disability.
    Funding: A funding level of $815 million is authorized for 
subparts 1, 2, and 3 for fiscal year 2001 and such sums as 
necessary for the four succeeding fiscal years. Of that amount, 
$5 million is available for federal leadership activities and 
$10 million for Regional Technology in Education Consortia in 
fiscal year 2001 not to exceed 2.5 percent of total 
appropriations in the remaining fiscal years; 30 percent of the 
remaining funds for Technology Innovation grants (competitive 
grant) and 70 percent of the remaining funds for the Technology 
Literacy Fund (formula program to States). It ensures that 
under no circumstances would the formula grant program to 
States receive less than it did in fiscal year 2000.
    The reauthorization bill puts an emphasis on increasing the 
use of education technology to provide professional development 
opportunities for prospective teachers and current teachers, as 
well as school leaders. It eliminates unfunded programs 
[Product Development (current Subpart 4 of title III, part A) 
and Elementary Mathematics and Science Equipment Program (title 
III, part E)].

Part B--Star Schools

    The purpose of the Star Schools program is to use 
telecommunications to encourageimproved instruction in math, 
science, and foreign languages as well as literacy skills and 
vocational education to underserved populations. The program provides 
5-year grants which can be renewed for a 3-year period. The 
reauthorization bill authorizes a funding level of $50 million for 
fiscal year 2001 and such sums as necessary for the 4 succeeding fiscal 
years.

Part C--Magnet School Assistance

    Magnet schools are public elementary schools or secondary 
schools that offer a special curriculum which attracts 
substantial numbers of students of different racial 
backgrounds. The purpose of the Magnet Schools Assistance 
program is to assist schools in increasing their racial, 
economic, linguistic, or ethnic diversity between minority and 
non-minority students and among students of different minority 
groups. Magnet school projects help local educational agencies 
implement systemic reform. A funding level of $125 million is 
authorized to carry out this program in fiscal year 2001.

Part D--Public Charter Schools

    Charter schools are public schools that are released from 
various regulations that normally apply to public schools in 
exchange for increased student performance accountability. The 
Public Charter Schools program supports the establishment of 
charter schools in states that have enacted state charter 
school laws.
    The Public Charter Schools program supports the design, 
initial implementation, and evaluation of charter schools. 
Under this grant program, funds are provided for up to three 
years to State educational agencies to support eligible charter 
schools within the State. The State educational agencies award 
grants for planning, technical assistance, and dissemination. A 
funding level of $175 million is authorized to carry out this 
program in fiscal year 2001. The reauthorization bill extends 
this program through fiscal year 2005.

Part E--Women's Educational Equity

    The Women's Educational Equity Act (WEEA), currently 
authorized as part B of title V of ESEA, is extended through 
fiscal year 2005. WEEA provides grants for the operation of 
programs promoting educational equity for women and girls. 
Approximately two-thirds of WEEA funds are used to support 
local projects. The remaining funds are used for technical 
assistance, dissemination, and research and development. Fiscal 
year 2000 funding for WEEA is $3 million. The proposed 
reauthorization makes minor clarifying changes to the existing 
law and provides an authorization level of $5 million in fiscal 
year 2001.

Part F--Civic Education

    The reauthorization bill merges the Civic Education program 
currently authorized as part F of title X and the International 
Education Exchange Program currently authorized under title VI 
of Goals 2000: Educate America Act and extends the program 
through fiscal year 2005. The proposal authorizes $10 million 
for fiscal year 2001 for each component (domestic and 
international).
    The Civic Education program provides support for programs 
related to instruction on the basic principles of our 
constitutional democracy and the history of the Constitution 
and the Bill of Rights. The program received $9.85 million in 
fiscal year 2000.
    The International Education Exchange program provides 
support for education exchange activities in civics and 
government education and in economic education between the 
United States and eligible developing countries (i.e. Eastern 
Europe, former republics of the Soviet Union). Its purpose is 
to support democracy and free market economies. Grantees offer 
exemplary curriculum and teacher training to educators from 
eligible countries. They also sponsor seminars and site visits 
and develop related programs for U.S. students. The program 
received $7 million in fiscal year 2000.

Part G--Fund for the Improvement of Education

    The Fund for the Improvement of Education (FIE), currently 
authorized as part A of title X of ESEA, is substantially 
streamlined and extended through fiscal year 2005. FIE 
currently provides the Secretary with broad authority to 
support nationally significant programs and projects designed 
to improve the quality of education. Several specific programs, 
such as character education, are also authorized under FIE. 
Fiscal year 2000 funding for FIE is $243.9 million. This amount 
includes $65 million for the comprehensive school reform 
program, which is authorized in this bill as part F of title I.
    The reauthorization bill specifies activities to be 
supported by FIE to include: the identification of exemplary 
schools and programs (such as Blue Ribbon Schools); the 
development and evaluation of model strategies for professional 
development for teachers and administrators (such as Christa 
McAuliffe Fellowships); character education; the scholar-
athletes program; elementary school counseling demonstrations; 
smaller learning communities; and the National Student and 
Parent Mock Elections. A funding level of $100 million is 
authorized for fiscal year 2001.

Part H--Allen J. Ellender Fellowship Program

    The Allen J. Ellender Fellowship Program, currently 
authorized as part G of title X, is extended through fiscal 
year 2005. This program makes an award to the Close Up 
Foundation to provide fellowships to students from low-income 
families and their teachers to allow them to participate in one 
week of seminars on government and meetings with 
representatives of all three branches of the federal 
government. Fiscal year 2000 funding for the program is $1.5 
million. The reauthorization bill provides for a funding level 
of $1.5 million for fiscal year 2001.

Part I--Ready to Learn Television

    Purpose: The Ready to Learn Television program authorizes 
the Secretary of Education to award grants or enter into 
contracts or cooperative agreements to develop, produce, and 
distribute educational and instructional video programming for 
preschool and elementary school children and their parents.
    Program: The reauthorization bill extends the current Ready 
to Learn Television program through fiscal year 2005 with small 
modifications. It makes funds available to local public 
television stations to work in partnerships with SEAs, LEAs, 
local schools, institutions of higher education, or community-
based organization to: develop educational programming and 
accompanying support materials for preschool and elementary 
school children; facilitate development of programming and 
digital content over public television stations for parents and 
caregivers; and widely distribute and disseminate programs. 
Funds under this part may be used to: address the learning 
needs of young children in limited-English-proficiency 
households; develop programming and support materials to 
increase family literacy skills; identify, support, and enhance 
the effective use and outreach of innovative programs that 
promote school readiness; and develop and disseminate training 
materials.
    Federal Funds: Currently funded at $16 million, the bill 
increases the authorization of the program to $50 million for 
fiscal year 2001.
    Part J--Inexpensive Book Distribution Program
    Purpose and Program: Funds made available under the 
Inexpensive Book Distribution Program support ``Reading is 
Fundamental'' (RIF), which is extended through fiscal year 
2005. Currently funded at $20 million, RIF supports and 
promotes programs, including the distribution of inexpensive 
books to students, to motivate children to read. RIF is a 
public-private partnership program that operates nationwide and 
serves 3.5 million children annually in schools, child care 
centers, libraries, hospitals, clinics, and homeless centers. 
The reauthorization bill provides for funding level of $25 
million for fiscal year 2001.

                     Title VI--Innovative Education


                                overview

    The purpose of title VI, part A, Innovative Education, is 
to provide funds to local educational programs for the 
implementation of initiatives that support school improvement 
and reform efforts with the goal of advancing student 
performance. To accomplish the purpose of part A, States 
allocate funds to local school districts for an array of 
activities such as professional development, technology, and 
library services.
    The title VI, part A, reauthorization proposal expands the 
current funding level for the Innovative Education Program 
Strategies section. The new authorization of $850 million (for 
fiscal year 2001) combines funds from Goals 2000 State Grants 
Program (which is set to expire in the year 2000) and the 
annual allocation for the authorized title VI program. The 
appropriation for programs under the current title VI program 
is $365.8 million.
    A key change from current law is the inclusion in this 
title of the Education Flexibility Partnership Act, 
Consolidated State and Local Plan Applications, and Waivers of 
statutory and regulatory requirements. These are provisions 
relating to both flexibility and accountability which are 
located in various titles of the current law and are now 
consolidated under title VI.
    The Rural Flexibility Act is a new title VI initiative. The 
purpose of the Rural Flexibility proposal is to provide 
adequate funding to rural school districts for improving 
student performance. The Rural Flex initiative will enable 
rural school districts to maximize their funding resources 
which will assist in the implementation of education reform 
strategies.
    Another new flexibility initiative is contained in part G, 
Education Performance Partnerships, which provides States with 
the opportunity to combine federal education formula funds in 
ways which will increase the academic achievement of their 
students. In exchange for this broad flexibility, States must 
demonstrate tough accountability. Participating States will 
enter into performance partnership agreements with the 
Secretary of Education.
    Finally, part H, Academic Achievement for All 
Demonstration, contains provisions that allows a State to 
combine funds under a variety of federal formula grant programs 
to use for any educational purpose permitted under State law. 
Up to 15 States may participate in the demonstration program. 
Participating States are to show results in improving the 
academic performance of all students. The goals for improvement 
and the means for achieving them are set by the States.

Part A--Innovative Education Program Strategies

    Purpose: The purpose of title VI is to support education 
reform efforts that are consistent with and support statewide 
education reform initiatives. Grant funds are used to develop 
and implement education programs to improve school, student, 
and teacher performance, including professional development 
activities and class-size reduction programs.
    State and Local Responsibility: The administration of title 
VI funds is handled by the State educational agencies. However, 
the design and implementation of title VI activities are the 
responsibilities of the local educational agencies, school 
superintendents, principals, and teachers.
    Federal Funding: A funding level of $850 million is 
authorized to carry out the innovative education strategies 
section of this part for fiscal year 2001 and such sums as 
necessary for the 4 succeeding fiscal years.
    Allotment to States: This is the same as current law. The 
Secretary allots to each State an amount based on a ratio of a 
State's school-age population to the school-age population of 
all States. A small State minimum is also included, as in 
current law, which is \1/2\ of 1 percent.
    Allocation to Local Educational Agencies: The 
reauthorization maintains the current law provisions.
    State Use of Funds: A SEA may use funds for: State 
administration of programs; support for planning, designing, 
and initial implementation of charter schools; support for the 
design and implementation of high-quality yearly student 
assessments; support for implementation of State and local 
standards; and technical assistance and direct grants to LEAs 
and statewide education reform activities, including effective 
schools programs, which assist LEAs to provide targeted 
assistance.
    State Applications: Any State submitting an application to 
the Secretary will provide assurances that, other than 
technical assistance and monitoring compliance, the State 
educational agency will not influence the decision making 
processes of local educational agencies as to how the local 
educational agencies will spend the funds received under this 
title.
    Local Uses of Funds: Title VI funds allocated to local 
educational agencies shall be used for innovative assistance 
and requires all title VI, part A programs and activities to be 
tied to promoting high academic standards, to be used to 
improve student performance, and to be part of an overall 
education reform strategy. Innovative assistance includes:
          (1) programs for the acquisition and use of 
        instructional and educational materials, including 
        library services and material (including media 
        materials), assessments, and other curricular 
        materials;
          (2) programs to improve teaching and learning, 
        including professional development activities, that are 
        consistent with comprehensive State and local systemic 
        education reform efforts;
          (3) activities that encourage and expand improvement 
        throughout the LEA that are designed to advance student 
        performance;
          (4) initiatives to generate, maintain, and strengthen 
        parental and community involvement;
          (5) programs to recruit, hire, and train certified 
        teachers (including teachers certified through State 
        and local alternative routes) in order to reduce class 
        size;
          (6) programs to improve the academic performance of 
        educationally disadvantaged elementary school and 
        secondary school students, including activities to 
        prevent students from dropping out of school;
          (7) programs and activities that expand learning 
        opportunities through strategic research designed to 
        improve classroom learning and teaching;
          (8) programs to combat both student and parental 
        illiteracy;
          (9) technology activities related to the 
        implementation of school-based reform efforts, 
        including professional development to assist teachers 
        and other school personnel (including school library 
        media personnel), regarding how to effectively use 
        technology in the classroom and the school library 
        media center;
          (10) school improvement programs or activities 
        relating to the title I assessment;
          (11) programs to provide for the educational needs of 
        gifted and talented children;
          (12) programs to provide same gender schools and 
        classrooms, if equal educational opportunities are made 
        available to students of both sexes as consistent with 
        the United States Constitution;
          (13) service learning activities; and
          (14) school safety programs.
    Local Applications: A local educational agency or 
consortium of agencies seeking title VI funds will include in 
their applications information including:
          (1) a description of the programs, projects, and 
        activities that will be funded and the planned 
        allocation of funds;
          (2) a description of how title VI projects will 
        contribute to improving student achievement or 
        improving the quality of education for students;
          (3) assurances of compliance regarding the 
        participation of children enrolled in private, 
        nonprofit schools.
          (4) a description of how parents, teachers, school 
        personnel, and administrative personnel will be 
        involved in the design, planning, and implementation of 
        title VI initiatives;
    Local Educational Agency Discretion: A local educational 
agency receiving funds under title VI will have complete 
discretion in determining how funds will be divided among the 
areas of targeted assistance. The local educational agency will 
ensure that the schools meet the educational needs of the 
students served by the schools receiving title VI funds.

Part B--Rural Flexibility Act

    The purpose of this part is to provide adequate funding to 
rural school districts to enhance their ability to recruit and 
retain teachers, strengthen the quality of instruction, and 
improve student achievement. Subpart I, the Rural Educational 
Achievement Program, permits rural school districts with 
enrollments of fewer than 600 students to combine funds from 
titles II, IV, and VI and apply these funds toward local 
initiatives designed to improve student achievement. In 
addition, participating local educational agencies are eligible 
to receive a supplemental grant that, when combined with other 
Federal dollars, will enable these small rural schools to offer 
programs and activities of sufficient size, scope, and quality 
to have a significant impact upon student and school 
performance. Subpart II, the Low-Income and Rural School 
Program, is designed to meet the needs of rural school 
districts serving large numbers of disadvantaged students. 
Local educational agencies residing in rural communities are 
eligible to receive funds from this program if 20 percent of 
the children they serve are from families living below the 
poverty level. A funding level of $125 million is authorized to 
support these programs during fiscal year 2001.

Part C--Education Flexibility Partnership Act

    The Education Flexibility Partnership Act allows State 
educational agencies the flexibility to waive certain Federal 
requirements, along with related State requirements, for the 
purpose of raising the achievement of all students. The 
provisions of Public Law 106-25, which was signed into law last 
year as a free-standing bill, are incorporated into title VI.

Part D--Flexibility in the Use of Administrative and Other Funds

    Consolidation of State and Local Administrative Funds: A 
State educational agency may consolidate administrative funds 
for one or more of the activities specified below provided that 
the State educational agency can demonstrate that the majority 
of such agency's resources come from non-Federal sources. These 
programs include:
          (1) all title 1 programs;
          (2) administration of this title;
          (3) establishment and operation of peer-review 
        mechanisms under ESEA; and
          (4) dissemination of information regarding model 
        programs and practices.
    Consolidated Administrative Recordkeeping: A State 
Educational Agency that consolidates administrative funds will 
not be required to keep separate records, by individual 
program, to account for administrative costs.
    Review of Consolidated State Administrative: To determine 
the effectiveness of State educational agencies consolidating 
administrative funds, the Secretary may periodically review the 
performance of State educational agencies.
    Consolidation of Local Administrative Funds: In accordance 
with regulations, a local educational agency, with the approval 
of its State educational agency, may consolidate 1 or more of 
the programs outlined under ``Consolidation of State and Local 
Administrative Funds.''
    Availability of Unneeded Program Funds: With the approval 
of the State educational agency, a local educational agency 
that determines for a fiscal year that funds from programs 
listed under ``Consolidation of State and Local Administrative 
Funds'' (other than funds from part A of title I) are not 
needed to carry out that program may use up to five percent of 
those funds to carry out one of the other programs listed under 
``Consolidation of State and Local Administrative Funds.''

Part E--Consolidated Plans

    Purpose: It is the purpose of this part to improve teaching 
and learning by encouraging greater cross-program coordination, 
planning and service delivery under this act and enhanced 
integration of programs under this act with educational 
activities carried out with State and local funds.
    Integration of State Plans: State educational agencies may 
integrate the following programs into one plan. These include:
          (1) Part A of Title I--Helping Disadvantaged Children 
        Meet High Standards;
          (2) Part C of Title I--Education of Migratory 
        Children;
          (3) Title II--Professional Development;
          (4) Title IV--Safe and Drug Free Schools; and
          (5) Part A of this Title--Innovative Education 
        Program Strategies;
    Integration of Local Plans: Local educational agencies may 
integrate the following programs into one plan:
          (A) Part A of Title I--Helping Disadvantaged Children 
        Meet High Standards;
          (B) Title II--Professional Development;
          (C) Title IV--Safe and Drug Free Schools;
          (D) Part A of this Title--Innovative Education 
        Program Strategies.

Part F--Waivers

    Waivers: A State educational agency, local educational 
agency, or Indian tribe which seeks a waiver, shall submit a 
waiver request to the Secretary that--
          (a) identifies the Federal programs affected by such 
        requested waiver;
          (b) describes which Federal requirements are to be 
        waived and how the waiving of such requirements will--
                  (i) increase the quality of instruction for 
                students; or
                  (ii) improve student academic performance;
          (c) if applicable, describe which similar State and 
        local requirements will be waived and how the waiving 
        of such requirements will assist the local educational 
        agencies, Indian tribes, or schools to achieve 
        improvement in student academic performance or increase 
        the quality of instruction for students;
          (d) describes specific, measurable, educational 
        improvement goals, and expected outcomes for all 
        students;
          (e) describes the methods to be used to measure 
        progress in meeting the goals and outcomes; and
          (f) describes how schools will continue to provide 
        assistance to the same populations served by programs 
        for which waivers are requested.
    Requirement for State Educational Agencies: In seeking a 
waiver, a State educational agency will provide all interested 
local educational agencies and the public with notice and the 
opportunity to comment and submit the comments to the 
Secretary.
    Local Educational Agencies: A waiver sought by a local 
educational agency will be reviewed by the State educational 
agency. In addition, the local educational agency will provide 
the opportunity for notice and comment to the public.
    Restrictions: Waivers will not be granted relating to the 
following:
          (1) the allocation or distribution of funds to 
        States, local educational agencies, or other recipients 
        under this Act;
          (2) maintenance of effort;
          (3) comparability of services;
          (4) use of Federal funds to supplement, not supplant, 
        non-Federal funds;
          (5) equitable participation of private school 
        teachers and students;
          (6) parental participation and involvement;
          (7) civil rights requirements;
          (8) requirements for a charter school;
          (9) prohibitions on the use of funds for religious 
        worship or instruction; and
          (10) the selection of a school attendance area or 
        school under subsections (a) and (b) of section 1113, 
        except that a State educational agency may grant a 
        waiver to allow a school attendance area or school to 
        participate in activities under part A of title I if 
        the percentage of children from low-income families in 
        the school attendance are of such school or who attend 
        such school is not less than 10 percentage points below 
        the lowest percentage of such children for any school 
        attendance are or school of the LEA that meets the 
        requirements of such subsections (a) and (b).
    Duration and Extension of Waiver: The duration of a waiver 
approved by the Secretary may be for a period not to exceed 
three years. The Secretary may extend the period if the 
Secretary determines that the waiver has been effective in 
enabling the State or affected recipients to carry out the 
activities for which the waiver was requested and the waiver 
has contributed to improved student performance and that such 
an extension is in the public interest.

Part G--Education Performance Partnerships

    Part G of title VI provides States with the opportunity to 
combine the funds they receive from federal education formula 
grants to tailor activities designed to increase student 
performance. In exchange for this increased flexibility, States 
must demonstrate progress in increasing academic achievement 
and in narrowing the gap between the lowest and highest 
achieving students. States that participate would enter into a 
performance partnership agreement with the Secretary of 
Education which includes student performance goals for the 5-
year term of the agreement. If a State chooses not to 
participate, any local educational agency in that State may do 
so.
    This approach maintains the traditional federal role of 
targeting of assistance towards low-income students served 
under title I by providing that any State which includes part A 
funds in its performance partnership must maintain the current 
formula for distributing those funds to schools and school 
districts.
    Part G also establishes a $2.5 billion bonus award fund. 
Bonuses would be provided to those States which make 
significant progress in eliminating achievement gaps over a 5-
year period. All States would be eligible to compete for bonus 
awards--whether or not they choose to enter into performance 
partnership agreements.

Part H--Academic Achievement for All Demonstration

    Part H of title VI establishes a demonstration program 
which permits a State to combine funds under a variety of 
federal formula grant programs to use for any educational 
purpose permitted under State law. Up to 15 States may 
participate in the demonstration program. If a State chooses 
not to participate, any local educational agency in that State 
may do so.
    Participating States are to show results in improving the 
academic performance of all students. The goals for improvement 
and the means for achieving them are set by the States and are 
described in a performance agreement.
    A State which elects to include funds from part A of title 
I in its agreement must assure that each local educational 
agency in the State will receive no less in Title I funds than 
the agency received in the fiscal year preceding the State's 
entry into the demonstration program. Otherwise, the 
distribution of funds from programs included in the performance 
agreement within the State will be determined either by the 
Governor and State legislature or by the individual or entity 
responsible for education under State law.
    A State which makes substantial reductions in achievement 
gaps by the end of the 5-year term of the agreement will be 
eligible for a performance reward equal to 5 percent of the 
funds allocated to the State for the first year of the 
performance agreement for programs included in the agreement. 
Funding for the reward program is to be provided under the Fund 
for the Improvement of Education.

  Title VII--Bilingual Education, Language Enhancement, and Language 
                          Acquisition Programs


Part A--Bilingual Education

    The Bilingual Education program is designed to provide 
educational assistance to students with limited English 
proficiency. Funds awarded under this program help students 
with limited English proficiency to meet challenging State 
content and performance standards. The reauthorization bill 
makes several changes to the Bilingual Education program. The 
key program changes are--
          Funding: $300 million has been authorized for fiscal 
        year 2001.
          Program Development and Implementation Grants: This 
        program has been repealed and the purposes of this 
        initiative have been woven into other programs under 
        this subpart.
          Program Enhancement Projects: The uses of funds 
        section has been modified. Grants will be used for: 
        developing, implementing, expanding, or enhancing 
        comprehensive preschool, elementary, or secondary 
        education programs for limited English proficient 
        children and youth; providing high quality professional 
        development; annually assessing the English proficiency 
        of all limited English proficient students. In awarding 
        grants, the Secretary may give priority to an entity 
        that serves a school district that has: a total 
        district enrollment that is less than 10,000 students; 
        a large percentage or number of limited English 
        proficient students; and limited or no experience in 
        serving English proficient students.
          Comprehensive School and Systemwide Improvement 
        Grants: These are two separate programs under current 
        law. The bill combines both initiatives into one grant 
        program. Grants awarded under this section will be used 
        for: improving instructional programs for limited 
        English proficient students; training school personnel 
        and community-based organization personnel to improve 
        the instruction and assessment of limited-English 
        proficient students; implementing family education or 
        parent outreach programs; annually assessing the 
        English proficiency of all limited English proficient 
        students; and developing or improving accountability 
        systems to monitor the academic progress of limited 
        English proficient students. Grantees who received 
        funds prior to the date of enactment of this bill will 
        continue to be funded for the duration of their grants 
        under the terms of current law. One-third of the grants 
        awarded under this section will be awarded to school 
        districts and two-thirds will be used for school 
        activities.
          Priority for All Subpart 1 Grants (Bilingual 
        Education Capacity and Demonstration Grants): In 
        awarding grants, the Secretary shall give priority to 
        an applicant who: experiences a dramatic increase in 
        the number or percentage of limited English proficient 
        students enrolled in the applicant's program and has 
        limited or no experience in serving limited English 
        proficient students; is a local educational agency that 
        serves a school district that has a total district 
        enrollment that is less than 10,000 students; 
        demonstrates that the applicant has a proven record of 
        success in helping limited English proficient students; 
        proposes programs that provide for the development of 
        bilingual proficiency both in English and another 
        language for all participating students; or serves a 
        school district in which a large percentage or number 
        of limited English students is enrolled. In addition, 
        the 25-percent limitation for special alternative 
        programs has been deleted.
          State Grant Program: The State grant program assists 
        local educational agencies with program design, 
        capacity building, assessment of student performance, 
        and programevaluation. The bill increases the minimum 
funding level from $100,000 to $200,000.

Part B--Foreign Language Assistance

    The Foreign Language Assistance Program provides 
competitive grant assistance to State or local educational 
agencies to provide foreign language study for elementary and 
secondary school students. Incentive payments are authorized as 
well for schools that offer programs designed to lead to 
communicative competency in a foreign language. The 
reauthorization bill extends this program through fiscal year 
2005 and adds provisions giving special consideration to grant 
applications which make effective use of technology, promote 
innovative activities, or are carried out through a consortium 
including the grantee and an elementary or secondary school. A 
funding level of $35 million is authorized for fiscal year 
2001.

Part C--Emergency Immigrant Education

    The Emergency Immigrant Education program provides funds to 
local educational agencies that experience unexpectedly large 
increases in their student populations due to immigration to 
assist with the education of those students. The fiscal year 
2001 authorization level is $200 million.

                         Title VIII--Impact Aid

    Impact Aid programs provide assistance to school districts 
that are financially burdened as a result of activities of the 
federal government for the education of federally connected 
children or due to the presence of federal property. Total 
funding for impact aid programs in fiscal year 2000 is $906.5 
million.
    Federal Property: The reauthorization bill maintains the 
current structure for providing payments to school districts 
due to federal ownership of property. The existing hold-
harmless provisions are replaced with new provisions dealing 
with the distribution of funds if appropriations are 
insufficient. The bill also seeks to avoid payment delays by 
requiring the Secretary to make a preliminary payment of 60 
percent of the amount received by a local educational agency in 
the previous year no later than 60 days following enactment of 
appropriations (provided that the LEA has submitted all data 
necessary for computation of its payment). It addition, it 
establishes a 5-year time frame following Federal acquisition 
of property in which districts may apply for payments. A 
funding level of $35 million is authorized in fiscal year 2001 
for Federal property payments.
    Basic Payments: The reauthorization bill increases from .10 
to .25 the weight assigned to children who have a parent who is 
on active duty in the uniformed services or is an official of a 
foreign government and is a foreign military officer, but do 
not reside on Federal property. A hold-harmless provision is 
included to assure that other LEAs do not lose funds due to 
this weight adjustment.
    The bill also institutes a maximum 3-year time limit for 
current law provisions which permit military dependents living 
off-base to be counted as on-base students in situations where 
their base housing is being renovated and would clarify that 
the rebuilding of on-base housing will be treated in the same 
manner as renovation. In addition, it permits military 
dependents to be counted as on-base students if they reside in 
housing initially acquired or constructed under the ``Build to 
Lease'' program if the property is within the fenced security 
perimeter of the military facility. If the property is subject 
to taxation, the impact aid payment to the LEA will be reduced 
by the amount of revenues received from the property taxes.
    The bill folds payments to heavily-impacted districts into 
the basic payments structure, consistent with the provisions of 
a pilot program which has been in operation for the past two 
years. A separate authority for additional funds for federally 
connected children with disabilities is maintained.
    A funding level of $875 million is authorized in fiscal 
year 2001 for basic payments, and $60 million is authorized for 
payments on behalf of children with disabilities.
    Construction/Modernization: The current construction 
authority is expanded to provide assistance for schools serving 
large proportions of federally connected students in districts 
which have no bonding authority or are at their limit for 
bonded indebtedness. A funding level of $62.5 million is 
authorized in fiscal year 2001. In addition, a funding level of 
$7 million is authorized for fiscal year 2001 for school 
facilities owned by the Department Education which are used to 
educate federally connected military students.
    Unfunded Programs: Unfunded authorities for special 
additional payments for LEAs with high concentrations of 
children with severe disabilities and for sudden and 
substantial increases in attendance of military dependents are 
repealed.

     Title IX--Indian, Native Hawaiian, and Alaska Native Education

    The purpose of title IX is to modify and improve the 
educational services provided for American Indian, Alaska 
Native, and Native Hawaiian students. The reauthorization bill 
continues to make grants available to schools operated or 
supported by the Bureau of Indian Affairs and allows local 
educational agencies to provide an increased range of services 
to include those that: (1) promote the incorporation of 
culturally responsive teaching and learning strategies; (2) 
incorporate American Indian and Alaska Native specific 
curriculum content into the curriculum; (3) promote 
coordination among tribal, Federal, and State public schools in 
areas that will improve education; and (4) offer family 
literacy activities. The reauthorization bill gives local 
educational agencies which receive formula grants under part A 
the ability to commingle all of the federal funding they 
receive for educating Indian children, regardless of which 
agency provides it, into 1 coordinated, comprehensive program 
to meet the specific needs of Indian children. The 
reauthorization bill also authorizes the provision of family 
literacy services for Indian, Native Hawaiian, and Native 
Alaskan students, limits administrative costs to 5 percent, and 
consolidates a number of programs under PartB: Native Hawaiian 
Education and Part C: Native Alaskan Education.

                      Title X--General Provisions

    The reauthorization bill contains a separate part 
pertaining to evaluation and dissemination of all elementary 
and secondary education programs funded under the Elementary 
and Secondary Education Act. Components include requiring the 
Secretary of Education to: carry out comprehensive evaluations 
of all programs and demonstration projects; evaluate the cost-
efficiencies of Federal elementary and secondary education 
programs; assess the impact of programs in relation to student 
and school performance; and disseminate broadly the results of 
these evaluations.
    In addition, the bill requires that the Secretary provide 
for a study conducted by the National Academy of Sciences 
regarding the relationship between time and learning which 
shall include an analysis on the impact of increasing education 
time on student learning; an analysis of how schools, teachers, 
and students use time and the quality of instructional 
activities; an analysis of how time outside of school may be 
used to enhance student learning; and cost estimates for 
increasing time in school.
    The bill reauthorizes America's Education Goals Panel 
(formerly the National Education Goals Panel), and the Panel 
will work with the Secretary of Education to disseminate 
information regarding best practices. To ensure that all 
students have access to high quality continuing education or 
service opportunities, the bill contains a provision that 
states that nothing in the Act shall be construed to prohibit 
recruiters for the Armed Forces of the United States from 
receiving the same access to secondary school students or 
directory information as is provided to postsecondary 
educational institutions or prospective employers of school 
student.

                   Title XI--Amendments to Other Acts


Part A--Repeals

    The Goals 2000: Educate America Act is repealed, as is the 
Advanced Placement Incentive Program currently authorized as 
Part B of Title VIII of the Higher Education Amendments of 
1998. The Advanced Placement program is replaced with new 
provisions included in the new part E of title III of the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

Part B--Education for Homeless Children and Youth

    The Education for Homeless Children and Youth program 
authorized as Subtitle B of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless 
Assistance Act is extended through fiscal year 2005. The 
program provides assistance for: the establishment of Offices 
of Coordinator of Education of Homeless Children and Youth in 
States; the development and implementation of State plans for 
the education of homeless children; and support to local 
educational agencies for the education of these children. The 
reauthorization bill strengthens provisions of the current law 
designed to avoid segregating homeless students, to maintain a 
child's attendance at his or her school of origin, to avoid 
enrollment delays, and to assure that the quality of an 
application is considered in the provision of subgrants to 
local educational agencies. A funding level of $40 million is 
authorized for fiscal year 2001.

Part C--Albert Einstein Distinguished Educators

    The Albert Einstein Distinguished Educator Fellowship 
program is extended through fiscal year 2005. This program, 
which is administered by the Secretary of Energy, provides 
fellowships for elementary and secondary school mathematics and 
science teachers. Einstein Fellows work for ten months in 
positions in the Department of Energy, the Senate, the House, 
the Department of Education, the National Institutes of Health, 
the National Science Foundation, the National Aeronautics and 
Space Administration, and the Office of Science and Technology 
Policy. A funding level of $700,000 is authorized for fiscal 
year 2001.
    General Notes:
    (1) The term ``research-based'' is used throughout the bill 
and is defined as follows: ``The term `research-based' used 
with respect to an activity or a program, means an activity 
based on specific strategies and implementation of such 
strategies that, based on theory, research, and evaluation, are 
effective in improving student achievement and performance and 
other program objectives.''
    (2) Throughout the bill, specific funding levels are 
authorized for fiscal year 2001, and ``such sums as may be 
necessary'' are authorized for the 4 succeeding fiscal years.

              II. Background and Need for the Legislation

    The Federal Government's involvement in elementary and 
secondary education began with the enactment of the Northwest 
Ordinance of 1787, one of the first laws passed by the 
Continental Congress. The Northwest Ordinance required each 
township within the territory to reserve one square mile for 
the establishment of public schools. Under the Northwest 
Ordinance law, 77 million acres of land were set aside for 
public education.
    178 years after passage of the Northwest Ordinance, the 
Congress of the United States determined that the Federal 
Government should develop legislation that would strengthen and 
improve educational opportunities for elementary and secondary 
school students. That determination evolved into congressional 
passage and enactment of the Elementary and Secondary Education 
Act of 1965.
    The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, which 
has been amended severaltimes during its 35 year history, 
continues to be the foundation for most of the Federal programs and 
activities related to elementary and secondary education. That 
foundation has been built on the belief that federally authorized 
programs help to strengthen and improve educational quality and 
opportunities to elementary and secondary school students.
    Currently, the Federal Government sends each State an 
estimated 7 cents on the dollar for education services. Those 7 
cents are a very important contribution to the State and local 
education systems that exist throughout the Nation. Over the 
last decade, Federal funds have been especially helpful in 
assisting State development of school reform strategies that 
will enable all students to meet challenging standards.
    Although some progress is visible regarding student 
performance improvement, we have a long way to go to ensure 
that all students have the knowledge and skills necessary to 
compete in a global economy. To accomplish such a task, the 
Federal, State, and local governments must join together to 
establish programs that will provide all students with the 
opportunity to obtain a high quality education.
    The Educational Opportunities Act, S. 2, strengthens the 
title I reform process initiated in 1994 which emphasizes the 
establishment of high standards and aligned assessments 
designed to measure progress toward those standards. This 
legislation increases high quality professional development 
opportunities for teachers and other school leaders. S. 2 also 
creates activities designed to enhance the important 
partnership between parents and their local schools, and will 
help local schools provide safe and drug-free learning 
environments. Finally, S. 2 increases State and local 
flexibility in the use of Federal funds in exchange for greater 
accountability.
    S. 2 offers States and local school districts a positive 
framework for creating a first rate education delivery system. 
This legislation provides mechanisms to give our children the 
quality education they need to succeed in an increasingly 
competitive world.

             III. Legislative History and Committee Action

    The Educational Opportunities Act, S. 2, was introduced by 
Senators Jeffords, Gregg, Lott, McCain, Mack, Coverdell, Hagel, 
and Landrieu on January 19, 1999.
    In December 1998, the committee held the first of 24 
hearings on issues related to the reauthorization of the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). All hearings 
were held by the full committee, including 3 field hearings and 
a joint hearing with the House Committee on Education and the 
Workforce. Committee ESEA hearings include:

December 4, 1998
Are Our Children Ready to Learn? (S. Hrg. 105-772)
Purpose: Examining early childhood education and related 
        services.

December 11, 1998
The Price We Pay for Illiteracy (S. Hrg. 105-787)
Purpose: Examining educational goals, focusing on literacy.

January 26, 1999
Improving Educational Opportunities: Senators' Perspectives (S. 
        Hrg. 106-1)
Purpose: Examining proposals by several members of the Senate 
        to improve ESEA programs.

February 9, 1999
Department of Education Elementary and Secondary Education 
        Proposals (S. Hrg. 106-30)
Purpose: Examining proposed legislation authorizing funds to 
        extend programs and activities under ESEA of 1965.

February 23, 1999
Education Reform: Governors' Views (S. Hrg. 106-4)
Purpose: Examining ESEA reform initiatives at the state level 
        and the view of state governors on the proper role of 
        the federal government.

March 16, 1999
Educating the Disadvantaged (S. Hrg. 106-23)
Purpose: Examining legislation authorizing funds for ESEA, 
        focusing on Title I, education programs for the 
        disadvantaged.

April 7, 1999 (Winooski, VT)
Reauthorization of the ESEA (S. Hrg. 106-62)
Purpose: Examining issues and programs related to the 
        reauthorization of ESEA.

April 14, 1999
What Works: Education Research (S. Hrg. 106-28)
Purpose: Examining education research issues, including 
        research support, vehicles for dissemination, education 
        improvement, education policy and practice, and the 
        impact of education research on overall school and 
        student performance.

April 19, 1999 (Montpelier, VT)
Reauthorization of the ESEA: A Focus on Professional 
        Development (S. Hrg. 106-36)
Purpose: Examining the effectiveness of professional 
        development programs authorized under ESEA.

April 22, 1999
Education Technology (S. Hrg. 106-78)
Purpose: Examining legislation authorizing funds for ESEA, 
        focusing on educational technology programs.

April 29, 1999
Retention and Social Promotion (S. Hrg. 106-54)
Purpose: Examining legislation authorizing funds for programs 
        of ESEA, focusing on retention and social promotion.

May 6, 1999
ESEA: Safe Schools (S. Hrg. 106-142)
Purpose: Examining legislation authorizing funds for programs 
        of the ESEA, focusing on safety programs.

May 10, 1999 (Bennington, VT)
Reauthorization of the ESEA: Innovative Programs (S. Hrg. 106-
        73)
Purpose: Examining the federal role in our education delivery. 
        What is working? What is Not? What can we do better?

May 12, 1999
ESEA Title I: Evaluation & Reform (S. Hrg. 106-51)
Purpose: Examining legislation authorizing funds for programs 
        of the ESEA, focusing on the Title I Program, helping 
        disadvantaged children meet high standards, including 
        issues as accountability, targeting assistance to low-
        come students, allocating resources for early childhood 
        initiatives and making Title I a portable entitlement.

May 18, 1999
ESEA Educating the Forgotten Half (S. Hrg. 106-59)
Purpose: Examining various strategies for transforming the 
        forgotten half into the indispensable foundation of the 
        21st century workforce and for making secondary 
        education the centerpiece of those strategies.

May 20, 1999
ESEA: From Tales To Tape (S. Hrg. 106-149)
Purpose: Examining legislation authorizing funds for programs 
        of the ESEA.

June 10, 1999
ESEA: Special Populations (S. Hrg. 106-77)
Purpose: Examining legislation authorizing funds for programs 
        of the ESEA, focusing on special populations, and S. 
        505, to give gifted and talented students the 
        opportunity to develop their capabilities.

June 17, 1999 (Joint Hearing with House Committee on Education 
        and the Workforce)
ESEA: Federal Education Research and Evaluation Efforts (S. 
        Hrg. 106-128)
Purpose: Examining legislation authorizing funds for programs 
        of the ESEA, focusing on research and evaluation.

June 22, 1999
Professional Development in ESEA (S. Hrg. 106-83)
Purpose: Examining proposed legislation authorizing funds for 
        programs of the ESEA, focusing on professional 
        development for teachers.

June 23, 1999
ESEA: Title VI and Class Size Reduction (S. Hrg. 106-101)
Purpose: Examining the legislation authorizing funds for 
        programs of the ESEA, focusing on Title VI, innovative 
        education program strategies.

June 29, 1999
ESEA: Arts Education and Magnet Schools (S. Hrg. 106-84)
Purpose: Examining proposed legislation authorizing funds for 
        programs of the ESEA, focusing on arts education and 
        magnet schools.

June 30, 1999
ESEA: Facilities (S. Hrg. 106-153)
Purpose: Examining proposed legislation authorizing funds for 
        programs of the ESEA, focusing on school facilities.

July 13, 1999
ESEA: Drug Free Schools (S. Hrg. 106-178)
Purpose: Examining proposed legislation authorizing funds for 
        programs of the ESEA, focusing on safe and drug free 
        schools.

July 20, 1999
ESEA: Improving Use of Funds (S. Hrg. 106-185)
Purpose: Examining proposed legislation authorizing funds for 
        programs of the ESEA, focusing on improving the use of 
        funds provided under the Act.

                           executive session

    On March 1, 7, 8, and 9, 2000, the committee met in 
executive session to consider S. 2. At the outset of the 
executive session, Senator Jeffords introduced a complete 
substitute for S. 2, which served as original text for purposes 
of further amendment. The committee took action on 38 
amendments, adopting 17 of them and defeating the remaining 21. 
Thirty-four other amendments were filed, but were either not 
offered or were withdrawn. The bill as amended was adopted by a 
roll call vote of 10 yeas to 8 nays.

                  votes taken during executive session

    Twenty-three roll call and 13 voice votes were taken during 
committee consideration of S. 2, as follows:
    1. Senator Kennedy offered an amendment to strike the 
Teacher Empowerment (Title II, Part A) provisions and 
substitute provisions authorizing $2 billion for activities 
under 4 subparts: Grants to States and LEAs (subpart 1); 
National Activities for the Improvement of Teaching and School 
Leadership (subpart 2); Transitions to Teaching (subpart 3); 
and Hometown Teachers (subpart 4). Under the amendment, a 
specific percentage of funds would be allocated for activities 
including: 56 percent for professional development activities; 
30 percent for teacher recruitment; and 4 percent for the State 
Agency for Higher Education for recruitment partnership grants. 
The amendment also proposed an increase in the current law set-
aside for professional development in math and science from 
$250 million to $300 million. The amendment was defeated by a 
roll call vote of 8 yeas to 10 nays.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Kennedy                             Jeffords
Dodd                                Gregg
Harkin                              Frist
Mikulski                            DeWine
Bingaman                            Enzi
Wellstone                           Hutchinson
Murray                              Collins
Reed                                Brownback
                                    Hagel
                                    Sessions

    2. Senator Gregg offered an amendment to establish an 
Academic Achievement for All Demonstration program as a new 
Part H of Title VI. Under the demonstration program, up to 15 
States would be permitted to combine funds under a dozen 
Federal education formula grant programs to use for any 
educational purpose permitted under State law. Participating 
States must show results in improving the academic performance 
of all students during the 5-year term of the performance 
agreement. If a State chooses not to participate, any local 
educational agency in the State may do so. The amendment was 
adopted by a roll call vote of 9 yeas to 8 nays, with Senator 
Jeffords voting ``present''.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Gregg                               Kennedy
Frist                               Dodd
DeWine                              Harkin
Enzi                                Mikulski
Hutchinson                          Bingaman
Collins                             Wellstone
Brownback                           Murray
Hagel                               Reed
Sessions

    3. Senator Frist offered an amendment which permits a local 
educational agency to use Title I funds for a schoolwide 
program to upgrade its entire educational program if at least 
40 percent of the children it serves are from low-income 
families. Under current law, the threshold is set at 50 
percent. Senator Frist's amendment also provides that any 
school that is using funds from more than one Federal education 
program in the operation of its schoolwide program will not be 
required to maintain separate fiscal accounting records by 
program, so long as the school maintains records that 
demonstrate that the schoolwide program addresses the intent 
and purpose of each Federal program for which funding is 
consolidated. The amendment was adopted by voice vote.
    4. Senator Murray offered an amendment to authorize $1.75 
billion for the class-size reduction program which has been 
funded for the past 2 years through appropriations legislation. 
Funds must be used to hire fully qualified teachers in order to 
reduce class size, with particular consideration for reducing 
class size in the early elementary grades. Funds may be used 
for recruiting, hiring, and training fully qualified regular 
and special education teachers; testing new teachers for 
academic content knowledge; and providing professional 
development. With some exceptions, not more than 25 percent of 
total funds may be used for professional development or testing 
teachers. If class size has already been reduced to 18 or fewer 
students in the early grades, funds could be used to further 
reduce class size or to conduct activities designed to improve 
teacher quality. The amendment was defeated by a roll call vote 
of 8 yeas to 10 nays.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Kennedy                             Jeffords
Dodd                                Gregg
Harkin                              Frist
Mikulski                            DeWine
Bingaman                            Enzi
Wellstone                           Hutchinson
Murray                              Collins
Reed                                Brownback
                                    Hagel
                                    Sessions

    5. Senator Gregg offered an amendment to authorize $500 
million for a new child centered program within Title I. Under 
the program, up to 10 States and up to 20 local educational 
agencies located in States which do not participate would 
allocate all their Part A funds (including the additional 
amount authorized in the amendment) to Title I-eligible 
children on a per-pupil basis. The per-pupil amount could be 
used for supplemental educational services provided by the 
school or by another entity and would follow any eligible child 
who transfers to another school. The amendment was adopted by a 
roll call vote of 9 yeas to 8 nays, with Senator Jeffords 
voting ``present''.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Gregg                               Kennedy
Frist                               Dodd
DeWine                              Harkin
Enzi                                Mikulski
Hutchinson                          Bingaman
Collins                             Wellstone
Brownback                           Murray
Hagel                               Reed
Sessions

    6. Senator Sessions offered an amendment to add a new Part 
C to Title IV, containing several provisions related to school 
safety and violence prevention. These provisions deal with: 
school safety and violence prevention activities; school 
uniforms; transfer of school disciplinary records; drug tests 
and locker inspections; employee background checks; disclaimers 
on materials produced with ESEA funding; and memorial services 
at public schools. The amendment was adopted by a roll call 
vote of 9 yeas to 8 nays, with Senator Collins not voting.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Jeffords                            Kennedy
Gregg                               Dodd
Frist                               Harkin
DeWine                              Mikulski
Enzi                                Bingaman
Hutchinson                          Wellstone
Brownback                           Murray
Hagel                               Reed
Sessions

    7. Senator Harkin offered an amendment to authorize $1.3 
billion for the repair and renovation of public schools. Of 
this amount, $50 million is authorized for grants to local 
educational agencies in which 50 percent of students reside on 
Indian lands. The remaining $1.25 billion is to be used for 
grants and loans for: repairing or replacing roofs, electrical 
wiring, or plumbing systems; repairing, replacing, or 
installing heating, ventilation, or air conditioning systems; 
ensuring that repairs and renovations are ADA compliant; and 
making other types of school repairs and renovations that the 
Secretary determines are urgently needed. The Secretary may not 
approve an application for a grant or loan unless the applicant 
demonstrates that it lacks sufficient funds from other sources 
to carry out the repairs. The amendment was defeated by a roll 
call vote of 8 yeas to 10 nays.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Kennedy                             Jeffords
Dodd                                Gregg
Harkin                              Frist
Mikulski                            DeWine
Bingaman                            Enzi
Wellstone                           Hutchinson
Murray                              Collins
Reed                                Brownback
                                    Hagel
                                    Sessions

    8. Senator Mikulski offered an amendment to add as a new 
purpose to the technology education provisions in Title V to 
``assist every student in crossing the digital divide by 
ensuring that every child is computer literate by the time the 
child finishes 8th grade, regardless of the child's race, 
ethnicity, gender, income, geography or disability.'' The 
amendment was adopted by voice vote.
    9. Senator Wellstone offered an amendment to authorize $5 
million for competitive national grants and contracts to 
elementary and secondary schools that work with experts to 
enable those schools to provide training to educators, 
educational programming, and support services related to issues 
concerning children experiencing or witnessing domestic 
violence. The amendment was defeated by a roll call vote of 8 
yeas to 8 nays, with Senator Jeffords voting ``present'' and 
Senator Collins not voting.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Kennedy                             Gregg
Dodd                                Frist
Harkin                              DeWine
Mikulski                            Enzi
Bingaman                            Hutchinson
Wellstone                           Brownback
Murray                              Hagel
Reed                                Sessions

    10. Senator Hagel offered an amendment to the impact aid 
provisions of the bill (Title VIII) which revises the criteria 
for an LEA to be designated as ``heavily impacted'' by reducing 
the percentage of federally connected children enrolled in the 
LEA from 40 percent to 35 percent; institutes a maximum 3-year 
time limit for current law provisions which permit military 
dependents living off-base to be counted as on-base students in 
situations where their base housing is being renovated and 
clarifies that the rebuilding of on-base housing will be 
treated in the same manner as renovation; and permits military 
dependents to be counted as on-base students if they reside in 
housing initially acquired or constructed under the ``Build to 
Lease'' program if the property is within the fenced security 
perimeter of the military facility. If the property is subject 
to taxation, the impact aid payment to the LEA will be reduced 
by the amount of revenues received from the property taxes. The 
amendment was adopted by voice vote.
    11. Senator Reed offered an amendment to establish two 
school library media resources programs as part of the 
Technology Education provisions of Title V. The amendment would 
authorize $250 million for a State formula grant program for 
library media resources. State funds are to be awarded to local 
educational agencies for activities such as acquiring up-to-
date library media resources, acquiring and using advanced 
technology, and providing professional development for school 
library media specialists. The amendment would also authorize 
$25 million for a national competitive grant program to assist 
local educational agencies in providing students with access to 
school libraries during non-school hours. The amendment was 
defeated by a roll call vote of 8 yeas to 10 nays.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Kennedy                             Jeffords
Dodd                                Gregg
Harkin                              Frist
Mikulski                            DeWine
Bingaman                            Enzi
Wellstone                           Hutchinson
Murray                              Collins
Reed                                Brownback
                                    Hagel
                                    Sessions

    12. Senator Bingaman offered an amendment to authorize $150 
million for the Teacher Training in Technology program which 
has been funded for the past 2 years through appropriations 
legislation. Under the amendment, the Secretary would award 
competitive grants to be used to prepare prospective teachers 
to make better use of advanced technologies to enhance student 
learning. The amendment was defeated by voice vote.
    13. Senator DeWine offered an amendment to authorize the 
Troops to Teachers program as a national activity in Title II, 
Part A. It directs the Secretary of Education to turn funds 
over to the Defense Activity for Non-Traditional Education 
(DANTES) to pay for and run the program. The Secretary of 
Education may retain a portion of the funds to identify LEAs 
with teacher shortages and States with alternative 
certification requirements. The amendment was adopted by voice 
vote.
    14. Senator Murray offered an amendment to add references 
to student involvement throughout the bill. The amendment was 
defeated by voice vote.
    15. Senator Bingaman offered an amendment to authorize $150 
million for school dropout prevention programs. Of that amount, 
$5 million is allocated for national activities. The remaining 
$145 million will be used for States formula grants and for a 
capacity building and design initiatives. State funds are to be 
awarded competitively to local schools to support dropout 
prevention programs, to assist school reentry, and to raise the 
academic achievement of all students. The amendment was adopted 
by voice vote.
    16. Senator Murray offered an amendment to authorize $2 
million for a national grant program to local educational 
agencies (or consortia) for innovative programs dealing with 
homeless education. Priority would be given to programs 
focusing on transportation, unaccompanied children and youth, 
and homeless pre-schoolers. The applicant must demonstrate 
experience in one of these areas. The Secretary is to evaluate 
the programs and disseminate information about them. The 
amendment was defeated by a roll call vote of 8 yeas to 10 
nays.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Kennedy                             Jeffords
Dodd                                Gregg
Harkin                              Frist
Mikulski                            DeWine
Bingaman                            Enzi
Wellstone                           Hutchinson
Murray                              Collins
Reed                                Brownback
                                    Hagel
                                    Sessions

    17. Senator Bingaman offered an amendment to authorize $50 
million to support Advanced Placement (AP) testing. The 
amendment would repeal the existing Advanced Placement testing 
provisions in the Higher Education Act and establish an 
expanded program within ESEA. The Secretary is to give first 
priority to providing grants to State educational agencies to 
enable them to cover all or part of the costs of AP test fees 
for low-income individuals. Seventy percent of any remaining 
funds will be allocated for grants to State and local 
educational agencies to expand access for low-income students 
to AP programs. Thirty percent of any remaining funds will be 
used for grants to provide students with on-line AP courses. 
The amendment was adopted by a roll call vote of 11 yeas to 7 
nays.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Jeffords                            Gregg
DeWine                              Frist
Collins                             Enzi
Kennedy                             Hutchinson
Dodd                                Brownback
Harkin                              Hagel
Mikulski                            Sessions
Bingaman
Wellstone
Murray
Reed

    18. Senator Bingaman offered an amendment to the provisions 
of Title V relating to programs for school technology resources 
to require that State applicants for funds include the State's 
goals for using advanced technology to improve student 
achievement and performance and its strategy for disseminating 
information. The amendment also requires that local educational 
agencies use grant funds to use technology to enable teachers 
to help students meet standards through the use of research-
based teaching practices and advanced technologies, to provide 
professional development in using technology to create new 
learning environments, and to use web-based learning resources. 
The amendment was adopted by voice vote.
    19. Senator Bingaman offered an amendment to the provisions 
of the National Technology Innovation Grants program in Title V 
to specify that any member of a consortium receiving a 
competitive grant under the program may serve as the fiscal 
agent, provided that the lead local educational agency agrees 
to have another member of the consortium serve in that 
capacity. The amendment was adopted by voice vote.
    20. Senator Harkin offered an amendment to transfer to the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act the environmental 
tobacco smoke provisions currently contained in Part C of Title 
X of the Goals 2000: Educate America Act. These provisions 
prohibit smoking within any indoor facility used for the 
provision of education, routine health care, day care, library 
services, or early childhood development to children. The 
amendment was adopted by a roll call vote of 18 yeas to 0 nays.

        YEAS                            
Jeffords
Gregg
Frist
DeWine
Enzi
Hutchinson
Collins
Brownback
Hagel
Sessions
Kennedy
Dodd
Harkin
Mikulski
Bingaman
Wellstone
Murray
Reed

    21. Senator Sessions offered an amendment to strike 
activities related to hate crimes from the national programs 
portion of Title IV. These activities include: a permissive use 
of funds by the Secretary to develop training programs and 
related materials designed to prevent and reduce the incidence 
of hate crimes; and a grant program to assist local educational 
agencies and community-based organizations in localities most 
directly affected by hate crimes. The amendment was defeated by 
a roll call vote of 5 yeas to 13 nays.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Gregg                               Jeffords
Frist                               DeWine
Hutchinson                          Enzi
Hagel                               Collins
Sessions                            Brownback
                                    Kennedy
                                    Dodd
                                    Harkin
                                    Mikulski
                                    Bingaman
                                    Wellstone
                                    Murray
                                    Reed

    22. Senator Bingaman offered an amendment to make a number 
of changes to title I, part A, including: providing for a 
reservation of title I funds for school improvement, 
accountability, and evaluation; substantially revising 
provisions related to standards, assessments, school 
improvement, and corrective action; and requiring the issuance 
of annual State and school report cards. The amendment was 
defeated by a roll call vote of 8 yeas to 10 nays.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Kennedy                             Jeffords
Dodd                                Gregg
Harkin                              Frist
Mikulski                            DeWine
Bingaman                            Enzi
Wellstone                           Hutchinson
Murray                              Collins
Reed                                Brownback
                                    Hagel
                                    Sessions

    23. Senator Gregg offered an amendment to amend Title I, 
Part A to require public school choice for Title I students who 
are victims of violent criminal offenses on public school 
grounds and to permit it for students who attend unsafe 
schools. The local educational agency may use Title I funds for 
the transportation costs of students who transfer for safety 
reasons. The amendment also requires public school choice for 
all students enrolled in a school identified for corrective 
action and school improvement. A local educational agency 
serving schools identified for school improvement may use Title 
1 funds to pay the transportation costs of students 
transferring from those schools; an LEA identified for 
corrective action must use Title I funds for such 
transportation costs. Once a school is no longer identified for 
school improvement, the local educational agency must continue 
to provide public school choice as an option to students in 
such school for not less than 2 years. The amendment was 
adopted by voice vote.
    24. Senator Reed offered an amendment to authorize $50 
million for the establishment of a competitive grant program 
within Part D of Title I for the establishment or expansion of 
child opportunity zone family centers in elementary and 
secondary schools. Such centers are school-based or school-
linked centers that provide comprehensive support services 
designed to improve the education, health, mental health, 
safety, and economic well-being of children and their families. 
The amendment was defeated by a roll call vote of 8 yeas to 10 
nays.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Kennedy                             Jeffords
Dodd                                Gregg
Harkin                              Frist
Mikulski                            DeWine
Bingaman                            Enzi
Wellstone                           Hutchinson
Murray                              Collins
Reed                                Brownback
                                    Hagel
                                    Sessions

    25. Senator Dodd offered an amendment to increase the 
authorization of funding for Part A of Title I from $10 billion 
to $15 billion. The amendment was adopted by voice vote.
    26. Senator Reed offered an amendment to require that State 
and local annual performance reviews include the review of 
parental involvement and professional development activities 
assisted under Title I, Part A; that State technical assistance 
be provided to address any problems with the implementation of 
parental involvement and professional development requirements; 
and that the State to review local parental involvement 
policies and practices. The amendment would also require, as a 
condition for receipt of ESEA funds, that the State develop a 
parental involvement plan. The requirements proposed by the 
Reed amendment could not be waived under a performance 
partnership or agreement. The amendment was defeated by a roll 
call vote of 8 yeas to 10 nays.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Kennedy                             Jeffords
Dodd                                Gregg
Harkin                              Frist
Mikulski                            DeWine
Bingaman                            Enzi
Wellstone                           Hutchinson
Murray                              Collins
Reed                                Brownback
                                    Hagel
                                    Sessions

    27. Senator Bingaman offered an amendment to strike the 
migrant education program from the list of programs which a 
State may choose to include in a performance partnership 
authorized under Part G of Title VI. The amendment was defeated 
by a roll call vote of 8 yeas to 10 nays.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Kennedy                             Jeffords
Dodd                                Gregg
Harkin                              Frist
Mikulski                            DeWine
Bingaman                            Enzi
Wellstone                           Hutchinson
Murray                              Collins
Reed                                Brownback
                                    Hagel
                                    Sessions

    28. Senator Reed offered an amendment to: add as a new 
purpose to the technology education provisions in Title V ``to 
support the development and use of education technology to 
enhance and facilitate meaningful parental involvement to 
improve student learning''; provide that localapplications for 
technology literacy grants include a description of how parents will be 
informed of the use of technologies; and give priority in the award of 
National Technology Innovation grants to consortia which demonstrate 
that their project will enhance parental involvement by providing 
parents with the information needed to participate in their child's 
learning. The amendment was adopted by voice vote.
    29. Senator Reed offered an amendment to require that the 
annual State report regarding the progress of schools toward 
meeting State student performance standards be submitted to the 
Secretary of Education and that the report include the number 
and names of low-performing schools, the reason each school was 
identified as low-performing, and the steps taken to address 
the performance problems of the schools. The amendment was 
defeated by a roll call vote of 8 yeas to 10 nays.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Kennedy                             Jeffords
Dodd                                Gregg
Harkin                              Frist
Mikulski                            DeWine
Bingaman                            Enzi
Wellstone                           Hutchinson
Murray                              Collins
Reed                                Brownback
                                    Hagel
                                    Sessions

    30. Senator Bingaman offered an amendment to authorize the 
Opportunities to Improve Our Nation's Schools (OPTIONS) program 
to provide grants to State and local educational agencies for 
programs that promote innovative approaches to public school 
choice. The amendment was defeated by a roll call vote of 8 
yeas to 10 nays.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Kennedy                             Jeffords
Dodd                                Gregg
Harkin                              Frist
Mikulski                            DeWine
Bingaman                            Enzi
Wellstone                           Hutchinson
Murray                              Collins
Reed                                Brownback
                                    Hagel
                                    Sessions

    31. Senator Reed offered an amendment to require that local 
educational agencies use at least 5 percent of their Title I, 
Part A funding for fiscal years 2001 and 2002 and 10 percent of 
those funds in subsequent fiscal years for professional 
development activities. The amendment would also strike the 
Title I, Part A program from the list of programs which a State 
may choose to include in a performance partnership authorized 
under Part G of Title VI. The amendment was defeated by a roll 
call vote of 8 yeas to 10 nays.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Kennedy                             Jeffords
Dodd                                Gregg
Harkin                              Frist
Mikulski                            DeWine
Bingaman                            Enzi
Wellstone                           Hutchinson
Murray                              Collins
Reed                                Brownback
                                    Hagel
                                    Sessions

    32. Senator Kennedy offered an amendment to include in the 
general provisions of the Act (Title X) a statement that 
nothing in the Act shall be construed to prohibit recruiters 
for the Armed Forces of the United States from receiving the 
same access to secondary school students or to directory 
information as is provided to postsecondary educational 
institutions or to prospective employers. The amendment was 
adopted by voice vote.
    33. Senator Kennedy offered an amendment to authorize the 
Community Technology Centers program which has been funded for 
the past 2 years through appropriations legislation. The 
amendment would establish a competitive grant program to allow 
foundations, museums, libraries, for-profit businesses, 
nonprofits, community-based organizations, institutions of 
higher education, SEAs, LEAs, or consortia to expand access to 
computers and related services to disadvantaged residents of 
economically distressed urban and rural communities. The 
amendment was defeated by a roll call vote of 8 yeas to 10 
nays.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Kennedy                             Jeffords
Dodd                                Gregg
Harkin                              Frist
Mikulski                            DeWine
Bingaman                            Enzi
Wellstone                           Hutchinson
Murray                              Collins
Reed                                Brownback
                                    Hagel
                                    Sessions

    34. Senator Kennedy offered three amendments, which were 
considered en bloc. The first amendment proposed to strike the 
education of homeless children and youth program from the list 
of programs which a State may choose to include in a 
performance partnership authorized under Part G of Title VI. 
The second amendment proposed to strike the emergency immigrant 
education program from that same list. The third amendment 
proposed to strike the Even Start program from the list. The 
three amendments, considered en bloc, were defeated by a roll 
call vote of 8 yeas to 10 nays.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Kennedy                             Jeffords
Dodd                                Gregg
Harkin                              Frist
Mikulski                            DeWine
Bingaman                            Enzi
Wellstone                           Hutchinson
Murray                              Collins
Reed                                Brownback
                                    Hagel
                                    Sessions

    35. Senator Dodd offered an amendment to substitute for the 
provisions of the 21st Century Community Learning Centers 
program under Part A of Title III provisions which: focus the 
program on after-school activities; increase the authorization 
level from $500 million to $1 billion; and change the program 
from a national competitive grant program to a State formula 
grant program. The amendment also provides that the program 
will not be included on the list of programs which a State may 
choose to include in a performance partnership authorized under 
Part G of Title VI. The amendment was defeated by a roll call 
vote of 8 yeas to 10 nays.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Kennedy                             Jeffords
Dodd                                Gregg
Harkin                              Frist
Mikulski                            DeWine
Bingaman                            Enzi
Wellstone                           Hutchinson
Murray                              Collins
Reed                                Brownback
                                    Hagel
                                    Sessions

    36. The substitute bill, as amended, was reported favorably 
by a roll call vote of 10 yeas to 8 nays.

        YEAS                          NAYS
Jeffords                            Kennedy
Gregg                               Dodd
Frist                               Harkin
DeWine                              Mikulski
Enzi                                Bingaman
Hutchinson                          Wellstone
Collins                             Murray
Brownback                           Reed
Hagel
Sessions

            IV. Explanation of the Bill and Committee Views


      Title I--Helping Disadvantaged Children Meet High Standards


Part A--Basic Programs

    The purpose of part A is to provide opportunities for those 
students served by part A of title I to meet challenging State 
performance and content standards. The last reauthorization of 
title I, which occurred in 1994, made major changes regarding 
standards, assessment, and professional development. The 1994 
law also established a 7-year timetable for all States to 
develop and implement standards and assessments. Most of the 
1994 changes have been retained in S. 2. Additional provisions 
have been included which build upon the reform activities 
created in the last reauthorization.
    A key provision in S. 2 is the inclusion of a reservation 
of funds, 50 percent of the amount that is in excess of 
$8,076,000,000, that State educational agencies will be able to 
use for school improvement activities, assessment initiatives, 
and awards for outstanding schools and educators. The State 
will determine how the reservation will be used.
    The 1994 law created several mechanisms to measure student 
performance. One such mechanism was adequate yearly progress. 
S. 2 expands the definition of adequate yearly progress by 
stating that all children served by this part shall meet the 
State's performance levels within 10 years. In addition, 
adequate yearly progress must be based on State standards and 
assessments.
    Another mechanism included in the last reauthorization was 
the establishment of the school improvement and corrective 
actions process for local educational agencies and schools.
    S. 2 expands these provisions by requiring State 
educational agencies and local educational agencies to take at 
least 1 of a series of corrective actions with respect to 
schools and local educational agencies that do not improve 
after being identified as failing to meet adequate yearly 
progress.
    S. 2 also expands parental involvement and professional 
development activities. Both the State and local educational 
agencies must implement parental involvement and professional 
development programs that have demonstrated effectiveness. In 
regard to professional development, the committee believes 
teachers may need to include the use of remedial and 
supplementary academic enrichment activities, including 
literacy programs or supplementary educational material and 
nstruction.
    Since the last reauthorization, the title I school-wide 
program has become quite popular. Due to its popularity, the 
committee changed the eligibility qualification from not less 
than 50 percent of enrolled children from low income families 
to not less than 40 percent.
    Two new provisions pertaining to school choice have been 
included in S. 2. The Senate bill requires local educational 
agencies to offer public school choice alternatives to students 
attending Title I schools that have been identified as needing 
improvement or corrective action, as well as schools where 
violent incidents have occurred. In addition to the public 
school choice section of the bill, S. 2 also creates a Child 
Centered program for up to 10 States and up to 20 local 
educational agencies in other States. Under the Child Centered 
program, title I funds received by a State or local educational 
agency would be distributed on a per pupil basis. Parents of 
the pupils who are eligible to receive these grants would be 
allowed to use them for supplementary education at a public 
school or for tutorial services.
    The committee passed bill includes an early childhood 
section. Under this section, the local educational agency may 
use part A of title I funds for preschool services.
    S. 2 increases the authorization level for fiscal year 2001 
for part A to $15 billion.

Part B--Even Start Family Literacy Programs

    The Even Start Family Literacy program is designed to 
improve the educational opportunities for low-income families 
by integrating early childhood, adult basic education, and 
parental education into a unified family literacy program. Even 
Start grants are geared to areas with high rates of poverty, 
illiteracy, unemployment, families of limited English 
proficiency, or disadvantaged children. S. 2 strengthens 
coordination activities between Even Start and other literacy 
and early childhood programs. In addition, it increases the 
authorization level for fiscal year 2001 to $500 million.

Part C--Education of Migratory Children

    The Migrant Education program provides grants to State 
educational agencies to develop or improve educational programs 
for migrant students. Most migrant programs are administered by 
local educational agencies and operate during both the regular 
school year and in the summer. Priority for services is given 
to current migrant students and to students who are failing, or 
at greatest risk of failing, to meet State standards. The 
committee passed bill builds upon current law to ensure that 
migratory children have the opportunity to attain high levels 
of educational excellence. S. 2 increases the authorization 
level for fiscal year 2001 to $400 million.

Part D--Parental Assistance

    Part D of title I focuses on parental assistance. Parental 
Information and Resource Centers, established under the Goals 
2000: Educate America Act, has been incorporated into S. 2. The 
committee bill expands the program by increasing the 
authorization level for fiscal year 2001 to $50 million and by 
strengthening provisions that focus on partnerships among 
parents, teachers, principals, administrators, and other school 
personnel.

Part E--Evaluations and Demonstrations

    S. 2 retains current law provisions.

Part F--Comprehensive School Reform

    S. 2 includes the Comprehensive School Reform program, 
often referred to as the Obey-Porter initiative. The 
Comprehensive School Reform program awards formula grants to 
State educational agencies. These grants are designed to assist 
in the implementation of effective school reform models. There 
are a number of demonstration programs that have produced 
positive results in a variety of subject areas. Project Seed, a 
mathematics project, is a reform effort which focuses on higher 
order thinking skills. S. 2 authorizes $200 million for fiscal 
year 2001.

Part G--General provisions

    S. 2 retains current law provisions.

Part H--Assistance to Address School Dropout Problems

    An issue of great concern to the members of the committee 
is the escalating school dropout rate. To address this problem, 
a dropout prevention program has been included in S. 2. The new 
initiative creates a grant program that will provide assistance 
to public schools for the implementation of an effective, 
sustainable, and coordinated dropout effort.

                       Title II--Teacher Quality


Part A--Teacher Empowerment

    The committee was unanimous in its interest to improve the 
quality of professional development opportunities for teachers. 
While there was some disagreement regarding the best method to 
achieve the goal of enhancing teacher professional development 
opportunities, there was no disagreement that children can make 
greater academic gains if they have a knowledgeable and caring 
teacher leading their classroom. S. 2 recognizes that an 
investment in better teachers is an investment in our nation's 
young people, and the legislation authorizes $2 billion in 
title II for teacher quality measures.
    The committee held hearings on professional development in 
Washington, D.C. and Montpelier, Vermont. Time and time again, 
witnesses spoke of the need to make significant investments in 
providing support and professional development to teachers in 
the classroom. It was the committee's intent to create 
legislation that reflected the observations and recommendations 
by professionals in the field regarding how to best meet the 
needs of individual students in schools across this country. 
The bill responds to those recommendations by taking a flexible 
approach that allows States and local educational agencies to 
adopt successful models that will work for the conditions and 
circumstances of their schools. Members of the committee heard 
testimony that: (1) professional development in the area of 
math and science is important; (2) collaborative, systemic, 
staff development activities adopted by School District 2 in 
New York City have been met with success in urban and rural 
environments; (3) recruitment of teachers from other careers by 
school districts with teacher shortages, has put a qualified, 
enthusiastic person at the head of the classroom; and (4) the 
short term focus of staff training and professional development 
has not helped teachers provide better instruction to their 
students. The committee heard from diverse voices about many 
different strategies for improving instruction for the students 
in their communities. The message received by members of the 
committee was loud and clear: different communities have 
different needs.
    It was the committee's intent to provide a general 
framework and funding stream for teacher quality initiatives 
while allowing individual school districts to adapt a program 
to meet its needs. The committee recognizes that coming up with 
the right formula for success in a specific school district is 
nearly impossible to do at the Federal level. Each school 
district has unique considerations and must determine for 
themselves how to strike the correct balance between recruiting 
individuals into the teaching profession, retaining new 
teachers and providing professional development for teachers in 
the classroom.
    The committee bill combines funds and authorities from the 
Eisenhower Program and Class Size Reduction programs while 
maintaining a separate Federal program for teacher quality 
initiatives in recognition of the critically important role 
that teachers play in improving educational opportunities for 
young people. The professional development component of title 
II, part A builds upon the strengths of the Eisenhower program 
by placing an emphasis on innovative professional development 
programs. In an effort to focus the Federal dollars on 
professional development that will make a difference in 
teaching, the bill strictly defines professional development as 
activities that directly relate to the curriculum and academic 
subjects in which a teacher provides instruction or is designed 
to enhance the ability of a teacher, paraprofessional or 
principal to understand and use State standards for the 
academic subjects in which a teacher provides instruction. The 
bill requires professional development activities to be tied to 
strategies that demonstrate effectiveness in increasing student 
academic achievement and performance or substantially 
increasing the knowledge and teaching skills of the teachers 
participating in the activities and all activities must be 
developed with extensive participation of teachers, 
paraprofessionals, and principals. Further, it prohibits the 
one-day, ``one-shot'' workshop approach that research and 
evaluation have shown to be largely ineffective in fostering 
learning and changing the way a teacher teaches.
    The committee's decision to unite the Eisenhower 
Professional Development program and the Class Size Reduction 
initiative was based on the consideration it gave to some 
fundamental issues, such as how to balance the tension between 
quality and quantity with respect to hiring teachers, and 
whether large classrooms are the biggest obstacle to improving 
student achievement. Witnesses brought to the attention of the 
committee constructive observations about the effectiveness of 
class size reduction with regard to managing students in the 
classroom and providing better instruction, increased personal 
attention to individual students, the cost-benefit associated 
with the program, the effect on poor communities, and the 
potential costs of not investing in professional development.
    The committee's intent in combining these funds and these 
authorities was to create a program that could be tailored to 
the individual needs of school districts across the country. 
The legislation allows a school district to commit the same 
percentage of funds that it does now to class size reduction, 
if it so chooses. Yet, for other school districts that have a 
greater need for recruitment or professional development, it 
allows that school district to shift funds to those needs.
    Title II of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act also 
maintains an important role for institutions of higher 
education in providing professional development for teachers. 
The most recent review of the Eisenhower program stated that 
teachers participating in State Agency for Higher Education 
(SAHE) grantee activities found that the professional 
development led to enhanced knowledge and skills and changes in 
their classroom teaching practice. Further, SAHE grantee 
activities were of longer duration and place a greater emphasis 
on subject matter content, active learning and coherence. Using 
the success of the Eisenhower program as a model, institutions 
of higher education within each state will receive a dedicated 
stream of funding to be provided through competitive grants 
within the State.
    Since 1991, Congress has provided authorization for grants 
to support the creation and implementation of the nationwide 
system of advanced certification for teachers provided by the 
National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. That system 
is close to completion. Thisauthority will allow the Secretary 
to provide the funding sufficient to finish the system. It is 
understood that these grants are obligated by the National Board for 
work covering multi-year contracts. The committee believes that efforts 
to encourage and support teachers to become highly accomplished master 
teachers as recognized through advanced certification or credential 
programs will improve teaching and learning in schools. The bill 
includes an authority that allows the Secretary to support such 
activities provided through high quality professional teacher 
enhancement programs such as the National Board for Professional 
Teaching Standards. In addition, the committee supports States' efforts 
to raise the quality of teachers through encouraging teachers to become 
master teachers as recognized through advanced certification programs 
such as the national board certification program offered by the 
National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. To date, 38 States 
have enacted some measure to encourage teachers to seek advanced 
certification. The committee intends to encourage further activities by 
making these funds available to the States to use for this purpose.

Part B--Leadership Education and Development Program

    Members of the committee have benefitted from hearing 
first-hand accounts from parents, teachers, principals, 
superintendents and other school leaders about the positive 
difference that strong leadership at the school level makes in 
educating our Nation's students. Unfortunately, at the same 
time, the members of the committee were informed of the lack of 
professional development opportunities in the areas of 
leadership, management, and skills building. In response to the 
need and concerns expressed by witnesses, the bill authorizes a 
new program designed to meet the unique professional 
development needs of our Nation's school leaders.
    This program, modeled after the Snelling Center for School 
Leadership in Vermont, authorizes $100 million for competitive 
grants to State educational agencies, local educational 
agencies, institutions of higher education or nonprofit 
educational organizations for programs to develop or enhance 
the leadership skills of school leaders. Programs for school 
leaders could include: training in effective leadership, 
management, and instructional skills and practice; enhancing 
and developing school management and business skills; improving 
the effective use of educational technology; improving 
knowledge of challenging State content and performance 
standards; encouraging highly qualified individuals to become 
school leaders and developing and enhancing instructional, 
leadership, school management, parent and community 
involvement, mentoring and staff evaluation skills of school 
leaders; and establishing sustained and rigorous support for 
mentorship and for developing a network of school leaders 
within the State with the goal of improving the leadership of 
school leaders.

Part C--Reading Excellence Act

    The committee believes that the current provisions of the 
Reading Excellence Act, first authorized in October 1999, are 
still current. The legislation adopted by the committee extends 
the current authorization through the year 2005 and increases 
the authorization level to accommodate the increased 
appropriations that the program has received.

Part D--National Writing Project

    The committee recognizes the effectiveness of the National 
Writing Project program and authorizes the program through 
2005. The committee believes that the National Writing Project 
has been effective in improving the teaching of writing and has 
improved learning in the Nation's schools. It is a model of 
excellence in professional development. Currently, the National 
Writing Project has sites in 49 States, with 169 sites overall. 
The legislation adopted by the committee promotes the expansion 
of the National Writing Project program and increases the 
authorization to $15 million in an effort to expand the reach 
of the program to more teachers.

Parts E and F--The New Century Program for Distributed Teacher 
        Professional Development and the Digital Education Content 
        Collaborative

    The bill reauthorizes and expands the ``Mathline'' program, 
renaming it the ``New Century Program for Distributed Teacher 
Professional Development.'' The ``Mathline'' program has 
provided over 5,000 K-12 math teachers with sustained training 
in the teaching and learning of mathematics. In turn, those 
teachers have reached over 1.3 million students. The provisions 
of part E of the bill expand upon the success of the 
``Mathline'' model with the goal of reaching more teachers in 
other subject areas. In addition, the committee has included an 
additional program, known as the ``Digital Education Content 
Collaborative'' under part F, which will provide high quality, 
curriculum-based digital content for teachers and students to 
easily access in order to meet the State standards for student 
performance. The committee recognizes that the capacity of 
interactive digital content, matched to State standards can 
dramatically increase and improve the types of services public 
broadcasting stations can offer kindergarten through grade 12 
schools and can contribute to student performance by broadening 
access to data, information and programming.

                   Title III--Enrichment Initiatives


Part A--21st Century Community Learning Centers

    The legislation passed by the committee includes a 
reauthorization of the 21st Century Community Learning Center 
program. The 21st Century Community Learning Center program 
remains largely unchanged from current law in recognition of 
the success the program has had in providing increased 
educational, health, social service, cultural and recreational 
activities for people in rural and urban communities throughout 
the Nation. The bill increases the authorization for the 
program to accommodate the increased appropriations the program 
has received in recent years.

Part B--Initiatives for Neglected, Delinquent or At-Risk Students

    The Initiatives for Neglected, Delinquent or At-Risk 
Students program has been reauthorized and moved to Title III 
of the Act. This program is designed to meet the academic and 
skills building needs of at-risk, school-aged youth in all 
States and remains unchanged from current law. Authorized at 
$42 million, the committee strongly supports the continuation 
of this program.

Part C--Gifted and Talented Children

    Funding for the National Center for Research and 
Development in the Education of Gifted and Talented Children 
and Youth is continued in this bill, in recognition of the 
vital contributions of the Center, in supporting, through 
research and dissemination, schools and local educational 
agencies developing strong, accessible programs to serve gifted 
and talented students. The research conducted and analyzed by 
the Center has been a valued resource for schools looking for 
more effective ways to identify and help gifted students from 
populations traditionally under-served and under-represented in 
these programs.
    The purposes of the National Center are to: develop, 
disseminate, and evaluate model projects and activities for 
serving gifted and talented students; to conduct research 
regarding innovative methods for identifying and educating 
gifted and talented students; and to provide technical 
assistance programs that will further the education of gifted 
and talented students. The National Center is funded through 
grants to or contracts with one or more institutions of higher 
education, State educational agencies, or a consortia of such 
institutions and agencies. The Secretary may use up to 30 
percent of the program's funds to pay for the National Center.

Part D--Arts in Education

    On June 29, 1999 the committee held a hearing on arts in 
education. Arts in education programs have proven to be 
effective tools in increasing academic achievement and 
performance for young people. Recent studies have found that 
low-income students with high involvement in the arts had 
higher grades in English, were less likely to drop out of 
school by the 10th grade, were less bored in school, had a 
higher self-concept, and placed a higher value on volunteer 
work than their low-income peers with low arts involvement. In 
an effort to make effective arts in education programs 
available to more students across the country, the committee 
reauthorized the current Federal Arts in Education program, 
moving it from Part D of Title X. The committee recognizes the 
need for students to have the opportunity to learn in, through, 
and about the arts and the value of partnerships between arts 
specialists, classroom teachers, and the resources of arts 
organizations to arts education in the schools.
    The reauthorization bill maintains the successful arts 
education programs of the Kennedy Center and VSA arts which 
support programs and affiliate organizations in nearly all 50 
States. The Kennedy Center supports a network of Alliances for 
Arts Education in 45 States. The alliances provide programs for 
young people in the arts and professional development for 
teachers. In addition, the programs help develop innovative 
collaborations between schools and cultural institutions. VSA 
ARTS currently has affiliates in 41 States and has served 4.3 
million Americans through its programs. Both the Kennedy Center 
and VSA ARTS provide leadership, access to technical 
assistance, and resources as well as an economy of scale at the 
national level to leverage and expand opportunities in the arts 
for young people across the country.
    The committee recognizes that active participation and 
learning in the arts improve overall academic achievement, 
student performance, socialization, and preparation for college 
and the workforce. In reauthorizing the Arts in Education 
program, the committee believes that: arts education should be 
an integral part of the elementary and secondary school 
curriculum for a complete education; the arts make a tremendous 
impact on the developmental growth of every child and have 
proven to level the ``learning field'' across socioeconomic 
boundaries; and the arts teach children the skills necessary to 
succeed in life, including developing an informed perception, 
articulating a vision, learning to solve problems and make 
decisions, building self-esteem and self-discipline, developing 
the ability to imagine what might be, and accepting 
responsibility to complete tasks from start to finish. The arts 
help children develop literacy skills in reading, writing, 
speaking, listening and viewing, and help children achieve a 
high level of competency in using convergent and divergent 
thinking skills, problem-solving skills, and comparing and 
contrasting skills. Participation in performing arts activities 
has proven to be an effective strategy for promoting the 
inclusion of persons with disabilities in mainstream settings. 
Opportunities in the arts have enabled individuals with 
disabilities to participate more fully in school and community 
activities and the arts have had a measurable impact on youth 
at risk in deterring delinquent behavior and truancy problems 
while increasing overall academic performance.
    In Gaining the Arts Advantage, a nationwide study of 91 
school districts that offer arts education to all of their 
students, it reports that the single most important factor 
contributing to the successful delivery of arts education is 
the involvement of community partners. In communities where 
parents and families, artists, arts organizations, businesses, 
local civic and cultural leaders are actively engaged in 
instructional programs, arts education is more successful. The 
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in arts 
education demonstrated that students receiving classroom arts 
instruction outperformed other students and that instruction 
increased all of their arts abilities, including the ability to 
create works of quality that communicated complex ideas. The 
bill supports cultural partnerships that use the arts to 
improve academic achievement of at-risk youth. The committee 
recognizes that there is much to be gained from capitalizing on 
the growing body of research that demonstrates the benefits of 
arts education to at-risk students by funding model 
partnerships between schools and arts organizations that 
support arts learning in school and after school. The 
legislation adopted by the committee embraces both a 
comprehensive strategy for a complete education in the arts 
including high-quality, sequential arts instruction in the 
classroom, as well as participation and learning in community-
based arts programs.

Part E--Advanced Placement Program

    The Advanced Placement Program was initially authorized as 
part of the Higher Education Amendments of 1998. The committee 
bill moves the authorization of this program to Title III of 
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and expands its 
purposes. The committee recognizes that having rigorous 
academic programs available to students provides those young 
people with better preparation for postsecondary study and has 
adopted this program to ensure that the opportunity is 
available to more students.

          Title IV--Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities


Part A--State Grants

    The committee has made substantial revisions to the Safe 
and Drug-Free Schools and Communities program in an effort to 
increase the accountability for the use of Federal funds and to 
ensure that effective, research-based programs are funded with 
Federal dollars. By better directing the use of Federal funds 
under this program, it is the committee's intent to improve 
efforts to provide all of our Nation's students a safe and 
nurturing learning environment. Recent tragedies in our 
Nation's schools have heightened attention to the devastating 
impact that an unsafe environment can have on learning. The 
committee believes strongly that every school in this Nation 
should be violence-free as well as drug- and alcohol-free and 
has strengthened the current program to better achieve those 
goals. The committee also believes that involving parents in 
violence and drug prevention programs is important.

Part B--Gun Possession

    The Gun-Free Schools provisions currently contained in part 
F of title XIV are transferred to part B of title IV. These 
provisions, which were first enacted in 1994, require States 
receiving funds under the Elementary and Secondary Education 
Act to have laws requiring local educational agencies to expel 
from school for at least one year any student who brings a 
weapon to school.
    The Report of State Implementation of the Gun-Free Schools 
Act--School Year 1997-98 issued in August 1999 indicates that 
an estimated 3,930 students were expelled for bringing a 
firearm to school. This figure represents a decrease of 
approximately 30 percent from the number of expulsions reported 
for the 1996-97 school year. Fifty-seven percent of the 1997-98 
expulsions involved high school students; 33 percent involved 
junior high students; and the remaining 10 percent involved 
elementary school students.

Part C--School Safety and Violence Prevention

    Part C includes a number of new provisions dealing with: 
school safety and violence prevention activities; school 
uniforms; transfer of school disciplinary records; drug tests 
and locker inspections; employee background checks; disclaimers 
on materials produced with ESEA funding; and memorial services 
at public schools. These provisions are virtually identical to 
provisions dealing with these subjects which were approved by 
the Senate last year as part of the Juvenile Justice 
reauthorization bill (S. 254).

Part D--Environmental Tobacco Smoke

    The bill transfers to part D of title IV the Elementary and 
Secondary Education Act the environmental tobacco smoke 
provisions currently contained in part C of title X of the 
Goals 2000: Educate America Act. These provisions prohibit 
smoking within any indoor facility used for the provision of 
education, routine health care, day care, library services, or 
early childhood development to children.

              Title V--Educational Opportunity Initiatives


Part A--Technology Education

    First authorized as part of the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act in 1994, the Federal education technology 
programs--Technology Literacy Challenge Fund and the Technology 
Innovations Challenge Grant--have made a significant and 
positive difference in increasing access to technology in our 
public school classrooms. The committee has extended the 
authorization of the ESEA programs in recognition of the 
important role these Federal dollars have had in making 
technology more prevalent and effectively used in our Nation's 
classrooms.
    While the committee was mindful of the extraordinary 
advances made in the area of education technology, the members 
also recognized there is still a long way to go in making 
technology an effective educational tool for all students in 
the nation. The committee passed legislation reaffirms the 
Federal commitment to education technology. It recognizes that 
the current system in place works well and therefore maintains 
that structure in an effort to build upon the current success 
and improve opportunities for more of our Nation's students.
    Throughout the legislation, the committee has incorporated 
provisions related to education technology in recognition of 
the ``next wave'' of education technology, that is effectively 
integrating it into the every day learning activities of the 
student. The committee's actions acknowledge the importance of 
``not separating technology from learning.'' While the 
committee did incorporate language relating to education 
technology throughout the bill, the committee also maintained 
separate funding streams for a number of education technology 
programs in an effort to ensure that the Federal Government 
continues to provide leadership and support for strengthening 
and integrating education technology in classrooms throughout 
the nation.
    The committee heard from expert witnesses about effectively 
integrating technology into the classroom for the benefit of 
students. Thus, the committee focused on integrating technology 
into all programs supported in this legislation and all core 
academic subject areas. The committee also placed a strong 
investment on teacher preparation and leadership and support 
from principals and other school leaders. Planning and 
partnerships were also highlighted by witnesses as being 
important to the successful integration of technology at the 
school, school district and State levels. The bill also 
includes language encouraging and allowing the use of 
technology to promote parental involvement and foster 
communication with parents.
    Based on the testimony from witnesses, the technology 
education program is working effectively, and therefore, the 
committee did not make significant changes to current law. The 
legislation passed by the committee maintains the important 
balance between the ``Technology Literacy Fund'' which provides 
formula grant funds to each State and the ``Technology 
Innovations Grant'' which supports the development of programs 
that may serve as replicable models of success in integrating 
technology effectively into the curriculum. In addition, the 
bill includes language that supports building and strengthening 
partnerships between institutions of higher education and 
school districts so that prospective teachers are better 
prepared to use technology upon entering the classroom. The 
provisions in S. 2 complement the teacher preparation 
initiatives relating to education technology which are included 
in Title II of the Higher Education Act. These provisions 
demand that schools of education improve the instruction that 
they provide to prospective teachers in the effective use of 
technology to enhance educational opportunities for young 
people in elementary and secondary classrooms. Further, as 
schools acquire equipment under the program, high quality 
educational software is equally important in providing the 
learning experiences which electronic learning technologies 
offer. The bill does not include a separate authorization for 
the Community Technology Centers initiative as those activities 
may be carried out by other programs established under this act 
such as 21st Century Community Learning Centers and under other 
Federal acts. The legislation passed by the committee provides 
resources to meet the critical needs that still exist as all 
States and school districts seek to provide better 
opportunities for learning through technology.

Part B--Star Schools

    The Star Schools program has helped encourage and support 
the use of distance learning strategies to serve multi-state 
regions and underserved populations. The committee believes 
that the program has played an important role in improving 
instruction and in providing challenging and advanced 
coursework in critical subjects such as mathematics, science, 
and foreign languages. These distance learning programs have 
been used effectively to provide students in small, rural 
schools and schools with large populations of underserved 
children with courses of instruction that the LEA would 
otherwise not be able to provide. In order to meet the 
challenging educational prerequisites that students and adults 
in the 21st century need to succeed in postsecondary study or 
in the workforce, the committee supports the continuation of 
the Star Schools program which has opened the door of 
opportunity to many young people in rural and underserved 
communities to more rigorous and diverse course offerings, 
college-level programs, second languages, and advanced 
placement. The committee also modernized the program by 
authorizing the use of funds for the establishment of web-based 
resources for interactive training and reaching large numbers 
of schools.

Part C--Magnet Schools Assistance Program

    The Magnet Schools Assistance Program (MSAP) provides 
competitive grants to local educational agencies (LEAs) for 
magnet schools that are intended to reduce, eliminate, or 
prevent minority group isolation in elementary and secondary 
schools and to strengthen students' knowledge of academic or 
vocational subjects. In order to be eligible for a grant, an 
LEA must be a participant in a court-ordered or voluntary 
desegregation plan. Magnet schools provide a special curriculum 
intended to be attractive to substantial numbers of students of 
different races. In addition to providing funds to operate 
magnet programs designed to promote desegregation and student 
achievement, the MSAP can provide leverage to school districts 
in building local capacity to continue and expand programs.
    The number of magnet schools has increased dramatically 
since the enactment of the MSAP, with approximately two million 
students nationwide now attending such schools, of which more 
than 65 percent of the students are nonwhite. Magnet schools 
allow children from diverse social, economic, ethnic and racial 
backgrounds to participate together in high quality public 
schools with a specialized curriculum. Magnet schools offer a 
wide range of distinctive programs that have served as models 
for school improvement efforts.
    The ethnic and racial segregation that exists in the 
Nation's schools is attributable to a number of causes, but 
primarily a result of the substantial residential segregation 
in our communities. In many major metropolitan areas of the 
country, residential segregation is so stark that more than 70 
percent of the minority residents would have to change their 
residence in order for there to be an even distribution of 
minority residents throughout the metropolitan area. The 
extreme racial and ethnic residential segregation that 
currently exists in the Nation results in virtually all 
minority and all majority enclaves. For example, almost one-
half of minority students attend schools with 75 percent or 
more minority students and almost one-third of non-minority 
students attend schools with less than 10 percent minority 
students. It is common that children of one racial or ethnic 
group rarely interact with children of another. Racial and 
ethnic residential segregation has the corresponding effect of 
exacerbating the concentration of poverty in communities and in 
local schools. This concentration of poverty is a key factor in 
adversely affecting the quality of education available to 
children.
    Title V of S. 2 reauthorizes the Magnet Schools Assistance 
Program and includes several new elements designed to: improve 
the capacity of local educational agencies to continue 
operating magnet schools after the grant has ended; increase 
the allowable use of funds for planning; clarify the critical 
role of professional development; and enhance the quality of 
the program. The authorization in fiscal year 2001 is $125 
million and such sums as may be necessary for each of the four 
succeeding fiscal years.
    The findings section of the bill, which has been revised 
and shortened, summarizes the importance of magnet schools in 
achieving desegregation in our Nation's schools and affirms the 
Federal Government's support of this program. The bill retains 
the existing statement of purpose which is to provide financial 
assistance to eligible local educational agencies for: (1) the 
elimination, reduction, or prevention of minority group 
isolation; (2) the development and implementation of magnet 
school projects that will assist local educational agencies in 
achieving systemic reform and providing all students the 
opportunity to meet challenging State content and student 
performance standards; (3) the development and design of 
innovative educational methods and practices; and (4) courses 
of instruction that will strengthen knowledge of academic and 
vocational subjects. In addition, the bill adds two new 
purposes of the program, including (5) to improve the capacity 
of local educational agencies, through professional 
development, to continue operating magnet schools at a high 
performance level after Federal funding is terminated; and (6) 
to ensure that all students enrolled in the magnet school 
program have equitable access to high quality education that 
will enable the students to succeed academically and continue 
with post secondary education or productive employment.
    Consistent with current law, priority is given to 
applicants who demonstrate the greatest need; who propose to 
carry out new or significantly revised magnet schools projects, 
who propose to serve a wide range of students by basing student 
selection on multiple criteria rather than relying solely on 
academic examination, and who propose to implement innovative 
educational approaches that are consistent with State and local 
content and student performance standards. In addition, the 
bill includes a new priority for those applicants who propose 
activities, which may include professional development, that 
will build local capacity to operate the magnet school program 
once Federal assistance has ended.
    The current law lists four uses of funds: (1) planning; (2) 
acquisition of books and materials; (3) payment or 
subsidization of the compensation of teachers and instructional 
staff who are necessary for the conduct of the program; and (4) 
for schools whose magnet program does not include all students 
enrolled in the school. S. 2 adds 3 new uses of funds to those 
in current law. Grant funds may be used: (1) for professional 
development in order to build the capacity to operate the 
magnet school once Federal assistance has terminated; (2) to 
enable the local educational agency to have more flexibility in 
the administration of a magnet school program in order to serve 
students attending a school who are not enrolled in a magnet 
school program; and (3) to enable the local educational agency 
to have flexibility in designing magnet schools for students of 
all grades. The addition of professional development as a use 
of funds is particularly important. Clarification is needed in 
the law regarding professional development as a separate 
activity from planning. Therefore, it is the committee's intent 
that professional development be considered a core use of 
funds, and not as planning. Trained, qualified teachers and 
staff are critical to the success of magnet school as well as 
any other school and these changes ensure that the magnet 
schools law reflects these priorities.
    As in current law, the bill prohibits grantees from using 
magnet school funds for transportation or any other activity 
that does not augment academic improvement. However, the ban on 
using funds for planning after the third year of receiving a 
grant has been removed. In addition, the bill modifies the 
current limitation on planning funds, and increases the limits 
on planning in the second and third year to 25 percent and 15 
percent, respectively. This change recognizes the critical 
importance of planning in maintaining as well as implementing 
innovative education strategies.
    The Innovative Programs component of the MSAP, designed to 
foster meaningful interaction among students of different 
racial and ethnic backgrounds, has been updated to better 
reflect the direction of this program. The bill states that an 
innovative program is one that involves innovative strategies 
other than magnet schools, such as neighborhood or community 
model schools, to support desegregation of schools and to 
reduce achievement gaps. The new language clarifies an 
innovative program as one that assists in achieving systemic 
reform and provides all students with the opportunity to meet 
challenging content and student performance standards.
    Finally, the evaluation section of this part lists what 
each evaluation shall address. As in current law, the bill 
lists several issues to be evaluated, including: (1) how magnet 
school programs lead to educational quality and improvement; 
(2) the extent to which magnet school programs enhance student 
access to quality education; (3) the extent to which magnet 
school programs lead to the elimination, reduction, or 
prevention of minority group isolation in schools with 
substantial proportions of minority students; and (4) the 
extent to which magnet school programs differ from other school 
programs in terms of organizational characteristics and 
resource allocations. The bill adds a fifth area to evaluate, 
and that is the extent to which magnet school programs continue 
once the grant has ended. In addition, a dissemination 
component is added to the bill, which states that the Secretary 
shall collect and disseminate information on successful magnet 
school programs to the general public.

Part D Public Charter Schools

    S. 2 reauthorizes the Public Charter Schools provisions in 
the legislation and maintains current law, while including an 
increase in the authorization level to $175 million. Last 
considered in 1998, the Charter School program was amended to 
increase and strengthen accountability, promote dissemination, 
and support technical assistance, evaluation and research on 
model charter school programs.

Part E--Women's Educational Equity Act

    The Women's Educational Equity Act (WEEA), which was 
created in 1974, provides grants for the operation of programs 
promoting educational equity for girls and women and assists 
institutions in meeting the requirements of Title IX of the 
Education Amendments of 1972. Approximately two-thirds of WEEA 
funds are used to support local projects. The remaining funds 
are used for technical assistance, dissemination, and research 
and development. A resource center conducts the technical 
assistance and dissemination activities. Fiscal year 2000 
appropriations for the act are $5 million.
    The bill extends WEEA through fiscal year 2005 and makes 
minor changes designed to clarify and update provisions of the 
existing law. The proposal is based on recommendations included 
in S. 1264, ``Educating America's Girls Act,'' introduced by 
Senators Snowe and Kennedy. A funding level of $5 million is 
authorized for fiscal year 2001, with such sums as may be 
necessary authorized in the 4 succeeding fiscal years.

Part F--Civic Education

    The civic education provisions of S. 2 combine the Civic 
Education program currently authorized as part F of title X and 
the International Education Exchange Program currently 
authorized under Title VI of Goals 2000: Educate America Act. 
The Civic Education program provides support for programs 
related to instruction on the basic principles of our 
constitutional democracy and the history of the Constitution 
and the Bill of Rights. Fiscal year 2000 appropriations for the 
program are $9.85 million. The International Education Exchange 
program provides support for education exchange activities in 
civics and government education and in economic education 
between the United States and eligible developing countries. 
Its purpose is to support democracy and free market economies. 
Fiscal year 2000 appropriations for the program are $7 million.
    The bill extends the civic education and international 
education exchange programs through fiscal year 2005 and makes 
revisions in them based on recommendations included in S. 1642, 
the ``Education for Democracy Act,'' introduced by Senators 
Cochran and Dodd. The civic education provisions include 
support for the ``We the People * * * The Citizen and the 
Constitution'' program which has been administered by the 
Center for Civic Education since 1985 and for the ``We the 
People * * * Project Citizen'' program. In addition to the 
instructional activities and simulated hearings currently 
authorized, S. 2 expands program activities to include advanced 
teacher training, the utilization of technology, and the 
development of civic education materials designed to address 
specific problems--such as school violence. In his introductory 
remarks to this legislation, Senator Cochran noted:

          The Popularity of We the People is demonstrated by 
        the 82,000 teachers and the 26.5 million students who 
        have participated since its beginning. Studies by the 
        Education Testing Service have repeatedly indicated 
        that We the People participants outperform other 
        students in every area tested. In one, We the People 
        high school students outscored university sophomore and 
        junior political science students in every topic.
          A Stanford University study showed that these 
        students develop a stronger attachment to political 
        beliefs, attitudes and values essential to a 
        functioning democracy than most adults and other 
        students. Other studies reveal that We the People 
        students are more likely to register to vote and more 
        likely to assume roles of leadership, responsibility 
        and demonstrate civic virtue.

    The international education exchange provisions of the bill 
extend current law provisions with minor change. Grantees, in 
consultation with the Secretary of State, offer exemplary 
curriculum and teacher training to educators from eligible 
developing countries. They also sponsor seminars and site 
visits and develop related programs for United States students.
    The bill authorizes $10 million for civic education and $10 
million for international education exchange in fiscal year 
2001 and ``such sums as may be necessary'' for each of the 4 
succeeding fiscal years.
    In addition, S. 2 includes language encouraging all schools 
to dedicate a day of learning for the study of the Declaration 
of Independence, the United States Constitution, and the 
Federalist Papers in the recognition of the importance of 
assuring our Nation's students have a solid understanding of 
the documents which comprise the foundation of our democracy. 
This language is drawn from S. Con. Res. 37, introduced by 
Senator Sessions.

Part G--Fund for the Improvement of Education

    The Fund for the Improvement of Education (FIE), currently 
authorized as part A of title X, provides the Secretary with 
broad authority to support nationally significant programs and 
projects designed to improve the quality of education. Under 
current law, FIE includes a lengthy list of activities which 
may be supported under the program and provides specific 
authorities for character education, elementary school 
counseling, smaller learning communities, scholar-athlete 
competitions, mock election programs, and model projects. 
Fiscal year 2000 funding for FIE is $243.9 million.
    The committee bill eliminates the current list of 
discretionary activities and limits FIE funding to support 
programs with specific authorities under the part, as well as 
the identification of exemplary schools and programs--such as 
Blue Ribbon Schools--and the development and evaluation of 
model strategies for professional development for teachers and 
administrators--such as Christa McAullife Fellowships. The 
Comprehensive School Reform Program currently funded under FIE 
is transferred to part F of title I. The model projects 
authority, which has not been funded, is repealed. The 
currently funded authorities relating to elementary school 
counseling, smaller learning communities, scholar-athlete 
competitions, and mock election programs are extended through 
fiscal year 2005 with minor revisions. More extensive revisions 
are made to the character education program, which is also 
extended through fiscal year 2005.
    Specifically, the elementary school counseling provisions 
are revised to update the definitions of ``school 
psychologist'' and ``school social worker.'' The smaller 
learning community provisions are revised to expand the pool of 
eligible applicants to include not only local educational 
agencies but also an elementary or secondary school, a Bureau 
funded school, or any of these entities in partnership with 
other public agencies or private nonprofit organizations and to 
add new provisions requiring recipients to submit an annual 
report to the Secretary which describes the use of grant funds 
and evidence of the impact of the grant on student performance 
and school safety. The national student and parent mock 
election provisions are revised to expand participation by 
including students and parents from the Territories, Department 
of Defense Dependent schools, and other international locales 
where Americans are based and to require that all votes be 
recorded at least 5 days prior to the date of the general 
election.
    With respect to character education, the committee 
recognizes that schools and communities are challenged as never 
before by demands for safety, academic achievement, and a 
technologically sophisticated student body. An important way to 
meet these challenges is through comprehensive character 
education programs. By integrating the values of caring, 
respect, responsibility, trustworthiness, citizenship and 
family, character education programs help meet the needs of the 
whole child, improving self-esteem and decision-making skills, 
while increasing the likelihood of academic success and 
thoughtful, productive citizenship.
    Since its inception in 1994, the Character Education 
Partnership Pilot Program has provided crucial support to 
States across the country in developing and implementing local 
character education program. In the past 6 years, character 
education has spread beyond the boundaries of a few isolated 
programs to schools all across the country. These schools have 
seen an appreciable improvement in school climate; a reduction 
in discipline problems, truancy and delinquency; and an 
increase in overall student achievement. Federal dollars have 
provided the seed money to get these efforts off the ground.
    The committee believes that this success merits expansion 
of the program to provide grants directly to local school 
districts, as well as continuing grants to state and local 
partnerships. In addition, the committee recognizes the 
importance of national activities to support these effective 
state and local programs and has included in S. 2 new 
provisions regarding national research, evaluation, and 
dissemination. Up to 5 percent of the funds available for 
character education may be used for these purposes.
    The committee bill authorizes $100 million for all FIE 
activities for fiscal year 2001 and such sums as may be 
necessary in the 4 succeeding fiscal years.

Part H--Allen J. Ellender Fellowship Program

    The Allen J. Ellender Fellowship Program, currently 
authorized as part G of title X, is extended through fiscal 
year 2005 without major change. The fiscal year 2000 
appropriations for the program are $1.5 million. This program 
makes an award to the Close Up Foundation to provide 
fellowships to students from low-income families and their 
teachers to allow them to participate in one week of seminars 
on government and meetings with representatives of all three 
branches of the Federal Government. Similar activities designed 
to increase the understanding of the Federal Government are 
made available to older Americans, recent immigrants, and 
children of migrant parents. In 1999, approximately 2,800 
fellowships were awarded under the program. The bill provides 
an authorization level of $1.5 million for fiscal year 2001 and 
such sums as may be necessary for the 4 succeeding fiscal 
years.

Part I--Ready-to-Learn Television

    Ready-to-Learn Television was enacted in 1992 to address 
the problem, identified by Dr. Ernest Boyer in his Carnegie 
Foundation report, of an alarmingly high number of children who 
enter school without the skills to learn. Their lack of 
preparation presents enormous obstacles to their education and 
raises impossible roadblocks for learning basic skills. Ready-
to-Learn is a worthwhile answer to that crisis. It links the 
power of television to the world of books. It helps young 
children improve the quality of the time they spend watching 
television and turns the old roadblocks into new building 
blocks for successful early learning.
    The committee finds that Ready-to-Learn has earned 
bipartisan support and has proven to be an effective program in 
addressing this serious problem. The committee recommends its 
continued authorization and expansion.

Part J--Inexpensive Book Distribution Program

    This title provides an authorization for the ``Reading is 
Fundamental'' (RIF) program. RIF makes books available to 
students and supports literacy initiatives in a variety of 
settings including schools, child care centers, libraries, 
hospitals and homeless centers. The committee recognizes that 
reading and literacy skills are at the heart of learning and 
continues to support this national model of excellence in this 
ESEA reauthorization bill.

                     Title VI--Innovative Education

    Title VI of the bill includes a broad array of flexibility 
options for States and localities. The existing title VI 
program is expanded to incorporate funding currently provided 
through the Goals 2000: Educate America Act. A variety of 
provisions dealing with waivers, program coordination, and 
related authorities are incorporated into title VI, permitting 
State and local officials to find in one place the options 
available to them. In addition, new provisions included as 
parts B (Rural Flexibility), G (Education Performance 
Partnerships), and H (Academic Achievement for All 
Demonstration) of the title offer additional opportunities to 
combine Federal education funds in ways which will make the 
most effective use of these funds in meeting the individual 
needs of schools and students.

Part A--Innovative Education Program Strategies

    The purpose of part A of title VI is to provide funds to 
local educational programs for the implementation of 
initiatives that support school improvement and reform efforts 
with the goal of advancing student performance. To accomplish 
this purpose, States allocate funds to local school districts 
for an array of activities such as professional development, 
technology, and library services.
    Title VI was created almost 20 years ago in response to the 
calls from State and local educational agencies that they be 
given the flexibility to respond to the education reform needs 
of their local communities. It remains the most flexible source 
of education funds provided by the Federal Government. The 
Title VI Effectiveness Evaluation for 1998 prepared by the 
Title VI National Steering Committee included the following 
observation from an Arkansas school district official:

          Title VI is the only Federal program where schools 
        can actually use money that isn't previously directed 
        to a need identified by those outside the school. As 
        our needs change, the program has the flexibility to 
        change with us. The funds are most beneficial when they 
        are used with other funding sources to work toward 
        improving targeted areas identified by the district.

    The committee bill increases the current funding level for 
the Innovative Education Program Strategies section, 
authorizing $850 million for fiscal year 2001. This increased 
funding is achieved by combining funds from Goals 2000 State 
Grants Program--which is repealed in the bill--and the annual 
allocation for the current title VI program. In fiscal year 
2000, funding for the current title VI program is $365.8 
million.

Part B--Rural Flexibility

    Part B is one of the new flexibility initiatives included 
in title VI and is based on S. 1225, the ``Rural Education 
Initiative Act,'' introduced by Senator Collins. The purpose of 
this part is to provide adequate funding to rural school 
districts to enhance their ability to recruit and retain 
teachers, strengthen the quality of instruction, and improve 
student achievement. Through flexibility provisions and a 
supplemental grant program, rural school districts will have 
the ability to maximize their resources for implementation of 
education reform strategies.
    Subpart I, the Rural Educational Achievement Program, is 
designed to address 2 unique problems facing small, rural 
districts. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act 
authorizes formula and competitive grants that allow many of 
our local school districts to improve the education of their 
students. These Federal grants support efforts to promote such 
laudable goals as the professional development of teachers, the 
incorporation of technology into the classroom, gifted and 
talented programs and making sure our schools provide safe 
learning environments for our children. Schools receive several 
categorical grants supporting these programs, each with its own 
authorized activities and regulations and each with its own red 
tape and paperwork.
    Unfortunately, as valuable as these programs may be for 
thousands of predominantly urban and suburban school districts, 
they simply do not work well in rural areas. This is because 
the grants are based on school district enrollment. 
Unfortunately, these individual grants confront smaller schools 
with a dilemma; namely, they simply may not receive enough 
funding from any single grant to carry out meaningful 
activities. Part B will allow a district to combine the funds 
from four categorical programs and use the funds to support 
projects that bring about improved academic achievement.
    Small Rural Schools face equally difficult challenges when 
attempting to compete for competitive grants. These schools 
must dedicate all of their resources to the primary task of 
educating students. They lack the personnel and resources to 
prepare successful applications.
    In response to these challenges, Part B permits rural 
school districts with enrollments of fewer than 600 students to 
combine funds from titles II, IV, and VI and apply these funds 
toward local initiatives designed to improve student 
achievement. In addition, participating localeducational 
agencies are eligible to receive a supplemental grant that, when 
combined with other Federal dollars, will enable these small rural 
schools to offer programs and activities of sufficient size, scope, and 
quality to have a significant impact upon student and school 
performance.
    Subpart II, the Low-Income and Rural School Program, is 
designed to meet the needs of rural school districts serving 
large numbers of disadvantaged students. Local educational 
agencies residing in rural communities are eligible to receive 
funds from this program if 20 percent of the children they 
serve are from families living below the poverty level.
    A funding level of $125 million is authorized to support 
these programs during fiscal year 2001.

Parts C through F--General Flexibility Authorities

    Parts C through F of title VI contain flexibility 
authorities included in current law which are moved to a single 
title for ease of reference.
    Part C includes the provisions of the Education Flexibility 
Partnership Act, which was signed into law in 1999 (Public Law 
106-25) as a free-standing bill. This act allows State 
educational agencies to waive certain Federal requirements, 
along with related State requirements, for the purpose of 
raising the achievement of all students.
    Part D includes the ``Flexibility in the Use of 
Administrative and Other Funds'' currently included as part B 
of title XIV. These provisions permit States and localities to 
consolidate administrative funds from several Federal programs.
    Part E includes the ``Coordination of Programs; 
Consolidated State and Local Plans and Applications'' 
provisions currently included as part C of title XIV. These 
provisions permit the submission of a single plan for several 
different programs at both the State and local levels.
    Part F includes the waiver provisions currently included as 
part D of title XIV. These provisions offer broad authority for 
the waiver of statutory or regulatory requirements of the act 
in order to increase the quality of instruction or improve 
academic performance.

Part G--Education Performance Partnerships

    Part G includes one of the significant steps taken by the 
committee to increase flexibility in exchange for greater 
accountability. The committee has taken these steps in the 
recognition that national programs which offer assistance for 
specific activities are limited in their ability to capture the 
diversity of individual needs in States and localities 
throughout the country.
    Among these steps are two new initiatives included in title 
VI which are designed to permit states and localities to make 
the most effective use of the federal funds available to them. 
The first of these initiatives is the performance partnership 
provisions included in part G, which are based on a bipartisan 
proposal developed by the National Governors Association (NGA). 
In a February 28, 2000, letter to Chairman Jeffords, the 
Chairman (Governor Mike Huckabee) and Vice Chairman (Governor 
James B. Hunt Jr.) of the Human Resources Committee of the 
National Governors Association (NGA) noted:

          * * * The Governors support an education system that 
        focuses on performance, is aligned with state 
        standards, and incorporates strong accountability 
        mechanisms. To this end, Federal education resources 
        must be accompanied by broad flexibility to ensure that 
        those who work within the education system can be held 
        accountable for the results they achieve. NGA believes 
        that the substitute bill takes an important step in 
        moving Federal elementary and secondary education 
        programs in this direction.* * *

    Under the performance partnership provisions, any State has 
the opportunity to combine the funds it receives from Federal 
education formula grants to tailor activities which will 
increase the academic achievement of its students. This 
approach will permit a States to focus funding in the areas in 
which its particular needs are greatest and which hold the 
greatest promise of success. In addition, it would permit 
States to operate under a single set of rules--allowing for the 
integration of State and Federal reform efforts.
    In exchange for this broad flexibility, a State must meet 
tough accountability standards which demonstrate progress in 
increasing academic achievement and in narrowing the gap 
between its lowest and highest achieving students. If a State 
chooses not to participate, any local educational agency in 
that State may do so.
    Participating States or local educational agencies will 
enter into performance partnership agreements with the 
Secretary of Education, which will include student performance 
goals for the 5-year term of the agreements. Part G sets out a 
timetable for negotiations between the State and the Secretary 
and provides for a peer-review process in the event that the 
agreement is rejected by the Secretary.
    Under a performance partnership agreement, a State may 
combine funds under all or any combination of formula grant 
programs listed in part G. These programs include: (1) 
Improving Basic Programs Operated by Local Educational Agencies 
(part A of title I); (2) Even Start; (3) Migrant Education; (4) 
Demonstrations of Innovative Practices (section 1502); (5) 
Teacher Empowerment Grants to States, Subgrants to Eligible 
Partnerships, and Subgrants to Local Educational Agencies; (6) 
Initiatives for Neglected, Delinquent, or At Risk Students; (7) 
Technology Literacy Fund; (8) Innovative Education; (9) 
Emergency Immigrant Education; (10) any other State formula 
grant program authorized under the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act which was not in effect prior to the date of 
enactment of the Educational Opportunities Act; (11) Class-Size 
Reduction; (12) State and Local Education Systemic Improvement 
(title III of the Goals 2000: Educate America Act); and (13) 
Education for Homeless Children and Youth.
    In many respects, performance partnerships are a logical 
extension of the Education Flexibility Partnership (``Ed 
Flex'') provisions signed into law last year with the near-
unanimous support of this committee and the full Senate. The 
list of programs subject to increased flexibility are similar, 
with the notable differences being that performance 
partnerships may include the homeless education program but may 
not include Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities programs 
or programs authorized under the Carl D. Perkins Vocational 
Technical Education Act. In addition, the performance 
partnership provisions include authority relating to formula 
grant programs added to the Elementary and Secondary Education 
Act in the future. The list of program requirements which may 
not be waived is identical in the two authorities.
    Performance partnerships take a step beyond Ed Flex, 
however, in that no program requirements other than those 
specifically mentioned in part G will apply to the funds 
combined under the partnership agreement. These funds may be 
used for any educational purpose designed to improve student 
achievement. Under Ed Flex, program requirements may be waived, 
but funds must be used to meet the specific purposes of the 
Federal programs included in the waiver authority.
    Part G includes special provisions related to the targeting 
of funds in cases where a performance partnership agreement 
includes funds from part A of title I. In those cases, a State 
must maintain the current formula for distributing those funds 
to schools and school districts.
    Accountability requirements also vary between performance 
partnership agreements which include part A of title I funds 
and those which do not. In both cases, however, States must 
establish rigorous performance goals which: establish high 
standards for all students; include annual goals for improving 
the performance of each group of students (disaggregated by 
race, ethnicity, English proficiency status, and socioeconomic 
status) and for narrowing achievement gaps; and require all 
students to make substantial gains in achievement.
    At the end of the third year of the agreement, the 
Secretary will conduct a performance review of the State's 
progress in meeting its goals and is to make recommendations 
for improvement in cases where progress is inadequate. In those 
cases, the Secretary will conduct a second review the following 
year and may either withhold a percentage of State 
administrative funds or terminate the agreement if problems 
persist. In instances where the review shows that student 
achievement in the State has declined significantly, the 
Secretary will terminate the agreement.
    The accountability requirements included in part G are 
stringent, and it is the intent of the committee that they be 
fully met by the States and local educational agencies which 
are permitted maximum flexibility in the use of Federal funds.
    Part G also provides a directed appropriations of $2.5 
billion for a bonus award fund. The award fund is intended to 
serve as a strong incentive to States to increase the academic 
achievement of their lowest performing students, and the $2.5 
billion in funding is made mandatory in order to guarantee that 
all States which make significant progress in eliminating 
achievement gaps over a 5-year period will receive bonus 
awards. To qualify, a State must reduce the achievement gap 
between its lowest and highest performing students in at least 
3 of 4 measured categories by a percentage that exceeds the 
national average. The measured categories include math and 
English at the 4th- and 8th-grade levels. Performance is to be 
measured either by National Assessment of Educational Progress 
tests or by another non-State auditing device. All States are 
eligible to compete for bonus awards--whether or not they 
choose to enter into performance partnership agreements.

Part H--Academic Achievement for All Demonstration

    A second State flexibility option is provided in part H of 
title VI, the Academic Achievement for All Demonstration. The 
committee approved an amendment by Senator Gregg to include 
part H, the provisions of which are similar to those of 
legislation (H.R. 2300) approved by the House of 
Representatives last year.
    Like part G, part H is intended to provide States and local 
educational agencies with maximum flexibility in the use of 
Federal education formula grant funds in exchange for strong 
accountability for improving student achievement through 5-year 
agreements. There are a number of differences in the specific 
approaches to achieving this objective, the most significant of 
which relate to the number of participants, the role of the 
Secretary, and the distribution of funds made available under 
part A of title I.
    Participation in the demonstration program established by 
part H is limited to the first 15 States to submit approvable 
applications. If a State chooses not to participate in either 
part G or part H, any local educational agency in that State 
may do so.
    The performance agreement submitted by the State is not 
negotiated with the Secretary. Rather, the Secretary must 
approve the agreement within 60 days unless it is incomplete.
    If part A of title I funds are included in the agreement, 
the State must provide each local educational agency an amount 
at least equal to the part A funds the agency received in the 
fiscal year preceding the one in which the performance 
agreement took effect. Unlike the part G requirements, a 
participating State is not required to maintain Federal 
targeting of funds to local educational agencies above the 
hold-harmless amount or to the school level.
    The list of programs from which a State can choose to 
combine funds is similar to the list included in part G, with 
the exceptions being that selected vocational education 
programs may be included in a part H agreement and no reference 
is made to new formula grant or Goals 2000 programs.
    Accountability requirements vary among performance 
agreements which include any title I funds, those which include 
part A of title I funds, and those which do not include title I 
funds at all. If title I funds are not included, States must 
establish performance goals which: establish a single high 
standards for all students; include annual goals for improving 
student performance in each subject and grade included in State 
assessments; compare student performance from one year to the 
next by grade level; and require all students to make 
substantial gains in achievement. States which include title I 
funds must meet several additional requirements, including the 
establishment of numerical student performance objectives and 
the disaggregation of assessment data by race, ethnicity, 
gender, English proficiency status, migrant status, and 
economic disadvantage. Annual numerical goals for improving the 
performance of students for which data is disaggregated and for 
narrowing the achievement gap must also be established by those 
States including part A funds in their agreements.
    As is the case with part G, the Secretary has the authority 
to terminate an agreement under certain circumstances and must 
do so if a State has not substantially met its performance 
goals at the end of the 5-year term. In those cases, the 
Secretary may also reduce up to half of State administrative 
funds for the programs included in the agreement in each of the 
2 years following termination.
    Part H also includes provisions for rewards to States which 
reduce achievement gaps, with the rewards being limited to 
States with performance agreements. The reward amount is equal 
to 5 percent of the funds allocated to the State for the first 
year of the performance agreement for programs included in the 
agreement. To qualify a State must either: (1) reduce by at 
least 25 percent the difference between the percentage of the 
highest and lowest performing groups of students for which data 
is disaggregated that meet the State's proficient level of 
performance in at least two content areas and at least two 
grade levels or (2) increase by 25 percent the proportion of 
two or more groups of students for which data is disaggregated 
that meet the proficient level. One of the two content areas 
must be math or reading. The Secretary is required to set aside 
sufficient funds under the Fund for the Improvement of 
Education to cover reward amounts to qualifying States.

                     Title VII--Bilingual Education

    The Bilingual Education program is designed to provide 
educational assistance to students with limited English 
proficiency. Funds awarded under this program help students 
with limited English proficiency to meet challenging State 
standards. S. 2 repeals the authorization for Program 
Development and Implementation grants and weaves the purposes 
of the program into other bilingual initiatives funded under 
this title. The committee also decided to combine Comprehensive 
School grants and System-wide Improvement grants into one 
program. Grants awarded under this initiative will be used for 
such activities as improving instructional programs, training 
school personnel, and implementing family education or parent 
outreach programs.
    One significant change the committee has included in the 
reauthorization pertains to grant priority. In awarding grants, 
the Secretary shall give priority to an applicant: (1) who 
experiences a dramatic increase in the number or percentage of 
limited English proficient students enrolled in the applicant's 
program and has limited or no experience in serving limited 
English proficient students; (2) that is a local educational 
agency that serves a school district with a total enrollment 
less than 10,000 students; (3) who demonstrates a proven record 
of success inhelping limited English proficient students; (4) 
who proposes initiatives that provide for the development of bilingual 
proficiency both in English and another language for all participating 
students; or (5) who serves a school district in which a large 
percentage or number of limited English students is enrolled.
    S. 2 retains the State grant program. The committee 
believes that it is important to increase the minimum funding 
level from $100,000 to $200,000. $300 million has been 
authorized for part A bilingual programs for fiscal year 2001.
    The Foreign Language Assistance program provides 
competitive grant assistance to State or local educational 
agencies to provide foreign language study for elementary and 
secondary school students. S. 2 extends this program through 
fiscal year 2005 and adds provisions giving special 
consideration to grant applications which make effective use of 
technology, promote innovative activities, or are carried out 
through a consortium.
    The Emergency Immigrant Education program provides funds to 
local educational agencies that experience unexpectedly large 
increases in their student populations due to immigration to 
assist with the education of those students. The committee 
raised the authorization level for fiscal year 2001 to $200 
million.

                         Title VIII--Impact Aid


                               Background

    Impact Aid programs provide assistance to school districts 
that are financially burdened as a result of activities of the 
Federal Government for the education of federally connected 
children or due to the presence of Federal property. Total 
fiscal year 2000 appropriations for impact aid is $906.5 
million. Separate funding authorities are provided for the 
major activities supported under title VIII. These include:
          (1)  Payments relating to Federal property (Section 
        8002). This section authorizes payments to school 
        districts due to federal ownership of property. The 
        Federal Government must have acquired the property 
        after 1938, and the assessed value of the property at 
        the time it was acquired must have represented at least 
        10 percent of the assessed value of all the district's 
        real property. Federal property is exempt from local 
        property taxes, which are a major source of support for 
        schools. Impact aid payments assist in making up for 
        the revenue foregone as a result of the Federal 
        presence. In fiscal year 2000, section 8002 payments 
        are being provided to 245 school districts. Fiscal year 
        2000 appropriations: $32 million.
          (2)  Basic support payments for eligible federally 
        connected children (Section 8003(b)). Federally 
        connected children include children of members of the 
        Armed Forces (living on or off the military base); 
        children who live on Indian lands; children who live in 
        low-rent housing; and children of civilians who work 
        and/or live on federal land. A ``weight'' is assigned 
        to each category of children. The weights are intended 
        to reflect differences in tax revenues lost and 
        educational costs and are one of the factors used in 
        the calculation of award amounts to local educational 
        agencies. In fiscal year 2000, basic payments are 
        provided to approximately 1,400 local educational 
        agencies serving over 1.2 million federally connected 
        children. Fiscal year 2000 appropriations: $737.2 
        million.
          (3)  Children with disabilities (Section 8003(d)). 
        This subsection provides additional funds for federally 
        connected children with disabilities. The additional 
        funds are to be used in accordance with the provisions 
        of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. In 
        fiscal year 2000, 831 school districts are receiving 
        payments on behalf of about 52 million children under 
        this subsection. Fiscal year 2000 appropriations: $50 
        million.
          (4)  Additional assistance for heavily impacted local 
        educational agencies (Section 8003(f)). Under current 
        law, a separate authority is provided for payments to 
        local educational agencies which enroll large numbers 
        or proportions of federally connected students. (As 
        noted below, S. 2 folds payments to heavily impacted 
        districts into the basic payments subsection of the 
        act.) In fiscal year 2000, 27 school districts are 
        receiving payments under this authority. Fiscal year 
        2000 appropriations: $72.2 million.
          (5)  Construction (Section 8007). This section 
        authorizes funds for the construction and renovation of 
        school facilities for the local educational agencies 
        with enrollments comprised of at least 50 percent 
        children living on Indian lands or with a parent in the 
        uniformed services and heavily impacted local 
        educational agencies. Authority is also provided for 
        payment to districts receiving assistance under section 
        8006 (``Payments for Increases in Military 
        Dependents''), but funding has never been provided for 
        this section. Payments are determined by ratably 
        distributing available funds among eligible local 
        educational agencies according to the relative weighted 
        count of federally connected students. In fiscal year 
        2000, approximately 150 local educational agencies 
        receive payments under this section in an average 
        amount of $46,667. Fiscal year 2000 appropriations: 
        $10.1 million.
          (6)  Facilities (Section 8008). This section 
        authorizes assistance for school facilities (both 
        emergency repairs and comprehensive capital 
        improvements) supported under the old section 10 
        program. These schools are owned by the Department of 
        Education and are used by local educational agencies to 
        educate federally connected military students. There 
        are 118 schools owned by the Department of Education 
        and located on military bases. Since 1983, the 
        Department of Defense has taken responsibility for the 
        maintenance and operation of 68 of these schools (known 
        as Domestic Dependents Elementary and Secondary 
        Schools). The Department of Education is responsible 
        for the remaining 50 schools. Fiscal year 2000 
        appropriations: $5 million.

                           Provisions of S. 2

    The committee bill extends currently funded impact aid 
programs through fiscal year2005. Unfunded authorities for 
special additional payments for local educational agencies with high 
concentrations of children with severe disabilities and for sudden and 
substantial increases in attendance of military dependents are 
repealed.
    A significant initiative included in S. 2 is the expansion 
of the current construction authority to include a facilities 
modernization component. These provisions are based on 
recommendations included in S. 897, the ``Federally Impacted 
School Improvement Act,'' introduced by Senators Baucus and 
Hagel. The purpose of this expansion is to provide badly needed 
assistance for schools serving large proportions of children 
living on or near Federal property which are located in 
districts which have no bonding authority or are at their limit 
for bonded indebtedness. Most of these children reside on 
Indian lands or are military dependents. Because of the Federal 
presence, these districts have limited--if any--access to tools 
such as local mill levies which are normally used by school 
districts to address school construction and repair needs. As a 
consequence, many of these school facilities are in serious 
disrepair and pose very real health and safety concerns. The 
committee bill authorizes $62.5 million in fiscal year 2001 for 
construction and facilities modernization. Of this amount, 20 
percent is reserved for the construction activities authorized 
under section 8007 of current law. The remaining 80 percent is 
to be used for the new facilities modernization activities 
authorized in section 8007A.
    A number of the revisions included in S. 2 are intended to 
reduce delays in the issuance of payments and to avoid 
disruption of payments to program participants. The committee 
is aware of the severe difficulties faced by school districts 
in planning, budgeting, and conducting related administrative 
activities when the Federal impact aid payments upon which they 
depend are delayed or abruptly reduced. The committee notes 
that the Department of Education has developed a performance 
goal related to the timely distribution of basic support 
payments and strongly encourages department officials to 
continue to give priority to this effort.
    Over the years, heavily impacted districts in particular 
have experienced lengthy delays in receiving payments. In an 
effort to alleviate this problem, the committee bill folds 
payments to heavily impacted districts into the basic payments 
structure, consistent with the provisions of a pilot program 
which has been in operation for the past two years. School 
officials of heavily impacted districts have expressed 
satisfaction with the pilot program, particularly in terms of 
its success in expediting payments.
    The bill also seeks to avoid payment delays to Federal 
property districts by requiring the Secretary to make a 
preliminary payment of 60 percent of the amount received by a 
local educational agency in the previous year no later than 60 
days following enactment of appropriations--provided that the 
local educational agency has submitted all data necessary for 
computation of its payment. In many cases, the failure of some 
local educational agencies to submit necessary data in a timely 
fashion has contributed to delays in payment to all districts. 
It is the hope of the committee that this provision will 
provide an incentive for all program participants to submit 
their data within the time frames established in the act. In 
addition, the bill establishes a 5-year time frame following 
Federal acquisition of property in which districts may apply 
for payments. The committee believes that 5 years is an 
adequate period of time for a local educational agency to 
determine its need for impact aid payments to compensate for 
revenue losses it experiences due to Federal property 
acquisition.
    In an effort to avoid substantial disruptions in the 
payments to a number of Federal property districts, the 
existing hold-harmless provisions are replaced with new 
provisions dealing with the distribution of funds if 
appropriations are insufficient.
    The committee bill also increases from .10 to .25 the 
weight assigned to children who have a parent who is on active 
duty in the uniformed services or is an official of a foreign 
government and is a foreign military officer, but do not reside 
on Federal property. A hold-harmless provision is included to 
assure that other local educational agencies do not lose funds 
due to this weight adjustment.
    The bill also includes language clarifying that current law 
provisions which permit military dependents living off-base to 
be counted as on-base students in situations where their base 
housing is being renovated apply in the same way to situations 
involving the rebuilding of on-base housing. This clarification 
is intended to make explicit the view of the committee that the 
provisions in current law cover both renovation and rebuilding. 
The committee neither intends nor expects Department of 
Education officials to seek the recovery of funds provided in 
the past to any local educational agency which exercised these 
provisions with respect to a rebuilding project. This new 
language also institutes a maximum 3-year time limit for these 
renovation/rebuilding provisions. Current law does not include 
a time limit, and this new limit will take effect with respect 
to payments made for fiscal years beginning on or after the 
date of enactment of S. 2.
    A total of $1.04 billion is authorized for impact aid 
programs in fiscal year 2001, as follows:
                                                             In millions
Payments for Federal Acquisition of Real Property (Section 
    8002).....................................................     $35.5
Basic Payments (Section 8003(b))..............................     875.0
Payments for Children with Disabilities (Section 8003(d)).....      60.0
Construction and Facilities Modernization (Sections 8007/
    8007A)
                                                                    62.5
Facilities Maintenance (Section 8008).........................       7.0

    Such sums as may be necessary are authorized for each of 
the fiscal years 2002 through 2005.

     Title IX Indian, Native Hawaiian, and Alaska Native Education


Part A--Indian education

    This part of the bill modifies and improves educational 
services provided for American Indian and Alaska Native 
students. The committee has included four new activities that 
can be provided under grants to Local Educational Agencies. 
These additions are intended to encourageLEAs to address the 
needs of American Indians and Alaskan Native students in the areas of 
curriculum development, creating and implementing standards, improving 
student achievement and gifted and talented education. The committee 
also recognizes that increasing the flexibility at the local level may 
give LEAs the ability to reduce their administrative costs while 
improving the services they provide. Accordingly, the committee 
included a new provision which would allow an LEA which receives 
formula grants under Part A the ability to commingle all of the federal 
funding they receive for educating Indian children, regardless of which 
agency provides it, into one coordinate comprehensive program to meet 
the specific needs of Indian children. In addition, the committee has 
provided increased flexibility in counting eligible children for 
funding purposes to BIA funded schools.
    Because the committee recognizes the importance of family 
literacy services for effected populations, we have allowed for 
grants for this purpose under the improvement of educational 
opportunities for Indian children. We have also underscored the 
importance of both pre-service and in-service training by 
separating the two into different sections under professional 
development. Lastly, we have reduced the percentage of funds 
that can be used on administrative costs.

Part B--Native Hawaiian education

    This part of the bill modifies and improves the educational 
services provided for Native Hawaiian students. We have updated 
the findings of Congress by using the most recent data 
available and included additional findings that reflect the new 
legal position of the United States relative to the status of 
Native Hawaiians as set forth in the brief filed by the United 
States in the United States Supreme Court on July 28, 1999. The 
committee has maintained the Native Hawaiian Education Council, 
while reducing its size and composition. The committee has also 
established priorities for the award of contract or grants. 
Recognizing that it has been difficult to have one Council 
serving two or more islands, the committee has added two more 
Island Councils so that each island will have its own Council.
    The committee believes that placing all of the existing 
programs serving Native Hawaiians into a single more flexible 
authority, will allow all of the types of activities currently 
carried out to continue. It is the committee's hope that this 
consolidation will better serve the educational needs of Native 
Hawaiians children and adults. The committee has focused on the 
importance of family literacy services in effected populations 
once again by adding it as a new permissible activity and we 
have reduced the percentage of funds that can be used on 
administrative costs.

Part C--Alaskan Native education

    This part of the bill modifies and improves the educational 
services provided for Alaska Native students. The committee has 
decided to place all of the existing programs serving Alaskan 
Natives, specifically Alaska Native Educational Planning, 
Curriculum Development, Teacher Training, and Recruitment; 
Home-Based Education for Preschool Children; and Student 
Enrichment, into a single more flexible authority. The 
committee believes that the consolidation will allow these 
activities to continue and will better serve the educational 
needs of Alaskan Native children and adults. The committee has 
once again added family literacy services as a new permissible 
activity and reduced the percentage of funds that can be used 
on administrative costs.

                      Title X--General Provisions

    Throughout the hearing process on the Elementary and 
Secondary Education Act, there was a great deal of attention 
placed on the importance of research and evaluation in 
targeting Federal education dollars. It was the committee's 
determination that research should be at the foundation of all 
the investments we make at the Federal level. Proven, research 
based programs offer the best opportunity for making a 
significant and positive difference in the education that our 
Nation's students receive. Title X places a new and increased 
focus on the importance of research and evaluation in an effort 
to make Federal dollars work more effectively in improving 
educational opportunities for all young people.

                   Title XI--Amendments to Other Acts


Part A--Repeals

    Part A of title XI repeals the Goals 2000: Educate America 
Act and the Advanced Placement Incentive Program currently 
authorized as part B of title VIII of the Higher Education 
Amendments of 1998. The Advanced Placement program is replaced 
with new provisions included as a new part E of title III of 
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

Part B--Education for homeless children and youth

    Part B of title XI includes amendments to the Education for 
Homeless Children and Youth program authorized as Subtitle B of 
Title VII of the Stewart D. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act. 
The program provides State formula grant assistance for: the 
establishment of Offices of Coordinator of Education of 
Homeless Children and Youth in States; the development and 
implementation of State plans for the education of homeless 
children; and subgrant support to local educational agencies 
for the education of these children.
    The committee notes that much progress has been made since 
the enactment of the homeless education program in 1987. At 
that time, nearly half of all homeless children were not 
attending school. In 1996-97, States reported that 
approximately 78 percent of these children were enrolled in 
grades K-12. At the same time, much remains to be done in 
overcoming the particular challenges involved in educating 
homeless children and youth. The mobility and frequent absence 
of the records or immunizations required for enrollment of 
homeless children present significant obstacles to meeting the 
educational needs of these children.
    The committee bill strengthens provisions of the current 
law in an effort to assure that homeless children receive a 
quality education, to provide for continuity in the education 
ofhomeless children, and to focus resources on high quality 
programs. Specifically, the committee bill includes several provisions 
designed to avoid segregating homeless students into separate schools. 
It is estimated that 40 such schools are now in operation. Many of 
these schools were established as temporary arrangements but have now 
become permanent fixtures. Serious questions have been raised regarding 
the quality of the education offered by some of these institutions.
    The bill also contains provisions intended to avoid 
disruption of a child's education program by maintaining the 
child's attendance at his or her school of origin. The bill 
also attempts to avoid enrollment delays by requiring immediate 
enrollment and by directing school officials to make referrals 
for immunizations and to contact other schools to obtain 
required records. Consistent with the committee's efforts 
throughout S. 2 to focus Federal resources on proven 
approaches, the bill includes new provisions requiring that the 
quality of an application is considered in the provision of 
subgrants to local educational agencies. A funding level of $40 
million is authorized for FY 2001 and such sums as may be 
necessary for each of the 4 succeeding fiscal years.

Part C--Albert Einstein Distinguished Educator Fellowship Act

    Part C of title XI includes amendments to the Albert 
Einstein Distinguished Educator Act of 1994, which is part A of 
title V of the Improving America's Schools Act of 1994. This 
program, which is administered by the Secretary of Energy, 
provides fellowships for 12 elementary and secondary school 
mathematics and science teachers each year. Einstein Fellows 
work for 10 months in positions in the Department of Energy, 
the Senate, the House, the Department of Education, the 
National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, 
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the 
Office of Science and Technology Policy.
    In addition to extending the authority for this program, S. 
2 revises the order-of-priority provisions. These provisions 
set out the order of placement of fellows in years where 
funding is not sufficient to support 12 fellows. The committee 
bill specifies that first priority will be given to the 
placement of 2--rather than 3--fellows in the Department of 
Energy. A funding level of $700,000 is authorized for fiscal 
year 2001 and such sums as may be necessary is authorized for 
each of the succeeding 4 years.

                            V. Cost Estimate

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                    Washington, DC, March 31, 2000.
Hon. James M. Jeffords,
Chairman, Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, U.S. 
        Senate, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 2, the Educational 
Opportunities Act.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Audra 
Millen (for federal costs), and Susan Sieg Tompkins (for the 
state and local impact).
            Sincerely,
                                           Steven Lieberman
                                    (For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
    Enclosure.

S. 2--Educational Opportunities Act

    Summary: Programs under the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) are authorized through 2000 under 
the General Education Provisions Act (GEPA). S. 2 would extend 
the authorization for most of these programs through 2005. It 
would also revise or reauthorize parts of the Stuart B. 
McKinney Homeless, Albert Einstein Distinguished Educator, and 
National Child Protection Acts. In addition, it would 
reauthorize activities that are currently authorized under the 
Higher Education Act of 1998 (HEA) and Parts III and IV of the 
Goals 2000: Educate America Act (Goals 2000). Those provisions 
of Goals 2000 were repealed by the Department of Education 
Appropriations Act, 2000, contained in the Consolidated 
Appropriations Act, 2000 (Public Law 106-113). Because most of 
these programs will qualify for an automatic one-year 
extension, CBO has estimated costs through 2006.
    CBO estimates that authorizations under the bill relative 
to current law would total about $25.3 billion in 2001 and 
about $158.6 billion over the 2001-2006 period, assuming 
adjustments for inflation, or $25.3 billion and $152.2 billion, 
respectively, without such adjustments. Over the 2001-2006 
period, CBO estimates that implementing S. 2 would increase 
outlays by $125.6 billion assuming appropriations that keep 
pace with inflation, and by $121.6 billion without such 
inflation adjustments.
    In addition, CBO estimates that the funding structure for 
two bonus payment plans under S. 2 would result in direct 
spending of $2.6 billion in 2006 and an additional $100 million 
after 2006. Because S. 2 would affect direct spending, pay-as-
you-go procedures would apply to the bill. We estimate, 
however, that there would be no impact on direct spending or 
receipts over the years for which such procedures apply: the 
current year and the next five years.
    The reauthorization of programs under S. 2 would provide 
grants to state and local education agencies and tribal 
governments to assist specific populations of students in 
meeting state performance standards. The bill contains no 
intergovernmental or private-sector mandatesas defined in the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform act (UMRA). Any costs incurred by state, 
local, or tribal governments would result from complying with 
conditions of aid.
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated 
budgetary impact of S. 2 is shown in Table 1. The costs of this 
legislation fall within budget function 500 (education, 
training, employment, and social services).
    CBO's estimate of the total spending under current law for 
2001 includes budget authority that was provided in advance 
under Public Law 106-113 and outlays from both this advanced 
authority and funding from previous years. CBO's estimate of 
proposed changes under S. 2 does not make any assumptions about 
advanced funding. Therefore, the estimate of total spending in 
2001 under S. 2 includes the advance appropriation enacted for 
the 2000-2001 academic year as well as the total estimated 
funding under S. 2 for the 2001-2002 academic year.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Funds for education programs are generally provided on an 
academic-year basis, so appropriations made in 2000, including any 
advances for 2001, are intended for the 2000-2001 academic year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Basis of estimate: S. 2 would reauthorize several existing 
education programs and create some new ones. Most of the bill's 
provisions would be subject to appropriation action. For the 
purposes of this estimate, CBO assumes that S. 2 will be 
enacted by the end of fiscal year 2000 and that all estimated 
amounts will be appropriated for each year. Table 1 shows two 
alternative funding paths: One that includes annual adjustments 
for anticipated inflation and one without such adjustments.
    Two of the provisions in title VI would increase direct 
spending, beginning in 2006. The bill explicitly provides $2.5 
billion in direct spending authority for one of those 
provisions. CBO estimates direct spending of $200 million for 
the other provision based on state eligibility requirements 
that title VI would establish. Of the $2.7 billion total for 
direct spending, CBO estimates that $2.6 billion would occur in 
2006, with the remaining $100 million coming over 2007 and 
2008.

                                  TABLE 1.--ESTIMATED BUDGETARY EFFECTS OF S. 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
                                                  --------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     2000     2001     2002     2003     2004     2005     2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

                                         With Adjustments for Inflation
Spending Under Current Law:
    Budget Authority/Authorization Level \1\.....   13,348    8,077      165      168      171        0        0
    Estimated Outlays............................   12,757   12,280    3,784      987      300      192       51
Total Proposed Discretionary Changes:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0   25,332   25,707   26,144   26,587   27,209   27,659
    Estimated Outlays............................        0    2,097   19,207   24,706   25,974   26,493   27,067
Spending Under S. 2:
    Estimated Authorization Level................   13,348   33,410   25,872   26,313   26,758   27,209   27,659
    Estimated Outlays............................   12,757   14,376   22,991   25,693   26,273   26,685   27,118

                                        Without Adjustments for Inflation
Spending Under Current Law:
    Budget Authority/Authorization Level \1\.....   13,348    8,075      160      160      160        0        0
    Estimated Outlays............................   12,757   12,280    3,782      982      292      182       48
Total Proposed Discretionary Changes:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0   25,335   25,311   25,301   25,296   25,456   25,456
    Estimated Outlays............................        0    2,097   19,175   24,370   25,217   25,292   25,409
Spending Under S. 2:
    Estimated Authorization Level................   13,348   33,410   25,471   25,461   25,456   25,456   25,456
    Estimated Outlays............................   12,757   14,376   22,957   25,352   25,510   25,474   25,457

                                           CHANGES IN DIRECT SPENDING
Estimated Budget Authority.......................        0        0        0        0        0        0    2,600
Estimated Outlays................................        0        0        0        0        0        0    2,600
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 2000 level is the amount appropriated for that year. The 2001 level includes $7.9 billion from an
  advance appropriation already enacted. Remaining amounts for 2001 and subsequent years are the estimated
  authorization levels under current law.

Note.--Components may not sum to totals because of rounding.

Spending subject to Appropriation

    S. 2 would reauthorize funding through 2005 for various 
programs created under ESEA and other acts which authorize 
education programs. These programs, most of which would have 
expired in 1999 had not the automatic one-year extension 
provided under GEPA applied, would generally be reauthorized at 
specific levels for 2001 and for such sums as may be necessary 
for 2002 through 2005.\2\ As most of these programs will 
qualify for an additional one-year extension under GEPA, CBO 
estimates costs through 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ The Charter Schools Program is currently authorized through 
2003 under the Charter School Reauthorization Act and through 2004 
under GEPA. The Albert Einstein Distinguished Educator Act is funded 
through the Department of Energy and is not subject to GEPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    CBO estimates that the bill would increase authorized 
levels by $25.3 billion in 2001 and by $158.6 billion over the 
2001-2006 period assuming that ``such sums'' amounts provided 
after 2001 are adjusted for inflation. If the authorized 
amounts are appropriated, S. 2 would increase outlays relative 
to current-law authorizations by $2.1 billion in the first year 
and by $125.6 billion over the six-year period. Without 
inflationary adjustments, the increased authorizations would 
result in outlays of $121.6 billion over the six years.
    Table 2 provides a detailed breakdown of CBO's estimates 
for the various components of each title under S. 2. For most 
existing programs that S. 2 would simply reauthorize, the 
outlay estimates reflect CBO's current spendout rate 
assumptions. Because most education programs are funded on a 
forward-funded basis, first-year spending is consistently slow 
for all programs, with variation in spending patterns in the 
subsequent years. Historically, spending occurs at an even 
slower rate for new programs, programs that experience 
significant funding increases, or programs with matching 
requirements or other restrictions. Conversely, spending may 
increase when additional activities are authorized for use with 
program funds. For new programs or significant revisions to 
existing authorizations under S. 2, an explanation of CBO's 
outlay assumptions is provided after Table 2.
    For several of the new or significantly expanded 
competitive programs under S. 2, CBO assumed an outlay rate of 
3 percent in the first year and a rate of 65 percent in the 
second year (with additional amounts in subsequent years). We 
refer to this pattern of spending as the rate for new, 
competitive, matching grant programs. By comparison, the 
established formula grant program under title I of ESEA has a 
pattern of spending 5 percent in the first year and 70 percent 
in the second year.

                TABLE 2.--DETAILED DISCRETIONARY EFFECTS OF S. 2, WITH ADJUSTMENTS FOR INFLATION
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              By fiscal year, in Millions of Dollars--
                                                  --------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     2000     2001     2002     2003     2004     2005     2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Spending Under Current Law:
    Budget Authority/Aithorization Level 1.......   13,348    8,077      165      168      171        0        0
    Estimated Outlays............................   12,757   12,280    3,784      987      300      192       51
Proposed Changes:
                           Title I--Helping Disadvantaged Children Meet High Standards

Grants to Local Education Agencies (LEAs):
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0   15,000   15,236   15,501   15,767   16,032   16,298
    Estimated Outlays............................        0      750   12,012   14,902   15,457   15,722   15,987
School Improvement:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0      136      138      141      143      146      148
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        7      109      135      140      143      145
Capital Expense Account:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       15       15        5        0        0        0
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        1       12       14        7        1        0
Education Finance Incentive Program:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0      200      203      207      210      214      217
    Estimated Outlays............................        0       10      160      199      206      210      213
Child Centered Program:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0      500      508      517      526      534      543
    Estimated Outlays............................        0       15      340      481      514      523      531
GAO Report and Evaluation:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0        9        0        0        0        0        0
    Estimated Outlays............................        0      (2)        3        3        3      (2)        0
Even Start Family Literacy:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0      500      508      517      526      534      543
    Estimated Outlays............................        0       15      365      456      514      523      531
Education of Migratory Children:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0      400      406      413      420      428      435
    Estimated Outlays............................        0       20      320      397      412      419      426
Parental Assistance:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       50       51       52       53       53       54
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        3       23       43       49       51       53
Federal Activities:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       35       36       36       37       37       38
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        2       28       35       36       37       37
Comprehensive School Reform:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0      200      203      207      210      214      217
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        6      136      192      206      209      213
Assistance to Address School Dropouts:
    Coordinated National Strategy:
        Estimated Authorization Level............        0        5        5        5        5        5        5
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        2        4        5        5        5        5
    Grants to States:
        Estimated Authorization Level............        0      125      127      129      131      134      136
        Estimated Outlays........................        0        4       85      120      128      131      133
    Capacity Building Initiative:
        Estimated Authorization Level............        0       20       20       21       21       21       22
        Estimated Outlays........................        0        8       16       20       21       21       21
      Subtotal, Title I:
          Estimated Authorization Level..........        0   17,195   17,456   17,750   18,049   18,353   18,657
          Estimated Outlays......................        0      842   13,611   17,000   17,694   17,994   18,297

                                 Title II--Professional Development for Teachers
Teacher Empowerment:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0    1,960    1,991    2,026    2,060    2,095    2,130
    Estimated Outlays............................        0       98    1,374    1,885    2,015    2,050    2,084
Alternative Routes to Teaching and Promoting
 Excellence in Teaching:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       40       41       41       42       43       43
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        2       28       38       41       42       43
Leadership Education and Development:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0      100      102      103      105      107      109
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        3       68       96      103      105      106
Reading Excellence:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0      280      284      289      294      299      304
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        3      140      226      272      291      296
National Writing Project:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       15       15       16       16       16       16
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        2       12       15       15       16       16
New Century Program for Distributed Teacher
 Professional Development:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       20       20       21       21       21       22
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        1       14       19       21       21       21
Digital Education Content Collaborative:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       25       25       26       26       27       27
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        1       17       24       26       26       27
      Subtotal, Title II:
          Estimated Authorization Level..........        0    2,440    2,478    2,522    2,565    2,608    2,651
          Estimated Outlays......................        0      109    1,652    2,304    2,493    2,550    2,593

                                        Title III--Enrichment Initiatives
21st Century Community Learners:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0      500      508      517      526      534      543
    Estimated Outlays............................        0       25      225      429      486      514      528
Initiatives for Neglected, Delinquent, or At-risk
 Students:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       42       43       43       44       45       46
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        2       34       42       43       44       45
Javits Gifted and Talented:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0      155      157      160      163      166      168
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        5      105      149      159      162      165
Arts in Education:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       25       25       26       26       27       27
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        1       18       24       26       26       27
Cultural Partnerships for At-risk Youth:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       45       46       47       47       48       49
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        1       31       43       46       47       48
Advanced Placement Incentive Program:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       50       51       52       53       53       54
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        3       35       48       51       52       53
Repeal of Higher Education Advanced Placement
 Program:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0      -15      -15      -16      -16        0        0
    Estimated Outlays............................        0       -1      -11      -15      -16      -15       -5
      Subtotal, Title III:
          Estimated Authorization Level..........        0      802      814      829      843      873      888
          Estimated Outlays......................        0       36      437      720      796      831      860

                              Title IV--Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities
State Grants:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0      700      711      723      736      748      761
    Estimated Outlays............................        0       35      491      673      720      732      744
National Programs:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0      150      152      155      158      160      163
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        8      105      144      154      157      160
Coordinator Initiative:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       75       76       78       79       80       81
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        4       53       72       77       78       80
      Subtotal, Title IV:
          Estimated Authorization Level..........        0      925      940      956      972      989    1,005
          Estimated Outlays......................        0       46      648      890      951      967      984

                                  Title V--Educational Opportunity Initiatives
Technology Education:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0      830      828      842      857      871      886
    Estimated Outlays............................        0       42      373      705      794      839      861
Star Schools:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       50       51       52       53       53       54
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        3       23       43       49       51       53
Magnet Schools Assistance:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0      125      127      129      131      134      136
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        6       88      120      129      131      133
Charter Schools:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       28       28       28       29      187      190
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        1       19       26       28       37      140
Women's Educational Equity:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0        5        5        5        5        5        5
    Estimated Outlays............................        0      (2)        4        5        5        5        5
Civic Education and International Educaton
 Exchange:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       20       20       21       21       21       22
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        2       16       20       21       21       21
Fund for the Improvement of Education:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0      100      102      103      105      107      109
    Estimated Outlays............................        0       12       80       99      103      105      107
Ellender Fellowships:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0        2        2        2        2        2        2
    Estimated Outlays............................        0    (\2\)        1        1        2        2        2
Ready to Learn TV:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       50       51       52       53       53       54
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        3       23       43       49       51       53
Inexpensive Book Distribution:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       25       25       26       26       27       27
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        1       18       24       26       26       27
      Subtotal, Title V:
          Estimated Authorization Level..........        0    1,234    1,238    1,260    1,281    1,461    1,485
          Estimated Outlays......................        0       70      644    1,087    1,204    1,268    1,401

                                         Title VI--Innovative Education
Innovative Education Program Strategies:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0      850      863      878      893      909      924
    Estimated Outlays............................        0       43      596      878      893      909      924
Grants to Small Rural LEAs:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       63       63       65       66       67       68
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        3       44       60       64       65       66
Grants to Poor Rural LEAs:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       63       63       65       66       67       68
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        3       44       60       64       65       66
Evaluation of Administrative Flexibility:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0    (\2\)    (\2\)    (\2\)    (\2\)    (\2\)    (\2\)
    Estimated Outlays............................        0    (\2\)    (\2\)    (\2\)    (\2\)    (\2\)    (\2\)
      Subtotal, Title VI:
          Estimated Authorization Level..........        0      975      990    1,008    1,025    1,042    1,059
          Estimated Outlays......................        0       49      683      938    1,003    1,020    1,037

                                         Title VII--Bilingual Education
Bilingual Education:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0      300      305      310      315      321      326
    Estimated Outlays............................        0       15      210      289      308      314      319
Immigrant Education:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0      200      203      207      210      214      217
    Estimated Outlays............................        0       24      160      199      206      210      213
      Subtotal, Title VII:
          Estimated Authorization Level..........        0      500      508      517      526      534      543
          Estimated Outlays......................        0       39      371      488      515      524      532

                                             Title VIII--Impact Aid
Payments for Federal Property:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       35       36       36       37       37       38
    Estimated Outlays............................        0       32       35       36       37       37       38
Additional Payments for Certain LEAs Impacted by
 Federal Property Acquisition:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0        1        1        1        1        1        1
    Estimated Outlays............................        0    (\2\)    (\2\)        1        1        1        1
Basic Support System Payments and Payments for
 Heavily Impacted Districts:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0      875      889      904      920      935      951
    Estimated Outlays............................        0      788      870      902      918      933      949
Payments for Children with Disabilities:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       60       61       62       63       64       65
    Estimated Outlays............................        0       54       60       62       63       64       65
Formula Construction:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       13       13       13       13       13       14
    Estimated Outlays............................        0       11       12       13       13       13       14
School Modernization:
    Estimated Authorization level................        0       50       51       52       53       53       54
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        5       19       43       51       52       53
Facilities Maintenance:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0        7        7        7        7        7        8
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        1        3        6        7        7        7
      Subtotal, Title VIII:
          Estimated Authorization Level..........        0    1,040    1,056    1,074    1,093    1,111    1,129
          Estimated Outlays......................        0      890      998    1,063    1,089    1,107    1,126

                         Title IX--Indian, Native Hawaiian, and Alaska Native Education
Indian Education Grants:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       62       63       64       65       66       67
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        7       50       62       64       65       66
Special Programs and National Activities:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0        4        4        4        4        4        4
    Estimated Outlays............................        0      (2)        3        4        4        4        4
Grants Administration and Planning:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0        3        3        3        3        3        3
    Estimated Outlays............................        0      (2)        2        3        3        3        3
Education for Native Hawaiians:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       23       23       24       24       25       25
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        1       16       22       24       24       24
Alaska Native Education Equity:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       17       17       18       18       18       18
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        1       12       16       17       18       18
      Subtotal, Title IX:
          Estimated Authorization Level..........        0      109      111      113      115      117      118
          Estimated Outlays......................        0       10       83      107      112      114      116

                                           Title X--General Provisions
General Provisions:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0        3        3        3        3        3        3
    Estimated Outlays............................        0      (2)        2        2        3        3        3
Comprehensive Regional Assistance Centers:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       70       71       72       74       75       76
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        4       49       67       72       73       74
      Subtotal, Title X:
          Estimated Authorization Level..........        0       73       74       75       76       77       79
          Estimated Outlays......................        0        4       51       70       75       76       77

                                       Title XI--Amendments to Other Laws
Education for Homeless Children and Youth:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0       40       41       41       42       43       43
    Estimated Outlays............................        0        2       28       38       41       42       43
Albert Einstein Distinguished Educators:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0        1        1        1        1        1        1
    Estimated Outlays............................        0      (2)      (2)        1        1        1        1
      Subtotal, Title XI:
          Estimated Authorization Level..........        0       41       41       42       43       44       44
          Estimated Outlays......................        0        2       29       39       42       43       44
Total Proposed Changes:
    Estimated Authorization Level................        0   25,332   25,707   26,144   26,587   27,209   27,659
    Estimated Outlays............................        0    2,097   19,207   24,706   25,974   26,493   27,067
Total Discretionary Spending Under S. 2:
    Estimated Authorization Level................   13,348   33,410   25,872   26,313   26,758   27,209   27,659
    Estimated Outlays............................   12,757   14,376   22,991   25,693   26,273   26,685   27,118
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 2000 level is the amount appropriated for that year. The 2001 level includes $7.9 billion from an
  advance appropriation already enacted. Remaining amounts for 2001 and subsequent years are the estimated
  authorization levels under current law.
\2\ Less than $500,000.

Note.--Components may not sum to totals because of rounding.

    Title I--Helping Disadvantaged Children Meet High 
Standards. Title I would reauthorize and revise programs 
currently authorized under parts A, B, C, and E of Title I of 
ESEA.\3\ It would also introduce three new programs under the 
same title: the Parental Involvement Grant program, the 
comprehensive School Reform program, and the Child Centered 
Program. S. 2 would authorize a total of $17.2 billion for 2001 
for all programs under title I. CBO estimates the total funding 
required for title I for the 2001-2006 period would be $107.5 
billion, assuming adjustments for inflation. We estimate 
resulting outlays of $85.4 billion over the 2001-2006 period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ Part D, which authorizes grants for neglected and delinquent 
youth, would be reauthorized under part B of title III of S. 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Part A--Basic Program. S. 2 would reauthorize the Basic and 
Concentration Grant programs under Part A of Title I of ESEA. 
The legislation would introduce stricter reporting 
requirements, phase out the capital expense account, add 
requirements to increase parental involvement, and increase the 
allowable set-aside for school improvement activities. It would 
also reauthorize two programs which have not been funded, the 
Targeted Grant program and the Education Finance Incentive 
Program. It would also establish a new program that would allow 
parents to control how Title I funds are spent on their child.
    Currently, states identified for school improvement are 
allowed to set aside 0.5 percent of certain Title I funds for 
school improvement activities. S. 2 would allocate 50 percent 
of appropriations in excess of the inflated 2000 funding level 
for improvement activities in addition to the set-aside. The 
legislation would direct any remaining excess to fund the 
Targeted Grant program. A similar provision exists in current 
law in reference to increases above 1995 levels, but funds have 
never been appropriated for these targeted grants.
    In addition, S. 2 would continue a separate authorization 
for school improvement at such sums as may be necessary for 
2001. While this provision has never been directly funded, 
Public Law 106-113 set aside $134 million for similar 
activities from amounts appropriated for basic grants. CBO 
assumes that new funds would be provided specifically through 
this additional authorization. As the new school improvement 
set-aside under S. 2 would also address these activities 
(providing an additional $3.5 billion for 2001 assuming 
appropriation of authorized levels), CBO estimates that funding 
under this authorization in subsequent years would be 
consistent with the 200 appropriation. Therefore, CBO's 
estimate for 2001 is $136 million, the 2000 level of $134 
million plus inflation.
    S. 2 would authorize $15 billion for 2001 for the basic, 
concentration, and targeted grants under Part A. The comparable 
funding for the 2000-2001 academic year was $7.9 billion.
    S. 2 would continue the authorization of the capital 
expense account. This account funds costs associated with 
ensuring that Title I services to private school children are 
administered in neutral settings. In response to the 1997 
Supreme Court ruling that overturned this requirement, S. 2 
would phase out funding over three years, authorizing $15 
million for 2001, $15 million for 2002, and $5 million for 
2003. Funding for 2000 was $12 million.
    S. 2 would authorize $200 million for 2001 to reauthorize 
the Education Finance Incentive Program, which has never been 
funded. The program would reward states that finance education 
in an equitable manner and at reasonable levels based on the 
state's relative wealth. The Secretary of Education would 
calculate an equity factor, reflecting the consistency of 
spending among districts, and an effort factor, determined by 
the extent to which the state's per pupil spending level is 
consistent with its relative per capita income. The bill would 
authorize the Secretary to award payments in proportion to the 
combination of these two factors. States would be required to 
use these funds for the same purposes as other grants under 
this part; therefore, CBO assumes funds will be spent at the 
same rate.
    S. 2 would authorize $500 million for 2001 for a new Child 
Centered Program to be established in up to 10 states and an 
additional 22 Local Education Agencies (LEAs). Participating 
states or LEAs would offer supplemental educational programs in 
various schools. Parents of eligible students could choose the 
school that would provide the supplemental services for their 
child and the specific amount allocated for their child would 
be directed to that school. Parents would also have the option 
to direct the school to use the funds for contracted tutorial 
services. The specific per pupil amount that would be made 
available for the parent's discretion would be determined by 
the LEAs or states, who could also use current Title I funds 
for this purpose in addition to funds made available 
specifically for this subpart. To be eligible, an agency must 
ensure that parents have an adequate number of choices among 
potential providers of the supplemental services. The program 
would also authorize a school-wide component for schools in 
which greater than 50 percent of their students chose to apply 
their funds to that school's child centered program.
    CBO estimates that designing these supplemental programs 
and establishing policies to administer the parental choice 
component and per pupil tracking of funds would require 
significant start-up time. Therefore, CBO expects that spending 
will occur slowly with only $15 million in outlays in 2001 
increasing to $531 million in 2006.
    S. 2 would also direct the Comptroller General to enter 
into a contract to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the 
child centered program, based on annual evaluations of each 
program funded under this part. It would require an interim 
report after three years and a final report by March of 2006. 
Based on estimates from the General Accounting Office, CBO 
estimates the total cost of the evaluation and reports would be 
$8.5 million. Assuming that funding is provided in 2001, CBO 
estimates the costs would be spread over the 2001-2005 period, 
with most of the costs incurred for data collection between 
2002 and 2004.
    Part B--Even Start Family Literacy. S. 2 would 
significantly increase funding for Even Start Family Literacy 
programs. It would authorize $500 million for 2001, compared 
with the 2000 funding level of $150 million. If actual 
appropriations exceed $150 million, the legislation would 
require 50 percent of such excess, not to exceed $2 million, to 
be set aside for a research project through the National 
Institute for Literacy. In addition, the bill would require 
long-term recipients to assume a greater share of costs, 
lowering the allowable federal share of total spending to 35 
percent for the ninth year and beyond. It also would expand the 
program's authorization to allow funds to be used in 
collaboration with otherTitle I funds for programs that serve 
children over eight years old. Currently funds are exclusively for 
programs serving children ages eight and under. CBO estimates that 
these changes would not change spending rates significantly.
    Part C--Education of Migratory Children. S. 2 would 
authorize $400 million to continue to fund grants to support 
the needs of children of migratory workers, currently 
authorized under Part C of Title I. The funding level for 2000 
was $355 million.
    Under current law, the Secretary may set aside a maximum of 
$6 million from the total appropriation under Part C of Title I 
of ESEA to meet existing data gathering and reporting 
requirements. S. 2 would require the Secretary to establish a 
national tracking system for children of migratory workers. 
States would be required to gather specific data and make the 
information available through electronic access. S. 2 would 
increase the maximum set-aside to $100 million to address the 
additional cost of establishing the system.
    Current law also encourages states and LEAs to establish 
consortia to coordinate tracking efforts and allows $1.5 
million of the funds set aside for data gathering to be used to 
provide incentive grants to such consortia. S. 2 would double 
the authorized set-aside for these incentive grants to $3 
million.
    CBO estimates that these increased set-asides will not 
significantly alter the spending behavior of this program.
    Part D--Parental Assistance. S. 2 would authorize $50 
million for 2001 for a new Parental Assistance program. The 
program would replace and expand on the Parental Assistance 
Funds program, authorized under Title IV of Goals 2000. The 
existing program is repealed effective September 30, 2000, 
under Public Law 106-113. Funds provided under this part would 
be used to support continuation grants for recipients under the 
current program. CBO estimates that the funds from this new 
program will demonstrate a spending rate consistent with the 
current program, which was funded at $33 million in 2000. CBO 
estimates outlays for 2001 of $3 million and $221 million over 
the six-year period.
    Part E--Federal Activities. S. 2 would authorize $35 
million for 2001 to continue the existing authority to conduct 
Federal evaluations of programs for the disadvantaged and to 
fund demonstrations of innovative strategies for serving 
disadvantaged children. For 2000, $9 million was provided for 
evaluations and $170 million was funded under the demonstration 
authority for the Comprehensive School Reform program, which 
would be authorized separately under S. 2. As the bill would 
introduce no changes to the underlying authorization, CBO 
estimates a spending rate consistent with the current programs.
    Part F--Comprehensive School Reform. S. 2 would authorize 
$200 million for 2001 to continue the Comprehensive School 
Reform Grant program created through a 1998 appropriations act. 
The program was funded in 2000 at $170 million under Title I's 
demonstration authority and at $50 million under the Fund for 
the Improvement of Education for a non-Title I component. CBO 
assumes a spending rate consistent with the current program's 
spending pattern.
    Part G--Assistance to Address School Dropouts. S. 2 would 
introduce a new Assistance to Prevent School Dropouts program. 
A program to address school dropouts is currently authorized 
under Part C of Title V of ESEA, but has never been funded. 
Subpart 1 would authorize $5 million for the Coordinated 
National Strategies component to fund research and the 
coordination of dropout prevention strategies and to establish 
a national recognition program. Subpart 2 would authorize $125 
million for 2001 to fund grants to States based on their 
relative share of Title I funds. States could award grants on a 
competitive basis directly to schools with high dropout rates. 
Funds could only be used to cover start-up and implementation 
costs of activities associated with whole school dropout 
prevention programs that are research based. It would authorize 
an additional $20 million for 2001 under subpart 3 to fund 
contracts with non-Federal entities to conduct capacity 
building and design initiatives.
    CBO expects that spending for subparts 1 and 3 would be 
consistent with other research initiatives, while outlays for 
subpart 2 would occur at a spending rate consistent with other 
new competitive matching grant programs.
    Title II--Professional Development for Teachers. Title II 
would authorize a total of $2.4 billion for 2001 for several 
initiatives that address teacher hiring, recruitment, and 
professional development. CBO estimates the total cost of 
implementing this title would be $15.3 billion for the 2001-
2006 period, with resulting outlays of $11.7 billion over that 
period.
    Part A--Teacher Empowerment. The Teacher Empowerment Act 
would authorize a total of $2.0 billion for 2001 for a block 
grant to fund many activities previously authorized under the 
Eisenhower Professional Development and Class Size Reduction 
programs, both of which would be discontinued. The combined 
funding level for the 2000-2001 academic year was $1.64 billion 
under Eisenhower Professional Development and the Class Size 
Reduction programs.
    S. 2 would reserve $40 million of funds under part A for 
subsection 4 which would authorize the Alternative Routes to 
Teaching and Promoting Excellence in Teaching program. This 
subsection would authorize grants to the National Board for 
Professional Teaching Standards to complete a national 
certification system and continuation grants for the Eisenhower 
National Clearinghouse program. It would also authorize 
competitive grants to education consortia to establish teacher 
academies that promote alternative routes to certification or 
teacher training programs.
    For funds under subsection 4 of this part, CBO assumes a 
spending rate consistent with other new competitive grant 
programs. The remaining $1.96 billion is assumed to spend at a 
rate consistent with programs it would replace.
    Part B--Leadership Education and Development. S. 2 would 
authorize $100 million for 2001 for competitive grants to State 
or local education entities to establish professional 
development opportunities for educators in leadership roles. S. 
2 would require 20 percent of the costs of such programs to be 
covered by non-Federal sources. CBO assumes a spending rate 
consistent with other new competitive matching grant programs.
    Part C--Reading Excellence. S. 2 would authorize $280 
million for 2001 to continue the Reading Excellence program, 
currently authorized under Part C of Title II of ESEA. The 2000 
funding level for this program was $260 million.
    Part D--National Writing Project. S. 2 would authorize $15 
million for 2001 to continue the National Writing Project, 
currently funded under Part K of Title X of ESEA. The 2000 
funding level for this program was $9 million.
    Part E--The New Century Program for Distributed Teacher 
Professional Development. S. 2 would authorize $20 million for 
2001 to continue and expand on the purposes of the Telecom 
Demonstration program, currently authorized under Part D of 
Title III of ESEA. The 2000 funding level for this program was 
$8.5 million. Despite the significant increase in funds, CBO 
assumes a spending rate consistent with the current program.
    Part F--Digital Education Content Collaborative. S. 2 would 
authorize $25 million for 2001 for a new program to support the 
development of educational videos. It would authorize 3-year 
grants with a 50-percent matching requirement. CBO assumes a 
spending rate consistent with other new competitive matching 
grant programs.
    Title III--Education Enrichment. Title III would authorize 
a total of $802 million for 2001 to continue four programs that 
focus on unique student populations or are offered outside the 
traditional classroom or school day. CBO estimates the total 
cost of implementing this title would be $5.0 billion for the 
2001-2006 period, with resulting outlays of $3.7 billion over 
that period.
    Part A--21st Century Community Learners. S. 2 would 
authorize $500 million for 2001 to continue the 21st Century 
Learners program, currently authorized under Part I of Title X 
of ESEA, with no significant revisions. The 2000 funding level 
was $453 million.
    Part B--Initiatives for Neglected, Delinquent, or At-risk 
Students. S. 2 would authorize $42 million for grants for 
education programs for neglected or delinquent youth, currently 
authorized under Part D of Title I of ESEA. The 2000 funding 
level was also $42 million.
    Part C--Javits Gifted and Talented. S. 2 would reauthorize 
and significantly revise the Javits Gifted and Talented 
program, currently authorized under Part B of Title X of ESEA. 
The current program supports competitive grants to states to 
develop and implement model programs that identify and 
challenge gifted and talented students. It also supports 
activities conducted through the National Center for Research 
and Development in the Education of Gifted and Talented 
Children and Youth.
    Under S. 2 once, funding exceeds $50 million, the program 
would be converted into a formula grant program supporting 
research-based gifted and talented programs in all states. It 
would set aside up to $50 million for continuation grants to 
current recipients under the competitive grant structure. The 
bill would allow 30 percent of funds to be reserved for the 
National Center for Research and Development.
    The remainder would be allocated among states based on 
their relative school-age population. States could set aside 10 
percent for administrative and application review purposes and 
2 percent for statewide parental support initiatives. The 
remainder would be allocated to LEAs on a competitive basis for 
activities targeted at gifted and talented students including 
offering professional development opportunities, implementing 
of model programs, or providing services for gifted students 
via distance learning. States would be required to fund 20 
percent of program costs through non-Federal sources.
    The bill would authorize $155 million for 2001 and such 
sums as necessary through 2005. The 2000 funding level for the 
current competitive grant program is $6.5 million. Typically, 
pilot programs demonstrate slower spending rates when they are 
expanded to become permanent grant programs. Spending also 
slows when matching requirements are introduced or when the 
scope of the program increases significantly. Therefore, CBO 
estimates that the program authorized under S. 2 would spend 
more slowly than the current program. CBO assumes a rate 
consistent with other new competitive matching grant programs.
    Part D--Arts in Education. S. 2 would authorize $25 million 
for 2001 to continue to support art education programs through 
the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts and VSA 
(formerly Very Special Arts) currently authorized under Part D 
of Title X of ESEA. Funding for 2000 was $12 million and CBO 
assumes spending to remain consistent with current rates.
    S. 2 also would authorize $45 million for the Cultural 
Partnerships for At-risk Youth program, also authorized under 
Part D of Title X but which has never been funded. S. 2 would 
authorize competitive grants and require 20 percent of program 
costs to be covered by nonfederal sources. Recipients could use 
funds for activities aimed at improving educational performance 
of at-risk youth, defined as those who have a history of drug 
use, are pregnant or have children, or have been incarcerated. 
Unlike the current authorization, S. 2 would not allow funds to 
be used for transportation, child care for children of 
participants, or equipment and supplies. CBO assumes a spending 
rate consistent with other new competitive matching grant 
programs.
    Part E--Advanced Placement Incentive Program. S. 2 would 
repeal the Advanced Placement program, authorized under Part B 
of Title VII of HEA and authorize the same activities under a 
new Advanced Placement Incentive Program. It would also 
introduce a grant program component for states to provide on-
line advanced placement courses. The bill would authorize $50 
million for 2001, directing 30 percent of the actual 
appropriation to be used for the traditional advanced placement 
program and the remaining 70 percent for grants under the on-
line program. Comparable funding for the traditional program 
for 2000 was $15 million.
    Title IV--Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities Act. 
S. 2 would authorize a total of $925 million to continue the 
Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities program in 2001, 
currently authorized under Title IV of ESEA. CBO estimates the 
total cost of enacting this title would be $5.8 billion for the 
2001-06 period, with resulting outlays of $4.5 billion over 
that period.
    Part A--State Grants. S. 2 would authorize $700 million for 
2001 for grants to state educational agencies and governors' 
programs and introduce several revisions. The comparable 
funding level for the 2000-2001 academic year was $439 million. 
It would require States to establish an advisory council, to 
implement a uniform management information system to track 
program services, and to include a parent involvement component 
in their State plans. It would allow States to submit interim 
plans while they incorporate these changes. It would also 
increase the allowable set-aside for administrative purposes 
from 4 percent to 5 percent, grant States more discretion in 
allocating funds to LEAs, and remove a requirement that 10 
percent of the governor's program funds be used for Law 
Enforcement Education Partnerships programs. It would maintain 
the current 20-percent cap on funds that can be spent on 
purchasing security devices such as metal detectors, but would 
expand the list of allowable devices to include electronic 
locks,surveillance cameras and other technologies. CBO 
estimates that the net effect of these provisions would not change the 
current spending rate for this program.
    S. 2 also would authorize $150 million to continue the 
National Programs and $75 million to continue the National 
Coordinator Initiative in 2001. Funding levels in 2000 were 
$111 million and $50 million, respectively. It would establish 
a Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities Advisory Committee 
to coordinate Federal programs. The advisory committee would be 
composed of representatives from eight Federal institutions and 
State and local governments. Authorized activities would 
include technical and training assistance, research and program 
evaluations, and information dissemination. CBO does not assume 
this new provision will significantly alter the spending of 
these programs.
    Part B--Gun Free Requirements. S. 2 would introduce two new 
requirements for recipients of funds under Title IV of ESEA. 
States must have in effect a State law mandating 1-year 
suspension for students caught with a weapon. Secondly, LEAs 
receiving funds under this part must have a policy of referring 
such students to juvenile court and comply with the state 
suspension law. CBO estimates no costs associated with this 
part.
    Part C--School Safety and Violence Prevention. Part C would 
not authorize additional funds but would expand the allowable 
activities for funds authorized under Titles IV and VI of ESEA. 
Under S. 2, funding under these two titles could be used for 
training school personnel to identify illegal weapons and 
respond to emergencies, purchasing school security equipment, 
or assisting schools to implement school uniform policies. It 
would also require States receiving funds under this part to 
establish policies for transferring data between LEAs regarding 
student expulsions and suspensions. CBO estimates no change in 
spending from these provisions.
    Title V--Educational Opportunity Initiatives. Title V would 
authorize a total of $1.2 billion for 2001 for a variety of 
programs. CBO estimates the total cost of implementing this 
title would be $8.0 billion for the 2001-06 period, with 
resulting outlays of $5.7 billion over that period.
    Part A--Technology Education. S. 2 would authorize $815 
million for 2001 to continue the Technology for Education 
program, currently authorized under Part A of Title III of 
ESEA.
    For 2001 only, S. 2 would authorize an additional $5 
million for the National Programs Initiative and an additional 
$10 million for the Regional Technical Support and Professional 
Development program, to cover one-time requirements. These 
additional authorizations address the costs of two new 
requirements that S. 2 would introduce. Under the National 
Programs Initiative, S. 2 would require the Secretary to update 
the National Long-Range Technology Plan within 12 months of the 
bill's enactment. S. 2 would require recipients of funds 
granted under the Regional Technical Support and Professional 
Development program to submit a report to the Congress 
detailing program activities within 3 months of enactment.
    The bill would require recipients to use funds for the 
State and Local Programs on initiatives to involve parents in 
their children's technology education and to prepare teachers 
in technology. It would also require the Secretary to submit an 
evaluation of both the Technology Literacy Challenge and the 
Technology Literacy Fund within three years of enactment. CBO 
expects that any changes would not affect current spending 
patterns in these programs.
    Part B--Star Schools. S. 2 would authorize $50 million for 
2001 to continue the Star Schools program. The funding level 
for 2000 was $51 million.
    Part C--Magnet Schools Assistance. S. 2 would authorize 
$125 million for 2001 to continue the Magnet Schools program 
currently authorized under Part A of Title V of ESEA. Funding 
for 2000 was $110 million. S. 2 would add provisions to ensure 
that programs are sustainable once federal funds are no longer 
available. States are currently allowed to set aside for 
planning 50 percent in year one, 15 percent in year two, and 10 
percent in year three. S. 2 would increase the amounts for 
years two and three to 25 percent and 15 percent respectively. 
It would also require the Secretary to disseminate evaluation 
results publicly.
    Part D--Charter Schools. The Charter School program is 
currently authorized through 2003 under the Charter School 
Reauthorization Act (Public Law 105-278) and through 2004 under 
GEPA. S. 2 would authorize $175 million for 2001 and extend the 
authorization through 2005 (2006 under GEPA). The comparable 
funding for 2000 was $145 million.
    Part E--Women's Educational Equity. S. 2 would authorize $5 
million to continue the Women's Educational Equity program for 
2001, currently authorized under Part B of Title V of ESEA. The 
2000 funding level was $3 million.
    Part F--Civic Education. As part of the Civic Education 
program, currently authorized under Part F of Title X of ESEA, 
the Secretary contracts with the Center for Civic Education to 
conduct two specific civic education programs. Under the 
International Education Exchange program, authorized under Part 
VI of Goals 2000, educational leaders from democratic countries 
are eligible to participate in a variety of activities aimed at 
improving education about democracies and free markets. S. 2 
would reauthorize both programs together as Part F of Title V 
of ESEA. It would require the Secretary to continue the 
programs under contract with the Center for Civic Education and 
also would authorize additional contracts with other entities 
such as the National Council on Economic Education.
    For 2001, S. 2 would authorize $10 million for the Civic 
Education program and $10 million for activities under the 
International Education Exchange program, currently funded at 
$10 million and $7 million, respectively. CBO estimates both 
programs will continue to spend funds at their current rates.
    S. 2 would repeal the currently unfunded Instruction in 
Civics, Government, and Law program that authorizes competitive 
grants to LEAs for civic instruction.
    Part G--Fund for the Improvement of Education (FIE). The 
Fund for the Improvement of Education, authorized under Part A 
of Title X of ESEA, authorizes over 25 activities or programs 
that have educational significance at the national level. S. 2 
would reduce this list to include only the identification of 
exemplary schools, the creation of model professional 
development programs, and five specific programs. The five 
programs are the Character Education program, the Scholar 
Athlete Competition, the Elementary School Counseling 
Demonstration, the Smaller Learning Communities Initiative, and 
the National Student and Parent Mock Election. S. 2 would 
introduce modifications to some of these programs. The 
Comprehensive School Reform program, currently authorized under 
this fund, would be authorized as Part F of Title I.
    S. 2 would authorize $100 million for 2001 for activities 
under this part. The 2000 funding level for the more broadly 
defined program was $244 million.4 CBO assumes 
spending rates will remain consistent with current funding of 
this program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ This total includes $50 million for the non-Title I component 
of the Comprehensive School Reform.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Part H--Allen J. Ellender Fellowships. S. 2 would authorize 
$1.5 million for 2001 to continue the Allen J. Ellender 
Fellowships program. The funding level for 2000 was also $1.5 
million.
    Part I--Ready to Learn TV. S. 2 would authorize $50 
million, a significant increase over the 2000 funding level of 
$16 million to continue the Ready to Learn TV program, 
currently authorized under Part C of Title III of ESEA. Despite 
the large funding increase, CBO assumes that spending would 
continue to reflect the historical pattern for this program.
    Part J--Inexpensive Book Distribution. S. 2 would authorize 
$25 million for 2001 to continue the Inexpensive Book 
Distribution program. The 2000 funding level was $20 million.
    Title VI--Innovative Education. Title VI would authorize a 
total of $975 million for 2001 for several new initiatives 
aimed at increasing the flexibility for spending Federal funds. 
CBO estimates the total cost of implementing this title would 
be $6.1 billion for the 2001-2006 period, with resulting 
outlays of $4.7 billion over that period.
    Part A--Innovative Education Program Strategies. S. 2 would 
authorize 2001 funding of $850 million to continue the current 
block grant program under Title VI of ESEA. Comparable funding 
for the 2000-01 academic year was $366 million.
    Part B--Rural Education Flexibility. Part J of Title X of 
ESEA authorizes the Urban and Rural Education Assistance 
program to provide additional funding to support the special 
needs of these populations. The program has received no funding 
for either rural or urban assistance.
    Title VI of S. 2 would repeal the existing authorization 
and authorize a new rural education system in its place. The 
program would consist of two parts: a formula grant program for 
small rural LEAs, and a competitive grant program for larger 
rural schools that serve high-poverty populations.
    Because Federal funds are generally allocated based on 
population, small rural LEAs often receive grants that are 
insufficient to cover the activities authorized under those 
programs. Subpart 1 of Part B of Title VI would provide 
supplemental grants to ensure that eligible LEAs receive a 
minimum total funding level under Titles II, IV, and the 
remainder of Title VI of ESEA. Grants under this program would 
be equal to the minimum level less any amounts received under 
these other titles in the same year. The guaranteed minimum 
level would be $20,000 plus an additional $100 for every 
student above a base enrollment of 50, not to exceed $60,000 
for any LEA.
    Subpart 2 would authorize competitive grants to rural LEAs 
that educate a significant number of low-income children. LEAs 
that qualify for grants under subpart 1 have the option to 
apply for a competitive grant under subpart 2 instead, but no 
LEA can receive grants under both parts.
    S. 2 would authorize a total of $125 million for 2001 for 
subparts 1 and 2, and such sums as may be necessary thereafter. 
It would reserve $62.5 million for the formula grants under 
subpart 1. Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts 
under titles II, IV, and VI, CBO estimates this amount would be 
sufficient to fully fund this subpart. Grants under both 
subparts could be used for any activities authorized under 
those three titles; therefore, CBO assumes a spending rate 
consistent with the block grant program under part A of title 
VI of this bill.
    Part D--Administrative Flexibility Program. S. 2 would 
direct the Secretary to conduct an evaluation of the use of 
administrative funds to be completed no later than July 1, 
2004. A similar evaluation was required under the previous 
authorization. CBO estimates the cost of the evaluation would 
be less than $500,000.
    Title VII--Bilingual Education. S. 2 would authorize $500 
million for 2001 for the Bilingual Education program, currently 
authorized under Title VII of ESEA. The funding level for 2000 
was $406 million. CBO estimates the total cost of implementing 
this title would be $3.1 billion for the 2001-2006 period, with 
resulting outlays of $2.5 billion over that period.
    S. 2 would authorize $300 million for 2001 to expand the 
Bilingual Grant program, authorized under Part A of Title VII 
of ESEA. The funding level for 2000 was $248 million.
    S. 2 would repeal the implementation and development grant 
program and increase the award period for program enhancement 
grants from two to three years. It would increase the data 
collection and evaluation requirements for grant recipients and 
remove a restriction on the use of funds for alternative 
programs. It would also consolidate the existing school-wide 
and system-wide programs, requiring that at least one-third of 
grants under the consolidated program be awarded for system-
wide initiatives. S. 2 would increase the minimum grant amount 
for Academic Excellence Awards to States from $100,000 to 
$200,000. CBO estimates that the increased scope of the program 
will result in a spending rate that is slower than under the 
current program.
    The bill would not extend the authorization of the Foreign 
Language Assistance program. The funding level for 2000 was $8 
million.
    S. 2 also would authorize $200 million to continue the 
Emergency Immigrant Education program. The funding level for 
2000 was $150 million.
    Title VIII--Impact Aid. S. 2 would authorize about $1 
billion for 2001 to continue the Impact Aid Program, currently 
authorized under Title VIII of ESEA. CBO estimates the total 
cost of implementing this title would be $6.5 billion for the 
2001-2006 period, with resulting outlays of $6.3 billion over 
that period.
    S. 2 would authorize $35 million for 2001 to continue the 
Payments for Acquisition of Federal Property program. The 2000 
funding level for this program was $32 million.
    S. 2 would also continue to authorize additional payments 
for certain LEAs under ESEA's subsection 8002(j), a previously 
unfunded provision. Payments under this section would support 
LEAs that qualify for payments under subsections 8002(b) and 
8003(b) and have unique circumstances that increase the costs 
imposed by the existence of federally ownedproperty. The bill 
would authorize $500,000 for 2001 and such sums as may be necessary for 
fiscal years 2001 through 2005.
    S. 2 would authorize continued payments to compensate LEAs 
that educate children whose parents' residence or work location 
partially or fully exempts them from local taxes. These 
payments are currently authorized under ESEA's section 8003. It 
would alter the criteria for designating heavily impacted 
districts and set a maximum grant amount for those districts. 
It would revise the existing payment structure for heavily 
impacted districts, making a single payment instead of two. It 
would also authorize $875 million for both basic payments and 
payments for heavily impacted districts. Combined funding in 
2001 for these programs was $809 million.
    S. 2 would authorize $60 million for 2001 for payments to 
LEAs that educate a significant number of students with 
disabilities, payments that are currently authorized under 
subsection 8003(d), and additional payments for this purpose, 
under section 8003(g). The 2000 funding level for these 
payments was $50 million.
    The bill would authorize $62.5 million for 2001 for school 
construction and renovation. It would permanently set aside 80 
percent of appropriated funds for a new school modernization 
initiative. LEAs with significant repair needs would be 
eligible to compete for grants if they had no remaining 
capacity to issue bonds or their facilities posed health or 
safety threats to their students. Recipients would be required 
to use nonfederal funds to cover half of any project costs. 
Remaining funds would be allocated to continue the current 
formula construction program, currently authorized under 
subsection 8008. The 2000 funding level was $10 million.
    CBO estimates the application and matching requirements of 
the school modernization component would cause spending to 
occur more slowly than for the current construction grants. The 
remaining money for construction would still be expected to 
spend at its current rate.
    S. 2 would authorize $7 million in 2001 to continue the 
Facilities Maintenance program, currently authorized under 
section 8008. The funding level for 2000 was $5 million.
    The bill would repeal section 8006, which was not funded in 
2000. Section 8006 authorized payments to support sudden and 
substantial increases in the number of federally connected 
students.
    Title IX--Indian, Native Hawaiian, and Alaska Native 
Education. S. 2 would authorize $109 million in 2001 to 
continue education programs for Native Indian, Native Hawaiian 
and Alaska Native students, currently authorized under Parts A, 
B, and C of Title IX of ESEA. Comparable funding for 2000 was 
$113 million. CBO estimates the total cost of implementing this 
title would be $682 million for the 2001-06 period, with 
resulting outlays of $543 million over that period.
    Part A--Native Indian Education Programs. S. 2 would 
authorize $62 million to continue to provide grants to LEAs in 
2001 under the Indian Education program, the same amount that 
was appropriated for 2000. It would authorize a separate $4 
million to continue special programs and national activities, 
compared to 2000 funding of $15 million. In addition, it would 
authorize $3 million for a new grants administration and 
planning component.
    Part B--Native Hawaiian Education Programs. S. 2 would 
authorize 2001 funding of $23 million to continue the Native 
Hawaiian Education program, the same amount that was 
appropriated for 2000.
    Part C--Alaska Native Education Programs. S. 2 would 
authorize $17 million to continue the Alaska Native Education 
program in 2001, compared to 2000 funding of $13 million.
    Title X--General Provisions. S. 2 would authorize a total 
of $73 million for 2001 for the American Education Goals Panel 
and to continue to fund regional centers that provide 
assistance for implementing programs under ESEA. CBO estimates 
the total cost of implementing this title would be $454 million 
for the 2001-06 period, with outlays of $352 million over that 
period.
    Part D--American Education Goals Panel. S. 2 would 
authorize $2.5 million for 2001 for the activities of the 
American Education Goals Panel. This panel is responsible for 
reporting on national progress toward achieving America's 
education goals.
    Part E--Comprehensive Regional Assistance Center. S. 2 also 
would authorize $70 million in 2001 to continue the 
Comprehensive Regional Assistance Center program, currently 
authorized under part A of Title XIII of ESEA. The funding 
level for 2000 was $28 million. Despite the increase in funds, 
CBO estimates spending consistent with the current program.
    Title XI--Amendments to Other Laws. Title XI would repeal 
the Goals 2000: Education America Act and Part B of Title VIII 
of HEA. It would also authorize a total of $41 million to 
continue education programs in 20001 for homeless youth and to 
provide fellowships for distinguished educators. CBO estimates 
the total cost of implementing this title would be $255 million 
over the 2001-06 period, with resulting outlays of $197 million 
over that period.
    Part B--McKinney Homeless Education Improvements Act of 
1999. Title VII of S. 2 would reauthorize Part B of the 
McKinney Act, authorizing $40 million for 2001. Comparable 
funding for 2000 was $29 million.
    Part C--Albert Einstein Distinguished Educators. S. 2 would 
authorize 2001 funding of $700,000 to continue the Albert 
Einstein Distinguished Educators awards, currently funded 
through the Department of Energy.

Direct spending

    CBO estimates that Title VI of S. 2 would increase direct 
spending by $2.6 billion in 2006, and by an additional $100 
million over the following 2 years combined.
    Title VI would introduce two new programs that offer states 
and LEAs flexibility in the use of federal funds in exchange 
for entering into performance agreements with the Secretary of 
Education. Under both the Education Flexibility program and the 
Academic Achievement for all Demonstration, participants would 
be able to consolidate funds from their choice of eligible 
programs without regard for most provisions of those programs. 
The list of eligible programs would be essentially the same 
under both programs and would include most of the formula grant 
programs authorized under S. 2. Both programs would maintain 
certain provisions, such as adherence to civil rights laws and 
allowing private school participation. Participants in both 
programs would be required to submit a plan for how they would 
use the consolidated funds to meet specific achievement goals 
within 5 years. Penalties for failure to comply under both 
programs include termination of the agreement and the 
withholding of administrative funds.
    The two programs would differ in their scope, flexibility, 
and review process. Under the Education Flexibility program, 
all states and LEAs would be eligible to participate, whereas 
the Academic Achievement for All Demonstration would be limited 
to 15 States and an additional 22 LEAs. Unlike the Academic 
Achievement for All Demonstration, the Education Flexibility 
program would maintain the school-level targeting requirements 
for participants that include funds under Part A of Title I in 
their performance plans. The Education Flexibility program 
would establish a more rigorous review process.
    In addition, both programs would establish separate 
achievement reward programs to make payments to States that 
demonstrate specific academic progress: the Closing the 
Achievement Gap Bonus Awards under the Education Flexibility 
program and the Achievement Gap Reduction Rewards under the 
Academic Achievement for All Demonstration.
    The Closing the Achievement Gap Bonus Awards program would 
make payments to any State that reduces its achievement gap in 
three out of four assessments by a greater margin than the 
average national reduction over a 5-year period. The 
achievement gap refers to the 4th- and 8th-grade math and 
English test score differential between students on free and 
reduced lunch and those who are not, based on a national test. 
The rewards would be made at the end of the fifth academic year 
after the first State enters into a performance agreement under 
the flexibility program; however, eligibility for the award 
would not be contingent on participation in the flexibility 
program.
    S. 2 would provide funding for this award by making a 
single-year direct appropriation of $2.5 billion dollars in the 
fifth full fiscal year after any State enters into a 
performance agreement. The funds would be distributed among 
eligible States based on their relative enrollment. CBO 
estimates that at least one State would participate in the 
program for the 2001-2002 academic year and that awards would 
be made at the end of the 2005-2006 academic year, presumably 
after May of 2006. Therefore, CBO estimates direct spending of 
$2.5 billion in 2006. Because the program would not restrict 
the use of payments by the recipients, CBO estimates that the 
total amount would be spent in the same year.
    The Achievement Gap Reduction Rewards program would only 
apply to States that enter into performance plans under the 
Academic Achievement for All Demonstration. The achievement gap 
under this program would be based on the difference in the 
percentage of high versus low performing students who meet the 
State's proficient level. States would be eligible for an award 
if they reduce the achievement gap in any content area by 25 
percent after five years. States could also qualify if two 
specific student populations demonstrate a 25-percent increase 
in the percentage meeting the proficient level in any content 
area. The specific student populations would be based on 
demographic factors such as race, ethnicity, or income level. A 
state would be entitled to a payment if they achieve either of 
these criteria in two content areas, one of which must be math 
or reading. The amount of the payment would be not less than 5 
percent of the total amount of funds included in the State's 
performance plan. The Secretary would be directed to set aside 
funds appropriated for the Fund for the Improvement of 
Education in 2001 to cover the costs of these payments. 
However, neither the payment level nor the requirement to make 
such payments would be subject to such appropriations and the 
program would therefore constitute a new entitlement.
    Although States would not be allowed to participate in both 
flexibility programs, participants in the Academic Achievement 
for All Demonstration are not precluded from receiving payments 
under the Closing the Achievement Gap Award program. CBO 
estimates most states would prefer the Academic Achievement for 
All Demonstration because of the added flexibility, the simpler 
application process, and the potential bonus. However, based on 
the experience of other flexibility programs, we do not assume 
that the maximum number of states would participate in 2001, 
but that the maximum would be reached by 2003. CBO assumes that 
States that do participate would choose to include all of the 
eligible programs in their plan. While most States might be 
eligible for payments, CBO estimates that only two-thirds would 
meet the entitlement criteria in each year. Based on these 
assumptions, CBO estimates direct spending of $100 million on 
2006--the first year that States could be entitled to these 
payments, $60 million in 2007, and $40 million in 2008.
    Pay-as-you-go considerations: The Balanced Budget and 
Emergency Deficit Control Act sets up pay-as-you-go procedures 
for legislation affecting direct spending or receipts. The 
estimated impact of S. 2 on direct spending is shown in Table 
3. For the purposes of enforcing pay-as-you-go procedures, only 
the effects in the current year, the budget year, and the 
succeeding 4 years are counted.

                       Table 3.--ESTIMATED IMPACT OF S. 2 ON DIRECT SPENDING AND RECEIPTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     2000   2001   2002   2003   2004   2005   2006    2007   2008   2009   2010
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes in outlays................      0      0      0      0      0      0   2,600     60     40      0      0
Changes in receipts...............      0      0      0      0      0      0       0      0      0      0      0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Estimated impact on State, local, and tribal governments: 
S. 2 would reauthorize certain sections of the Elementary and 
Secondary Education Act of 1965 which provide over $25 billion 
in grants to State and local education agencies and tribal 
governments to support their efforts to improve educational 
opportunities and performance for specific populations of 
students. The bill contains no intergovernmental mandates as 
defined in UMRA. In general, any costs to state, local, or 
tribal governments as a result of enactment of this bill would 
be incurred voluntarily, as conditions of aid.
    Estimated impact on the private sector: The bill contains 
no private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA.
    Previous CBO Estimates: CBO has prepared estimates of five 
related bills that have been ordered reported during the 106th 
Congress:
     H.R. 1995, as ordered reported by the House 
Committee on Education and the Workforce on June 30, 1999, 
would consolidate funding for teacher training initiatives, 
similar to part A of title II of S. 2. (See CBO estimate dated 
July 1, 1999.)
     H.R. 2300, as ordered reported by the House 
Committee on Education and the Workforce on October 13, 1999, 
would authorize the Straight A's program to consolidate funding 
under several education programs and is similar to the Academic 
Achievement for all Demonstration Program under title VI of S. 
2. (See CBO estimate dated October 15, 1999.)
     H.R. 2, as reported by the House Committee on 
Education and the Workforce on October 18, 1999, addressed 
Education for the Disadvantaged, Rural Education, Education for 
the Homeless, Education for Indians, Native Hawaiians, and 
Alaska Natives, and the Magnet School and Charter School 
programs. S. 2 would also reauthorize these same programs with 
some significant variations. (See CBO estimate dated October 
19, 1999.)
     H.R. 3616, as ordered reported by the House 
Committee on Education and the Workforce on February 16, 2000, 
would reauthorize the Impact Aid program with some significant 
differences from title VIII of S. 2. (See CBO estimate dated 
February 28, 2000.)
     H.R. 3222, as ordered reported by the House 
Committee on Education and the Workforce on February 16, 2000, 
would reauthorize the Even Start Family Literacy and 
Inexpensive Book Distribution programs, with few variations 
from the authorizations under S. 2. (See CBO estimate dated 
February 18, 2000.)
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Audra Millen. Impact 
on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Susan Sieg Tompkins. 
Impact on the Private Sector: Nabeel Alsalam.
    Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                    VI. Regulatory Impact Statement

    The committee has determined there will be minimal 
increases in the regulatory burden as a result of this 
legislation.

           VII. Application of Law to the Legislative Branch

    S. 2 reauthorizes and amends the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act of 1965 to continue programs primarily offering 
assistance to States and local educational agencies on behalf 
of teachers and elementary and secondary school students and, 
as such, has no application to the legislative branch.

                   VIII. Section-by-Section Analysis

    Section 1--Short Title; Table of Contents. Section 1 
specifies the title of the legislation as the Educational 
Opportunities Act and lists the table of contents.
    Section 2--References. Section 2 notes that all amendments 
and repeals referenced in the act apply to the Elementary and 
Secondary Education Act of 1965.
    Section 3--Short Title; Purpose; Definitions. Section 3 
specifies the purpose of S. 2 which is to support programs and 
activities that will improve the Nation's schools and enable 
all children to achieve high standards. This section also lists 
the definitions used throughout S. 2.

      Title I--Helping Disadvantaged Children Meet High Standards

    Section 101--Policy and Purpose. Section 101 amends section 
1001 of the act to modify the purpose. The purpose is to enable 
schools to provide opportunities for children served under 
title I to acquire the knowledge and skills contained in the 
challenging State content standards and to meet the challenging 
State student performance standards developed for all children. 
The section also establishes various mechanisms for 
accomplishing the purpose.
    Section 102--Authorization of Appropriations. Section 102 
amends section 1002 of the act and specifies the authorized 
funding levels for all parts and certain provisions of title 1. 
The authorization level for part A of Title I is increased from 
$7.4 billion to $15 billion. The authorization level for Part B 
of Title I (Even Start) is increased from $118 million to $500 
million. The authorization level for Part C (Migratory 
Children) of Title I is increased from $310 million to $400 
million. The newly established Part D (Parental Assistance 
Program) is authorized at $50 million. Part E (Federal 
Evaluations) is authorized at $25 million. Funding for the 
Comprehensive School Reform program is authorized at $200 
million.
    Section 103--Reservation and allocation for school 
improvement. Section 103, in accordance with currant law, 
permits each state to reserve \1/2\ percent of the funds they 
receive under Parts A and C of Title I and Part B of Title III 
for school improvement activities. Section 103(a) specifies 
that in addition to these amounts the Secretary shall reserve 
50 percent of the funds in excess of $8,076,000,000 (for fiscal 
year 2001 and each of the 4 succeeding fiscal years) for State 
assessment development, school improvement, and academic 
achievement awards. Funds from the Secretary's reservation 
shall be allocated in accordance with the Basic Grant formula 
except that no state may receive less than \1/2\ percent of 
these funds.
    Section 103(b) restates current law with regard to the \1/
2\-percent State reservation and allocation for school 
improvement except that the amount of funding from Title I to 
which the \1/2\-percent reserve may be applied is capped at the 
amount that the state received in fiscal year 2000.

Part A--Basic Programs

    Section 111--State Plans. Section 111 amends section 1111 
of the act to make technical amendments to section 1111 of the 
act and by including several new provisions which are to be 
included as part of the State plan. One provision further 
defines adequate yearly progress. The adequate yearly progress 
definition specifies: that children must meet the State's 
levels of performance within 10 years; there must be continuous 
and substantial academic improvement for all students; that 
States must have in place specific State determined yearly 
progress requirements in subjects and grades included in the 
State assessments; and that performance on assessments and 
other academic indicators are important in determining adequate 
yearly progress. This section also specifies that student 
reports include information on the attainment of student 
performance standards. This section also includes several 
provisions regarding the impact of Federal and State laws on 
student performance and schoolwide programs. This section also 
requires the State educational agency to inform local 
educational agencies of the local educational agencies' ability 
to obtain waivers. This section requires each State plan to 
support effective parental involvement practices. This section 
redesignates subsections (d) through (g) as (e) through (h). 
Finally, this section requires that information collected under 
this section will protect individual privacy.
    Section 112--Local Educational Agency Plans. Section 112(1) 
amends section 1112(a) of the act to specify that the local 
educational agency shall be coordinated with plans submitted 
under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the Carl 
D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act of 1998, the 
Head Start Act and other acts as appropriate.
    Section 112(2) amends section 1112(b) of the act to specify 
that the local educational agency shall coordinate professional 
development planning provisions with similar provisions 
described under title II of this act. This section also 
includes a provision requiring the local educational agency, 
where appropriate, to describe how funds under part A will be 
used to support early childhood education programs.
    Section 112(3) amends section 1112(c) of the act to require 
each local educational agency to plan to carry out several 
activities including: providing information to the public 
regardingschoolwide authority; providing technical assistance; 
coordinating, to the extent possible, with other agencies providing 
services to children, youth, and families; providing services to 
eligible children attending private elementary and secondary schools in 
accordance with the act; examining model programs for the educationally 
disadvantaged; complying with professional development requirements as 
described under this part; and informing eligible schools about waiver 
authority. In addition, this section adds requirements for States to 
review a local educational agency plan to determine if such agency's 
parental involvement activities are in accordance with section 1118.
    Section 113--Eligible School Attendance Areas. Section 113 
includes technical amendments to section 1113(b) of the act. In 
addition, a provision is included that allows a local 
educational agency to designate and serve a school attendance 
area or school that is not an eligible school attendance area, 
but that was an eligible school attendance area and was served 
in the fiscal year preceding the fiscal year for which the 
determination is made for 1 additional year.
    Section 114--Schoolwide Programs. Section 114 amends 
section 1114 of the act and allows a local educational agency 
to use part A funds with other Federal, State, and local funds 
to upgrade the entire educational program in a school that 
serves an eligible school attendance area where not less than 
40 percent of the children are from low-income families. A 
provision is included which requires that assessment results be 
provided to parents in a language the family can understand. 
This section also includes technical amendments to section 1114 
of the act.
    Section 115--Targeted Assistance Schools. Section 115 
includes technical amendments to section 1115 of the act and 
references professional development activities.
    Section 116--Pupil Safety and Family School Choice. Section 
116 amends part A of title I by inserting a new section after 
section 1115A of the act.
    New Section 1115B(a) describes student eligibility as it 
pertains to the pupil safety and family school choice 
initiative. Eligibility criteria includes a student who is 
served by the title 1 program and becomes a victim of a violent 
criminal offense while on public school grounds. If a student 
meets the eligibility criteria, then the local educational 
agency shall allow the eligible student to transfer to another 
public school or public charter school in the same State as the 
school where the criminal offense occurred. The transfer must 
occur in accordance with State and local law.
    New Section 1115B(b) describes State educational agency 
determinations. These include: deciding the actions that 
constitute a violent criminal offense; determining which 
schools in the State are unsafe public schools; and defining 
unsafe public schools.
    New Section 1115(c) allows a local educational agency that 
serves the public school in which the violent criminal offense 
occurred to use funds from part A of title I to provide 
transportation services or to pay the reasonable costs of 
transportation for the student to attend another school.
    New Section 1115(d) specifies that any school receiving 
assistance under this section shall comply with title VI of the 
Civil Rights Act of 1964 and not discriminate on the basis of 
race, color, or national origin.
    New Section 1115(e) specifies that nothing under this 
section will affect the requirements of part B of the 
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
    New Section 1115(f) stipulates that the amount of 
assistance provided under part A for a student who transfers 
shall not exceed the per pupil expenditures for students as 
provided by the local educational agency that serves the school 
involved in the transfer.
    Section 117--Assessment and Local Educational Agency and 
School Improvement. Section 117(1) amends section 1116(a) of 
the act by specifying that a local educational agency receiving 
funds under part A of title 1 shall: use the State assessments 
described in the State plan; use any additional measures or 
indicators to review the progress of each school in meeting the 
State's student performance standards; and provide the results 
of the local annual review to schools. Following the annual 
review, each local educational agency shall prepare and 
disseminate an annual performance report.
    Section 117(2) amends section 1116(c) of the act to 
describe school improvement criteria. A local educational 
agency shall identify for school improvement any school (served 
under part A of title I) that for 2 consecutive years failed to 
make adequate yearly progress as defined in section 111. In the 
case of a targeted assistance program, a local educational 
agency may review the progress of only those students served 
under part A of title I. Before identifying a school for school 
improvement, the local educational agency will provide the 
school with an opportunity to review the data. Each school that 
is identified must develop a plan that addresses the teaching 
and learning needs in the school. The plan must include: a 
description of the specific achievement problems; research-
based strategies that are likely to improve student 
performance; activities for addressing the need for high-
quality professional development; activities that will enable 
the school to meet adequate yearly progress; responsibilities 
of the school and the local educational agency; and strategies 
to promote effective parental involvement. Each school will 
notify the parents of the students regarding the status of the 
school as a school needing improvement. Each identified school 
will receive technical assistance. In addition to providing 
technical assistance, each local educational agency is required 
to implement a system of corrective action, which must occur 
when the identified school fails to make adequate yearly 
progress at the end of the second year of the school's 
identification. A local educational agency must take one of the 
following corrective actions (consistent with State and local 
law): instituting a new curriculum; restructuring the school; 
developing and implementing a joint plan between the local 
educational agency and the school that addresses specific 
student performance problems; reconstituting school staff; 
decreasing decision making authority at the school level. The 
section also references a list of permissible corrective 
actions that a local educational agency may implement. A local 
educational agency may delay corrective action for 1 year if 
the local educational agency determines that the school is 
meeting the specific yearly progress requirements and the 
school will meet the State's criteria for adequate yearly 
progress within 1year. A local educational agency shall be 
required to provide all students enrolled in an identified school with 
an option to transfer to any public school or public charter school 
within the local educational agency (schools not identified as needing 
improvement) or enter into a cooperative agreement for the purposes of 
transfer with other local educational agencies (only occurs if all 
schools within the original local education agency are identified as 
schools needing school improvement). The public school choice provision 
must be carried out in accordance with State and local law.
    The local educational agency in which the schools have been 
identified may use part A of title 1 funds to provide 
transportation to students transferring to another school. The 
amount of transportation assistance shall not exceed the per 
pupil expenditure for elementary or secondary school students 
as provided by the local educational agency that serves the 
school involved in the transfer. Once a school is no longer 
identified for school improvement, the local educational agency 
shall continue to provide public school choice as an option to 
students in such school for a period of not less than 2 years. 
Schools that for at least 2 of the 3 years following 
identification make adequate progress toward meeting the 
State's performance levels shall no longer need to be 
identified for school improvement. The State educational agency 
shall review any waivers approved for an identified school and 
shall terminate any waiver approved waiver if the State 
determines that the waiver is not helping the identified school 
to make yearly progress.
    Section 117(3) amends section 1116(d) of the act to specify 
that a State educational agency shall annually prepare an 
annual performance report. The performance report shall contain 
information regarding local educational agency performance in 
making adequate yearly progress and the progress of the local 
educational agency in enabling students to meet the State 
levels of performance. If a local educational agency is 
identified as an entity needing improvement, the local 
educational agency shall submit a plan that includes: specific 
yearly progress requirements; addresses the teaching and 
learning needs in the schools within the local educational 
agency; incorporates research-based strategies; addresses 
professional development needs of the instructional staff; 
identifies specific goals and objectives the local educational 
agency will undertake for making adequate yearly progress; 
identify how the local educational agency will provide written 
notification to parents; the responsibilities of the State 
educational agency and the local educational agency; and 
strategies for effective parental involvement. The local 
educational agencies needing improvement will be provided with 
technical assistance. After providing technical assistance, 
each State educational agency shall implement corrective action 
for any local educational agency that fails to make adequate 
yearly progress and shall continue to provide technical 
assistance while implementing any corrective action. Consistent 
with State and local law, the State educational agency shall 
not take less than 1 of the following corrective actions: 
instituting and implementing a new curriculum; restructuring 
the local educational agency; developing and implementing a 
joint plan between the State educational agency and the local 
educational agency that addresses student performance problems; 
reconstituting school district personnel or making alternative 
governance arrangements. This section also lists several 
permissible corrective actions that a State educational agency 
may implement. Prior to implementing any corrective action, the 
State educational agency shall provide a hearing to the 
affected local educational agency, if State law provides for a 
hearing process. A State educational agency may delay, for a 
period not to exceed one year, implementation of corrective 
action if the State educational agency determines that the 
local educational agency is meeting the State yearly progress 
requirements and the schools within the local educational 
agency will meet the State's criteria for improvement within 1 
year. The State educational agency shall review any waivers 
granted to a local educational agency that has been designated 
for improvement or corrective action and shall terminate any 
waiver that is not helping the local educational agency meet 
the yearly progress requirements.
    Section 118--Assistance for School Support and Improvement. 
Section 118(1) amends section 1117(a) of the act to list the 
priorities for a State educational agency for providing support 
to local educational agencies. First, the State educational 
agency must provide support and assistance to local educational 
agencies that have received corrective action. Second, the 
State educational agency must provide support and assistance to 
other local educational agencies and schools identified as in 
need of improvement. Third, the State educational agency must 
provide support and assistance to other local educational 
agencies and schools participating under part A of title I that 
need support and assistance to carry out the purpose of part A.
    Section 118(2) amends section 1117(c)(1) of the act to 
specify that technical assistance shall be provided through 
several approaches such as: school support teams; the 
designation and use of distinguished teachers and principals; 
implementation of research-based comprehensive school reform 
models; and a review process designed to develop high quality 
school improvement plans. This section also enables a State, if 
the State chooses to do so, to recognize and provide financial 
rewards to teachers or principals in a school where the 
students have consistently made significant gains in academic 
achievement.
    Section 119--Parental Involvement. Section 119(1) and (2) 
amends section 1118(a)(2)(B) and 1118(b)(1) of the act to make 
technical amendments to current law.
    Section 119(3) amends section 1118(e) of the act to enable 
a school district, if the school district chooses to do so, to 
establish a school district parent advisory council. This 
section also provides for other support for parental 
involvement activities.
    Section 119(4) amends section 1118(f) of the act to make 
technical amendments to current law.
    Section 119(5) amends section 1118(g) of the act to specify 
that in a State where a parental information and resource 
center is established, such a center shall provide parents with 
a description of the services and programs provided the center.
    Section 120--Professional Development. Section 120(1) 
amends section 1119(b) of the act to establish that 
professional development activities shall provide support to 
teachers, principals, administrators, paraprofessionals, pupil 
services personnel, and parents. Professional development 
initiatives shall be of sufficient intensity and duration to 
have a positive and lasting impact. This section also refers to 
providing training for teachers in the use of technology 
andincludes strategies for identifying and eliminating racial and 
gender bias in instructional materials and practices.
    Section 120A--Participation of Children Enrolled in Private 
Schools. Section 120A(2) amends section 1120(b) of the act to 
specify that the local educational agency shall make decisions 
about the delivery of services to eligible private school 
children, including an analysis of the views of private school 
officials regarding the delivery of services through potential 
third party providers. If the local educational agency 
disagrees with the views of the private school officials on the 
delivery of services, the local educational agency will provide 
a written document, to private school officials, with the 
reasons why the local educational agency has chosen not to 
provide the services. Each local educational agency will 
provide to the State educational agency a written affirmation 
that the consultation has occurred. If a private school 
declines to have eligible children in the private school 
participate in title I, part A services, the local educational 
agency is not required to further consult with the private 
school officials. Each year, the local educational agency shall 
inform the private school of the opportunity for eligible 
children to participate in title I, part A services. A private 
school official shall have the right to appeal the local 
educational agency decision to the State educational agency as 
to whether: the consultation was meaningful; timely; and the 
views were given due consideration.
    Section 120A(3) amends section 1120 of current law to 
redesignate subsections (c), (d), and (e) as subsections (d), 
(e), and (f).
    Section 120A(4) amends section 1120 of the act to add a 
provision to describe the allocation for equitable services to 
private school students.
    Section 120B--Early Childhood Education. Section 120B(1) 
and (2) amends the heading of section 1120B and section 1120C 
to make technical changes to the act.
    Section 120B(3) amends section 1120B to add 2 new 
subsections (1120(d) and (e)) to permit a local educational 
agency, if the local educational agency chooses to do so, to 
use part A of title I funds to provide preschool services. New 
subsection 1120(e) establishes that early childhood education 
programs that use part A of title I funds may do so jointly 
with Even Start programs, Head Start programs, or State funded 
preschool programs. Early childhood education programs shall: 
focus on the developmental needs of children; teach children to 
understand and use language; enable children to develop an 
appreciation of books; and for children with limited English 
proficiency, enable the children to make progress toward 
acquisition of the English language.
            Subpart 2--Allocations
    Section 1121--Grants for the Outlying Areas and the 
Secretary of the Interior. Section 1121(a) specifies the 
reservation of funds.
    Section 1121(b)(2) is amended to authorize grants to the 
outlying areas through fiscal year 2001 in accordance with the 
latest action on the Compacts of Free Association.
    Section 1121(c) specifies the allotment that is reserved 
for the Secretary of the Interior to meet the educational needs 
of Indian children.
    Section 1122--Amounts for Basic Grants, Concentration 
Grants, and Targeted Grants. Section 1122(a) establishes the 
level of the appropriation of funds for each of 3 programs 
under part A of title I for fiscal years 2001 through 2005. The 
section specifies that funds for part A of title I shall be 
allocated in such a way that the Basic and Concentration Grant 
programs shall receive an amount equal to the amount received 
in fiscal year 2000 before funding is allocated to the Targeted 
Grant Program. Funding that is appropriated in excess of the 
fiscal year 2000 level shall be allocated to the Targeted Grant 
Program. In the event that funding for part A of title I is 
reduced in any fiscal year, funds shall first be reduced from 
the Targeted Grant Program. If additional reductions are 
necessitated, funding shall then be taken from the 
Concentration Grant program.
    Section 1122(b) describes the adjustments to the 
allocations where necessitated by the appropriations process. 
The ratable reduction rule is utilized to determine the 
relative size of each State's allocation when full funding is 
not available.
    Section 1122(c) establishes the hold harmless provisions 
that determine the amount of title I funding that a local 
education agency may receive as a result of changes in absolute 
and relative population and poverty. If the proportion of 
children counted is above 30 percent of the children served by 
the local education agency, it will receive not less than 95 
percent of the amount it received in the previous year. If the 
proportion of children counted is between 15 percent and 30 
percent of the children served by the local education agency, 
it will receive not less than 90 percent of the amount it 
received in the previous year. If the proportion of children 
counted falls below 15 percent of the children served by the 
local education agency, it will receive not less than 85 
percent of the amount it received in the previous year. The 
section is amended to eliminate the ``cliff'' phenomenon 
whereby a local education agency that loses eligibility during 
one year as a result of a change in population or poverty loses 
all of its funds. A local education agency that received 
funding in the prior year is eligible to continue to receive 
funding in accordance with the hold harmless provisions. A 
local education agency that loses eligibility for 5 consecutive 
years may not continue receive funding.
    Section 1122(d) describes ratable reductions.
    Section 1123--Definitions. Section 1123 defines freely 
associated States, outlying areas, and State for the purposes 
of distributing the allocations.
    Section 1124--Basic Grants to Local Educational Agencies. 
Section 1124(a) specifies the amounts of the local educational 
agencies basic grants. This section also describes and 
simplifies the formula by which grants are calculated. Section 
1124(a) outlines the allocations to large and small local 
educational agencies. In addition, this section establishes the 
formula for Puerto Rico.
    Section 1124(a) provides authority to calculate grants on 
the basis of county data in the event that the Department of 
Census fails to provide local education agency specific data.
    Section 1124(b) specifies the minimum number of children a 
local educational agency must have to qualify for a basic 
grant.
    Section 1124(c) describes the categories that are used for 
counting the number of children for basic grants.
    Section 1124(d) establishes the State minimum for basic 
grants.
    Section 1124A--Concentration Grants to Local Educational 
Agencies. Section 1124A(a) specifies the eligibility 
requirements and amount of grants.
    Section 1124A(B) is amended to simplify the reference to 
the basic grant expenditure factor.
    Section 1124A(B)(4) is amended to eliminate reference to 
the county suballocation formula in effect for fiscal years 
1996-1998. Authority for the States to allocate funding on the 
basis of county data is retained for any year in which the 
Secretary relies upon county data in lieu of local education 
agency data. The section retains authority for a State to 
reserve 2% of its allocations (when county data is utilized) to 
make grants to eligible local educational agencies that reside 
in ineligible counties.
    Section 1124A(b) establishes the ratable reduction rule 
utilized for making allocations when full funding is not 
available.
    Section 1124A(c) is amended to allow a state that receives 
0.25 percent or less of the available funds, but does not 
receive a grant in accordance with the formula used to 
determine the small grant minimum, to allocate these funds to 
local education agencies in accordance with the same rules 
applied to allocation by states that receive a grant in 
accordance with the small grant minimum.
    Section 1125--Targeted Grants to Local Educational 
Agencies. Section 1125(a) specifies the eligibility 
requirements for local educational agencies.
    Section 1125(b) establishes the amount of grants for local 
educational agencies, the District of Columbia, and Puerto 
Rico.
    Section 1125(c) specifies the weights for allocations to 
counties and the weights for allocations to local educational 
agencies.
    Section 1125(d) describes how targeted grants are 
calculated.
    Section 1125(e) establishes the State minimum.
    Section 1125A--Education Finance Incentive Program. Section 
1125A(a) authorizes the Secretary to make grants to States.
    Section 1125A(b) specifies the distribution of funds for 
this subsection which is based upon fiscal effort and equity.
    Section 1125A(c) describes how funds awarded under this 
subsection will be utilized.
    Section 1125(d) establishes maintenance of effort.
    Section 1125(e) authorizes $200,000,000 for fiscal year 
2001 and such sums for each of the 4 succeeding years.
    Section 1126--Special Allocation Procedures. Section 
1126(a) specifies the allocations for neglected children.
    Section 1126(b) describes allocations for local educational 
agencies that have special circumstances.
    Section 1126(c) specifies the reallocation process.
    Section 1127--Carryover and Waiver. Section 1127(a) 
specifies the limitation on carryover funds.
    Section 1127(b) establishes waiver authority for a State 
educational agency.
    Section 1127(c) specifies that the limitation on carryover 
funds does not apply to any local educational agency that 
receives less than $50,000 under subpart 2.
    Section 120D--Establishment of the Child Centered Program. 
Section 120D amends part A of title I by creating a new subpart 
3.
            Subpart 3--Child Centered Program
    New Section 1131--Definitions. This section defines several 
terms that are mentioned in the Child Centered Program.
    New Section 1132--Child Centered Program Funding. New 
section 1132(a) establishes that not more than 10 States and 
not more than 20 local educational agencies may participate in 
the Child Centered Program.
    New Section 1132(b) permits local educational agency 
participation. If a State does not have a Child Centered 
Program, a local educational agency within the State may carry 
out such a program. In order for a local educational agency to 
participate, the local educational agency shall obtain approval 
from the State for submission of its application, but not the 
contents of the application.
    New Section 1132(c) describes the grant specifications for 
the Child Centered Program. The Secretary shall award grants to 
each State or participating local educational agency that has 
an application approved. $500,000,000 is authorized for each 
year of implementation.
    New Section 1133--Child Centered Program Requirements. New 
section 1133(a) requires the State or participating local 
educational agency to establish a per pupil amount based on the 
number of eligible children in the State or school district 
served by the local educational agency. The State of 
participating local educational agency may vary the per pupil 
amount by taking into account various factors. For a Child 
Centered Program at a public school, the State or the 
participating local educational agency shall make available the 
per pupil allocation which will be used for supplemental 
education services. The supplemental education services will be 
provided by the school directly or through supplemental 
services with a governmental or non-governmental agency, 
school, postsecondary educational institution, another entity; 
or if directed by the parent of an eligible child, the 
supplemental services may be provided through a school-based 
program or through a tutorial service provider. In the case of 
a tutorial assistance provider, the school or local educational 
agency shall ensure that the provider selected by the parent is 
reimbursed for their services following notification, by the 
parent, to the school or local educational agency that the 
services were satisfactory.
    New Section 1133(b) describes the Child Centered Program as 
it applies to schoolwide programs. A public school, in which 50 
percent of the students are eligible children, may use Child 
Centered Program funds in combination with other Federal, 
State, and local funds to carry out a schoolwide program. If 
the public school does not have a schoolwide plan approved 
under section 1114, the public school shall develop and adopt a 
comprehensive plan for reforming the school's educational 
program. If a public school is operating a schoolwide 
initiative under a Child Centered Program, the Secretary may 
exempt the Child Centered Program from statutory or regulatory 
requirements of any other noncompetitive formula grant program 
or any discretionary program administered by the Secretary 
(other than those programs under the Individuals with 
Disabilities Education Act) to support the schoolwide 
initiative if the purposes of the other noncompetitive and 
discretionary programs are met.
    New Section 1133(c) stipulates that a State or 
participating local educational agency that has a Child 
Centered Program shall ensure that eligible children who are 
enrolled in a private school shall receive supplemental 
education services as described under section 120A.
    New Section 1133(d) requires that in order to be eligible 
to operate a Child Centered Program, a State or participating 
local educational agency must operate a statewide or school 
district wide open enrollment program that permits parents to 
enroll their child in any public school in the State or school 
district. The open enrollment requirement may be waived if the 
State or participating local educational agency demonstrates 
that the parents have sufficient options to enroll their child 
in multiple public schools or shall have sufficient options to 
use the per pupil amount made available to purchase 
supplemental education services from multiple assistance 
providers or schools.
    New Section 1133(e) describes parental involvement as it 
pertains to the Child Centered Program. Any public school 
receiving Child Centered Program funds shall hold an annual 
meeting to explain the program, the curriculum in use at the 
school, the forms of assessment used to measure student 
progress, and the proficiency levels students are expected to 
meet.
    New Section 1134--Application. New section 1134(a) 
describes the information that must be in the Child Centered 
Program application. The information shall include: a detailed 
description of the program to be assisted; an assurance that 
the State or participating local educational agency shall 
publish in a widely read medium an annual report card; in the 
case of an application from a participating local educational 
agency, an assurance that the local educational agency has 
notified the State regarding the submission of the application; 
a description of specific measurable objectives for improving 
student performance; a description of the process the State or 
participating local educational agency will use to measure 
progress; in the case of a State application, an assurance that 
the State or local educational agency meet the requirements of 
section 1111; and an assurance that each local educational 
agency meet the requirements of section 1116.
    New Section 1135--Administrative Provisions. New section 
1135(a) stipulates that a State or participating local 
educational agency shall carry out a child centered program for 
5 years.
    New Section 1135(b) permits a State to reserve 2 percent 
and a local educational agency to reserve 5 percent of the 
funds to pay the costs of administrative expenses of the Child 
Centered Program.
    New Section 1135(c) requires the State educational agency 
and each participating local educational agency carrying out a 
Child Centered Program to submit an annual report to the 
Secretary.
    New Section 1135(d) requires the Secretary to review each 
Child Centered Program during the third year of its existence.
    New Section 1135(e) describes the treatment of the amounts 
received. The per pupil amount provided for under this subpart 
shall not be treated as income of the eligible child or the 
parent of the eligible child for purposes of Federal tax or for 
determining the eligibility for other Federal assistance.
    New Section 1136--Evaluation. New section 1136(a) describes 
the annual evaluation process.
    New Section 1136(b) stipulates that the Comptroller General 
in consultation with the Secretary shall establish minimum 
criteria for the Child Centered Program.
    New Section 1137--Report. This section requires the 
Comptroller General to submit an interim report and a final 
report to Congress regarding the findings of the annual 
evaluations of the Child Centered Program.
    New Section 1138--Limitation on Conditions; Preemption. 
This section stipulates that nothing under Subpart 3 shall be 
construed to authorize or permit a Federal Government officer 
or employee to control specific instructional content or 
student performance standards and assessments, curriculum, or 
instruction. In addition, nothing under Subpart 3 shall be 
construed to authorize or permit a Federal Government officer 
or employee to preempt any provision of a State constitution or 
State statute that pertains to the expenditure of State funds 
in or by religious institutions.

Part B--Even Start Family Literacy Programs

    Section 121--Even Start Family Literacy Programs. Section 
121(a) amends section 1202(a) of the act to authorize a 
reservation of funds for migrant programs, outlying areas, and 
Indian Tribes.
    Section 121(b) amends section 1202(b) of the act to 
authorize a reservation for Federal activities which consists 
of an evaluation, technical assistance, program improvement, 
and research.
    Section 121(c) amends part B of title I of the act. In 
addition to authorizing the grant program as described under 
current law, this section adds a new State plan section to the 
act.
    New Section 1202A--State Plan. Section 1202A(a) describes 
the contents of the State plan. Each plan shall: include the 
State's indicators of program quality; describe how the State 
will use the indicators; describe how the State will fully 
implement the program; describe how the State will conduct 
competition for subgrants; and describe how the State will 
coordinate resources to improve family literacy services.
    Section 1202A(b) describes the duration of the State plan.
    Section 1202A(c) describes the use of funds for Family 
Literacy Services. A State shall give priority to programs that 
were of low quality as evaluated based on the indicators. 
Technical assistance shall also be provided.
    Section 1202A(d) makes technical amendments to section 1204 
of the act.
    Section 1202A(e) amends section 1205 of the act. This 
section establishes that the program will provide high quality, 
intensive family literacy services using instructional 
approaches based on effective research. The program shall also 
use methods that ensures that participating families 
successfully complete the program.
    Section 1202A(f) amends section 1206(b). The section is 
amended by adding a provision that allows an Even Start program 
to permit the participation of children 8 years of age or older 
if the Even Start program collaborates with a program funded 
under part A of title I.
    Section 1202A(g) makes technical amendments to section 
1207(c)(1)(F) of the act.
    Section 1202A(h) amends section 1208 of the act. In 
awarding subgrant funds to continue a program after the first 
year, the State educational agency shall review and evaluate 
the progress of each eligible entity.
    Section 1202(i) amends section 1210 of the act by 
describing the indicators program quality.
    Section 1202(j) amends the following parts of section 1211.
    Section 1211--Research. Section 1211(a) establishes that 
the Secretary, in consultation with the National Institute for 
Literacy may conduct research on family literacy services.
    Section 1211(b) requires the Secretary to ensure that the 
results of the research are disseminated.

Part C--Education of Migratory Children

    Section 131--Program Purpose. Section 131 amends section 
1301 of the act to make technical amendments to add two new 
purposes. The new purposes ensure that: migratory children who 
move among the States are not penalized in any manner by 
disparities among the States in curriculum, graduation 
requirements, and State student performance and content 
standards and that migratory children receive full and 
appropriate opportunities to meet the same challenging State 
standards that all children are expected to meet.
    Section 132--State Application. Section 132 amends section 
1304 of the act to require new information for the State 
application. This information includes a description of joint 
planning efforts with respect to local, State, and Federal 
programs and bilingual programs under part A of title VII. In 
addition, States will also be required to consult with parent 
advisory councils for the purposes of planning and operating 
programs.
    Section 133--Comprehensive Plan. Section 133 makes 
technical amendments to section 1306 of the act.
    Section 134--Coordination. Section 134(1) amends section 
1308(b) of the act to establish a national system for 
electronically exchanging, among the States, health and 
educational information regarding all students served under 
this program.
    Section 134(2) amends section 1308(c) to authorize 
$10,000,000 to carry out this section.
    Section 134(3) amends section 1308(d)(1) to authorize 
$3,000,000 to carry out incentive grants as described under 
current law.
    Section 134(4) amends section 1308(e) to require the 
Secretary to direct the National Center for Education 
Statistics to collect data on migratory children.
    Section 141--Parental Assistance. This section amends title 
I by adding the following:

Part D--Parental Assistance

    New Section 1401--Parental Information and Resource 
Centers. This section states the purpose of this part which is 
to: (1) provide leadership, technical assistance, and financial 
support to nonprofit organizations and local educational 
agencies to help implement successful and effective parental 
involvement policies, programs, and activities; (2) strengthen 
partnerships among parents, teachers, principals, 
administrators, and other school personnel; (3) develop and 
strengthen the relationship between parents and the schools; 
and (4) further the developmental progress of children.
    New Section 1401(b) authorizes the Secretary to award 
grants (while ensuring geographic distribution of grants) to 
nonprofit organizations, or consortia of nonprofits and local 
educational agencies, to establish school-linked or school-
based parental information and resource centers to provide 
training, information, and support to parents of elementary and 
secondary school students, individuals who work with parents, 
and organizations that carry out parent education and family 
involvement programs.
    New Section 1402--Applications. This section requires 
agencies and organizations seeking grants under this part to 
submit an application to the Secretary which must include a 
broad range of assurances. Each organization or consortium 
receiving a grant will be governed by a board of directors 
which includes parents or organizations that represent parents. 
At least \1/2\ of the overall funding provided each fiscal year 
must serve areas with high concentrations of low-income 
families.
    New Section 1403--Uses of Funds. This section states that 
grant funds shall be used to: (1) assist parents in 
participating effectively in their children's education; (2) 
obtain information about the range of options, programs, 
services, and resources available at all levels of the 
government to assist parents and school personnel who work with 
parents; (3) help parents learn and use the technology applied 
in their children's education; (4) plan, implement, and fund 
activities for parents that coordinate the education of their 
children with other Federal programs that serve their children; 
and (5) provide support for State or local educational 
personnel if the participation of such personnel will further 
the activities assisted under the grant.
    New Section 1404--Technical Assistance. This section states 
that the Secretary shall provide technical assistance, by grant 
or contract, for the establishment, development, and 
coordination of parent training, information, and support 
programs and parental information and resource centers.
    New Section 1405--Reports. This section requires agencies 
and organizations receiving assistance under this part to 
submit to the Secretary, on an annual basis, information 
concerning parental information and resource centers assisted 
under this part.
    New Section 1405(b) requires the Secretary to annually 
disseminate to the public and the Congress, the information 
that each organization or consortium submits.
    New Section 1406--General Provisions. This section states 
that no person shall be required to participate in a parent 
education or developmental screening program. In addition, no 
program or center assisted under this part shall take any 
action that infringes on the right of a parent to direct the 
education of their children.

Part E--Federal Evaluations, Demonstrations, and Transition Projects

    Provisions of part E, title I remain the same as in current 
law.
    Section 151--General Provisions; Comprehensive School 
Reform; Assistance to Address School Dropouts. This section 
amends part A of title I by redesignating part F as part H; 
sections 1601 through 1604 as sections 1901 through 1904, 
respectively; and by inserting 2 new parts to follow part E of 
title I, including: Part F (Comprehensive School Reform) and 
part G (Assistance to Address School Dropouts). Provisions of 
the new part H, title I (General Provisions) remain the same as 
current law.

Part F--Comprehensive School Reform

    New Section 1601--Purpose. This section states the purpose 
of this part which is to provide financial incentives for 
schools to develop comprehensive school reforms based upon 
effective practices and research-based programs that emphasize 
basic academics and parental involvement so that all children 
can meet State content and student performance standards.
    New Section 1602--Program Authorization. This section 
authorizes the Secretary to award grants to State educational 
agencies, by formula to enable them to provide subgrants to 
local educational agencies to carry out the purpose of this 
part.
    New Section 1603--State Applications. This section requires 
State educational agencies seeking a grant to submit an 
application to the Secretary, describing such items as: process 
andselection criteria; how the State educational agency will 
ensure that reforms are research-based programs; how the State 
educational agency will evaluate the implementation of reforms and link 
the reforms to student achievement; and how the State educational 
agency will make available technical assistance to the local 
educational agencies or consortia.
    New Section 1604--State Use of Funds. This section requires 
State educational agencies receiving grants to award 
competitive subgrants to local educational agencies. The 
subgrants must be of sufficient size and scope to support the 
initial costs for the plan selected or designed, in an amount 
of at least $50,000, and renewable for 2 additional one-year 
periods. The State educational agency must give priority 
consideration to local educational agencies that plan to use 
the funds for schools identified as being in need of 
improvement or corrective action and demonstrate a commitment 
to assist schools with budget, professional development, and 
other strategies to ensure reforms are properly implemented and 
sustained. The State educational agency shall distribute 
subgrants equitably to different geographic regions within the 
State, including urban and rural areas. State educational 
agencies may not reserve more than 5 percent of the grant funds 
for administrative, evaluation, and technical assistance 
expenses.
    New Section 1605--Local Applications. This section requires 
local educational agencies or consortia seeking subgrants under 
this part to submit an application to the State educational 
agencies for consideration.
    New Section 1606--Local Use of Funds. This section requires 
local educational agencies or consortia receiving a subgrant to 
provide funds to schools eligible for assistance under part A 
to support a variety of reform activities.
    New Section 1607--National Evaluation and Reports. This 
section requires the Secretary to develop a plan for a national 
evaluation of the programs assisted under this part. The 
evaluation shall examine the implementation and results 
achieved by schools after 3 years of implementing school 
reforms and the effectiveness of reforms in schools with 
diverse characteristics.

Part G--Assistance to School Dropouts

    New Section 1701--Purpose. This section states the purpose 
of this part which is to provide school dropout prevention and 
to raise academic achievement levels.
            Subpart 1--Coordinated National Strategy
    New Section 1711--National Activities. This section 
authorizes the Secretary to: (1) conduct data regarding 
participation in Federal dropout prevention and school reentry 
programs; (2) establish an interagency working group to address 
dropout prevention and school reentry issues; and (3) create a 
national recognition program for schools that have made 
extraordinary progress in lowering dropout rates.
            Subpart 2--National School Dropout Prevention Initiative
    New Section 1721--Program Authorized. This section states 
that funds under this part will be allocated to States based on 
the title I formula.
    New Section 1721(b) authorizes funds provided to states 
under this subpart be used by State educational agencies to 
award grants to public middle or secondary schools that have 
dropout rates that are in the highest one-third of dropout 
rates in the State for the purpose of supporting dropout 
prevention programs.
    New Section 1721(c) specifies that first-year grants to 
schools may not be of an amount less than $50,000 and not more 
than $100,000, with grant amounts decreasing during each year 
of participation in the program. Schools which create smaller 
learning communities are eligible for a 10 percent increase in 
the amount of their grant.
    New Section 1721(d) states that grants under this subpart 
may be awarded for a duration of 5 years.
    New Section 1722--Strategies and Capacity Building. This 
section requires schools receiving grants under this subpart to 
use grant funds for research-based, sustainable, and widely 
replicated strategies for dropout prevention and school reentry 
programs serving the entire school population.
    New Section 1722(b) authorizes the Secretary to award up to 
5 contracts with non-Federal entities, for a capacity building 
and design initiative to increase the proven strategies.
    New Section 1722(c) authorizes the Secretary to offer 
support to entities with experience in providing training and 
related assistance to offer such assistance to schools 
receiving grant funds.
    New Section 1723--Selection of Schools. This section 
requires schools seeking a grant under this subpart to submit 
an application, containing specific information, to the State 
educational agency.
    New Section 1723(b) requires State educational agencies to 
review applications and award grants to schools after a review 
by a panel of experts on school dropout prevention.
    New Section 1723(c) specifies that to be eligible to 
receive a grant under this subpart, schools must serve at least 
50 percent of students who are low-income or participate in a 
school-wide program.
    New Section 1724--Dissemination Activities. This section 
requires schools receiving agrant under this subpart to provide 
information and technical assistance to other schools within the school 
district.
    New Section 1725--Progress Incentives. This section states 
that local educational agencies shall use funding under this 
title to provide assistance to schools that have not made 
progress toward lowering school dropout rates after receiving 
assistance under this subpart for 2 fiscal years.
    New Section 1726--School Dropout Rate Calculation. This 
section specifies that in order to calculate a school dropout 
rate, schools shall use: (1) ``the annual event school dropout 
rate for students leaving a school in a single year determined 
in accordance with the National Center for Education 
Statistics' Common Core of Data,'' or (2) a standard method 
determined by the State educational agency.
    New Section 1727--Reporting and Accountability. This 
section requires schools receiving funding under this subpart 
to provide, on an annual basis, a report to the Secretary 
regarding the status of the implementation of activities funded 
under this subpart.
    New Section 1728--State Responsibilities. This section 
requires State educational agencies to report to the Secretary, 
1 year after the enactment of the Educational Opportunities 
Act, all school district and school data regarding school 
dropout rates.
    New Section 1728(b) requires State educational agencies 
receiving funds under this part to develop and implement 
education funding formula policies for public schools that 
provide appropriate incentives to retain students in school.
    New Section 1728(c) requires State educational agencies 
receiving funds under this part to develop uniform, long-term 
suspension and expulsion policies for serious infractions 
resulting in more than 10 days of exclusion from school.
            Subpart 3--Definitions; Authorization of Appropriations
    New Section 1731--Definitions. This section provides the 
meanings of certain terms used in this part, including: ``low-
income'' and ``school dropout.''
    New Section 1732--Authorization of Appropriations. This 
section authorizes funding levels of $5 million for subpart 1 
and $145 million for subpart 2 for fiscal year 2001 and ``such 
sums as may be necessary for each of the 4 succeeding fiscal 
years.'' Within subpart 2, $125 million is available to carry 
out section 1721 and $20 million for section 1722.

                       Title II--Teacher Quality

    Section 201--Teacher Quality. Section 201 amends Title II 
to strike all of Part A and insert new provisions, renaming 
Title II as ``TEACHER QUALITY'' and Part A as ``Teacher 
Empowerment.''

Part A--Teacher Empowerment

    Provisions of the new Title II, Part A include:
    Section 2001--Purpose. Section 2001 states the purpose of 
Part A is to provide grants to States and local educational 
agencies to help increase student achievement and performance 
by improving teacher quality.
            Subpart 1--Grants to States
    Section 2011--Formula Grants to States. Section 2011(a) 
includes general provisions dealing with formula grants to 
States, providing that States with applications approved by the 
Secretary will receive grants in order to make subgrants to 
local educational agencies and eligible partnerships as well as 
to carry out specified statewide activities.
    Section 2011(b) establishes allotments, as follows:
          \1/2\ of 1 percent is reserved for the outlying areas 
        (United States Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, 
        and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands), 
        provided that the amount reserved does not exceed the 
        amount received for this purpose in fiscal year 2000;
          \1/2\ of 1 percent is reserved for the Secretary of 
        the Interior for professional development activities in 
        schools operated or funded by the Bureau of Indian 
        Affairs, provided that the amount reserved does not 
        exceed the amount received for this purpose in fiscal 
        year 2000;
          The 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the 
        Commonwealth of Puerto Rico will first receive an 
        allotment equal to the amount received in fiscal year 
        2000 from the Eisenhower Professional Development 
        Program and the Class Size Reduction program--subject 
        to ratable reduction if appropriations are insufficient 
        to fund the hold-harmless. Amounts above the FY 2000 
        level will be allocated based on the number of 
        individuals age 5 through 17 in the State (50 percent) 
        and on the number of individuals age 5 through 17 from 
        families with incomes below the poverty line (50 
        percent). No State may receive less than \1/2\ of 1 
        percent of the total amounts above the fiscal year 2000 
        level.
          If a State does not apply for funds, the funding it 
        would have received will be reallotted among the 
        remaining States on the basis described above.
    Section 2012--Allocations Within States. Section 2012(a) 
requires States to use grant funds to carry out activities for 
the improvement of teaching and learning as provided by this 
section.
    Section 2012(b) requires that each State use at least 90 
percent of funds to make subgrants to local educational 
agencies and eligible partnerships. The remaining funds may be 
used for authorized State activities. No more than 5 percent of 
the funds retained by the State may be used for planning and 
administration.
    Section 2012(c) provides that:
          95 percent of the funds available for subgrants be 
        allocated to local educational agencies on the basis of 
        enrollment in public and private nonprofit elementary 
        schools and secondary schools in the State (25 percent) 
        and of the number of individuals age 5 through 17 from 
        families with incomes below the poverty line in the 
        State (75 percent). Subgrants are to be used to carry 
        out activities described in subpart 3;
          5 percent of the funds available for subgrants be 
        awarded by the State Agency for Higher Education 
        through a competitive process open to eligible 
        partnerships. Not more than 5 percent of the funds made 
        available to eligible partnerships may be used for 
        planning and administration.
    Section 2013--State Use of Funds. Section 2013(a) specifies 
the activities a State may conduct with the funds reserved for 
statewide use. These activities include: (1) reforming teacher 
certification/recertification or licensing requirements to 
ensure that--teachers have teaching skills and academic content 
knowledge, requirements are aligned with State content 
standards, and teachers have the knowledge and skills necessary 
to help students meeting State student performance standards; 
(2) carrying out programs related to induction of new teachers 
and to alternative routes to State certification; (3) 
developing and implementing effective mechanisms for recruiting 
and retaining qualified teachers and principals; (4) developing 
or improving performance measures to evaluate the effectiveness 
of professional development programs; (5) developing or 
improving systems to evaluate the impact of teachers on student 
academic achievement and performance; (6) providing technical 
assistance to local educational agencies; (7) promoting 
reciprocity of teacher certification or licensure between or 
among States; (8) developing or assisting in the development of 
proven, innovative strategies to deliver intensive professional 
development programs; (9) supporting activities to encourage 
and support teachers seeking National Board for Professional 
Teaching Standards or other recognized entities; and (10) 
providing professional development activities involving 
training in advanced placement instruction.
    Section 2013(b) requires States which receive a grant under 
this subpart as well as a grant under Title II of the Higher 
Education Act to coordinate the activities carried out under 
both grants.
    Section 2014--Applications by States. Section 2104(a) 
provides that States must make application to the Secretary for 
funds under this subpart.
    Section 2014(b) requires that State applications include: 
(1) a description of how the State will ensure that local 
educational agencies that receive subgrants will comply with 
the requirements of subpart 3; (2) an assurance that the State 
will measure the annual progress of local educational agencies 
and schools with respect to improving student academic 
achievement and performance in accordance with part A of title 
I, closing achievement gaps, and increasing the percentage of 
classes in core academic subjects that are taught by highly 
qualified teachers and that the State will require each LEA and 
school to report to the public on its annual progress; (3) a 
description of how the State will hold LEAs and schools 
accountable for making annual progress; (4) a description of 
how the State will coordinate professional development 
activities provided under Federal, State, and local programs 
and how such coordination helps assure the effective use of 
technology by teachers, paraprofessionals, and principals; and 
(5) a description of how the State will encourage the 
development of proven, innovative strategies to deliver 
intensive professional development programs, (6) a description 
of how the activities to be carried out by the State under this 
part will be based on a review of relevant research and an 
explanation of why the activities are expected to improve 
student performance and outcomes.
    Section 2014(c) provides that a State application will be 
approved unless the Secretary makes a written determination 
within 90 days of receipt that the application is in violation 
of the provisions of this act.
            Subpart 2--Subgrants to Eligible Partnerships
    Section 2021--Partnership Grants. Section 2021(a) provides 
that the State agency for higher education, in conjunction with 
the State educational agency, shall award subgrants on a 
competitive basis to eligible partnerships assuring equitable 
geographic distribution within the State.
    Section 2021(b) sets out the use of funds by an eligible 
partnership, which include: (1) professional development 
activities in core academic subjects for teachers, 
paraprofessionals, and--if appropriate--principals; and (2) 
assistance to LEAs and individuals for professional development 
activities related to the use of State content standards, 
performance standards, and assessments--which may include 
programs for individuals who will provide such instruction to 
others within their schools.
    Section 2021(c) provides that no single participant in an 
eligible partnership may use more than 50 percent of the funds 
made available to the partnership.
    Section 2021(d) requires eligible partnerships which 
receive a grant under this subpart as well as a grant under 
Title II of the Higher Education Act to coordinate the 
activities carried out under both grants.
    Section 2021(e) defines ``eligible partnership'' as an 
entity which includes a high-need local educational agency, a 
school of arts and sciences, and an institution of higher 
education's division that prepares teachers--and which may 
include other LEAs, a public charter school, a public or 
private elementary or secondary school, an educational service 
agency, a public orprivate nonprofit educational organization, 
other institutions of higher education, a school of arts and sciences 
within such an institution, the division of such an institution that 
prepares teachers, a nonprofit cultural organization, an entity 
carrying out a pre-kindergarten program, a parent-teacher organization, 
a teacher organization, or a business.
            Subpart 3--Subgrants to Local Educational Agencies
    Section 2031--Local Use of Funds. Section 2031(a) sets out 
the professional development activities which LEAs receiving 
subgrants are required to conduct. These activities include: 
(1) professional development activities in mathematics and 
science--except that a LEA may retain a waiver granted 
previously; and (2) professional development activities that 
give teachers, paraprofessionals, and principals with the 
knowledge and skills to provide students with the opportunity 
to meet challenging State or local standards.
    Section 2031(b) sets out the professional development 
activities which LEAs receiving subgrants may conduct. These 
activities include: (1) recruiting and hiring certified 
teachers to reduce class size or to teach special education; 
(2) improving recruitment efforts through financial incentives 
for teachers in academic shortage areas, recruitment of 
professionals from other fields and from underrepresented 
groups, and establishment of hiring policies that ensure 
comprehensive recruitment efforts; (3) improving retention of 
highly qualified teachers and principals through activities 
such as mentoring and incentive programs; (4) improving the 
quality of the teaching force, including professional 
development activities related to technology, different 
learning styles, and discipline; and (5) providing teacher 
opportunity payments.
    Section 2032--Professional Development for Teachers. 
Section 2032(a) provides that all professional development 
activities must be directly related to the curriculum and 
academic subjects in which a teacher provides instruction or is 
designed to enhance the ability of a teacher, paraprofessional, 
or principal to understand and use State standards except in 
cases where the professional development deals with teaching 
children with different learning styles, disciplining children, 
or identifying early and appropriate interventions to assist 
children with different learning styles.
    Section 2032(b) provides that all professional development 
activities must also: (1) be measured in terms of the annual 
progress criteria to be reported by LEAs and schools; (2) be 
tied to challenging State or local standards; (3) be tied to 
promising and effective practices and research-based programs; 
(4) be of sufficient intensity and duration to have a lasting 
impact, except in cases where short-term activities are part of 
a comprehensive professional development plan; and (5) be 
developed with extensive participation of teachers, 
paraprofessionals, and principals.
    Section 2032(c) provides that any LEA which does not 
provide the required professional development activities (as 
determined by the State) may request technical assistance to 
come into compliance. Any LEA that does not comply for 2 
consecutive fiscal years must make teacher opportunity payments 
in an amount proportional to the amount expended for 
professional development activities in the second fiscal year 
in which the agency failed to comply. A portion of funds must 
be used for teacher opportunity payments if a request for such 
payment is made by a group of teachers in a school served by 
the LEA. A LEA that makes progress in the next two subsequent 
years shall not be required to provide teacher opportunity 
payments and a LEA that fails to make progress for the next two 
subsequent years shall request technical assistance from the 
State.
    Section 2032(d) defines ``professional development 
activity.''
    Section 2033--Teacher Opportunity Payments. Section 2033 
authorizes Teacher Opportunity Payments. The section permits 
LEAs to provide payments directly to a teacher or a group of 
teachers to participate in professional development activities 
which meet the requirements applied to LEA subgrants. LEAs must 
establish procedures for notifying teachers of the availability 
of such payments and for principals to recommend teachers for 
participation based on lack of full certification or the need 
for additional assistance. If funding is inadequate to honor 
all requests for payments, priority shall be given to teachers 
recommended by principals for participation.
    Section 2034--Local Application. Section 2034(a) provides 
that LEAs must apply to the State for a subgrant, with the 
application being coordinated with other programs carried out 
under ESEA.
    Section 2034(b) provides that local applications shall 
include: (1) a description of how funds are to be used; (2) an 
assurance that the LEA will target funds to schools that have 
the lowest proportions of highly qualified teachers or are 
identified for school improvement by other measures of school 
quality as determined and documented by the LEA; (3) a 
description of how professional development activities under 
this subpart will be coordinated with such activities provided 
through other Federal, State, and local programs; (4) a 
description of how the LEA will integrate funds under this 
subpart with funds received under title V, part A for 
professional development; (5) a description of how the LEA has 
collaborated with teachers, paraprofessionals, principals, and 
parents in preparation of the application and (6) a description 
of how the activities to be carried out by the LEA will be 
based on a review of relevant research and an explanation of 
why the activities are expected to improve student performance 
and outcomes.
            Subpart 4--National Activities
    Section 2041--Alternative Routes to Teaching and Promoting 
Excellence in Teaching. Section 2041(a) authorizes competitive 
grants to eligible consortia for the establishment of teacher 
academies which promote alternative routes to certification or 
model professional development activities. Programs promoting 
alternative routes to certification must include highly 
qualified individuals, provide stipends, provide master 
teachers to mentor students, and include a service requirement. 
Model professional development activities may include innovate 
programs, model curricula, and the development of innovative 
techniques to evaluate theeffectiveness of professional 
development programs. At least one grant must be made to an eligible 
consortium that includes a high-need local educational agency located 
in a rural area and makes extensive use of distance learning. No single 
participant in an eligible consortium may use more than 50 percent of 
the funds made available under the grant. An eligible consortium must 
include the State agency responsible for certifying or licensing 
teachers, at least one high-need local educational agency, a school of 
arts and sciences, and an institution that prepares teachers. It may 
also include LEAs, public charter schools, public or private elementary 
or secondary schools, educational service agencies, public or private 
nonprofit educational organizations, museums, or businesses.
    Section 2041(b) authorizes the Secretary to award grants to 
the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards to 
enable the Board to complete a system of national board 
certification for fiscal year 2001 and allows the Secretary to 
support activities to encourage and support teachers seeking 
advanced certification or advanced credentialing through high 
quality professional teacher enhancement programs designed to 
improve teaching and learning.
    Section 2041(c) authorizes competitive grants for teacher 
training programs relating to mathematics and science. Grants 
are to be used to encourage students, including young women to 
pursue math and science teaching and may include programs 
jointly developed by the grant recipient and by a business, 
industry, or institution of higher education.
    Section 2041(d) authorizes the Secretary, in consultation 
with the Director of the National Science Foundation, to award 
a grant or contract to continue the Eisenhower National 
Clearinghouse for Mathematics and Science Education and 
provides the authority for the Clearinghouse to use funds to 
provide information and resources in the areas of language arts 
and social studies.
    Section 2041(e) authorizes the Troops-to-Teachers Program 
allowing the Department of Education to fund the program and 
contract with the Department of Defense, Defense Activity for 
Non-Traditional Education Support (DANTES) for the 
administration of the program. The Secretary of Education would 
be permitted to retain a portion of the funds to identify LEAs 
with concentrations of low-income children and with teacher 
shortages and to identify States with alternative certification 
programs.
            Subpart 5--Funding
    Section 2051--Authorization of Appropriations. Section 2051 
authorizes $2 billion for fiscal year 2001, of which $40 
million will be used to carry out the national activities 
authorized under Subpart 4. ``Such sums as may be necessary'' 
are authorized for fiscal years 2002 through 2005.
            Subpart 6--General Provisions
    Section 2061--Definitions. Section 2061 includes 
definitions for the terms ``arts and sciences,'' ``core 
academic subjects,'' ``highly qualified,'' ``high-need local 
educational agency,'' ``out-of-field teacher,'' ``poverty 
line,'' and ``State.''
    Section 202--Leadership Education and Development Program. 
Section 202 amends title II to strike all of part B and insert 
new provisions, renaming part B as ``Leadership Education and 
Development Program.''

Part B--Leadership Education and Development Program

    Provisions of the new Title II, Part B include:
    Section 2201--Leadership Programs. Section 2201(a) defines 
``school leader'' as an elementary or secondary school 
superintendent, principal, assistant teacher or another 
individual in a management or leadership position with a State 
or region of a State whose work directly impacts teaching and 
learning relating to elementary and secondary education.
    Section 2201(b) authorizes the Secretary to award grants to 
State educational agencies, institutions of higher education, 
local educational agencies and nonprofit educational 
organizations (or consortia of such entities) to provide 
professional development to school leaders.
    Section 2201(c) sets out the criteria to be used in 
awarding grants, including the quality of the proposal, the 
educational need of the area to be served, and equitable 
geographic distribution.
    Section 2201(d) requires that application for funds be 
submitted to the Secretary.
    Section 2201(e) sets out the uses of grant funds, which 
include providing school leaders with training in leadership, 
management, and instructional skills; enhancing and developing 
the school management and business skills of school leaders; 
improving understanding of educational technology and State 
standards; improving the knowledge of school leaders regarding 
challenging State content and performance standards; 
encouraging highly qualified individuals to become school 
leaders; and developing mentorships and a network of school 
leaders within the State.
    Section 2201(f) provides that the Federal Government will 
assume 80 percent of the cost of the program. The 20 percent 
match may be paid in cash or in kind. The matching requirement 
may be waived by the Secretary for entities serving low-income 
areas.
    Section 2201(g) authorizes $100 million for FY 2001 and 
``such sums'' in the 4 subsequent fiscal years for Part B.

Part C--Reading Excellence Act

    Section 203--Reading Excellence. Section 203(a) amends the 
part heading for Title II, Part C, as ``Reading Excellence 
Act''.
    Section 203(b) authorizes $280 million in FY 2001 and 
``such sums'' in the 4 subsequent fiscal years for Part C.
    Section 203(c) provides that the short title for Part C 
will be ``Reading Excellence Act''.
    Section 204--National Writing Project. Section 204 amends 
Title II to strike all of Part D and insert new provisions, 
renaming Part D as ``National Writing Project.''

Part D--National Writing Project

    Provisions of the new Title II, Part D include:
    Section 2301--Purpose. Section 2301 sets out the purpose of 
Part D as supporting the expansion of the National Writing 
Project network, ensure high quality programs, promote 
dissemination of information on effective practices, and 
coordinate activities with other ESEA activities.
    Section 2302--National Writing Project. Section 2302(a) 
authorizes the Secretary to make a grant to the National 
Writing Project.
    Section 2302(b) sets out grant requirements, providing that 
the National Writing Project will use grant funds to pay the 
Federal share of establishing and operating teacher training 
programs and will contract with nonprofit educational providers 
for the non-Federal share.
    Section 2302(c) requires contractors to conduct the program 
during the school year and the summer months, train K-12 and 
college teachers, select members of a National Writing Project 
teacher network, and encourage teachers from all disciplines to 
participate.
    Section 2302(d) defines ``Federal share'' as being 50 
percent of the cost to the contractor of establishing and 
operating teacher training programs. Cost-sharing may be waived 
on a case-by-case basis on the recommendation of the National 
Advisory Board. The Federal share may not exceed $100,000 for 
any one contractor or $200,000 for a statewide program 
administered by any one contractor in at least 5 sites 
throughout the state.
    Section 2302(e) requires the National Writing Project to 
establish a National Advisory Board, comprised of national 
educational leaders, leaders in the field of writing, and 
others determined to be necessary. The advisory board will 
advise on national issues related to writing, review activities 
and programs, and support the continued development of the 
National Writing Project.
    Section 2302(f) requires the Secretary to conduct an 
independent evaluation of the teacher training programs 
supported under Part D. The evaluation is to include a 
determination of the administrative costs of the National 
Writing Project and its contractors. The results of the 
evaluation are to be provided to the appropriate committees of 
Congress. Up to $150,000 of Part D funds may reserved for the 
evaluation.
    Section 2302(g) requires the National Writing Project to 
establish a National Review Board, comprised of leaders in the 
field of writing research and others determined to be 
necessary. The review board is to review and recommend 
applications for assistance.
    Section 2302(h) authorizes $15 million for fiscal year 2001 
and ``such sums'' for the 4 subsequent fiscal years for Part D.
    Section 205--General Provisions. Section 205 redesignates 
title II, part E (``General Provisions'') as part G and strikes 
all current provisions.

Part G--General Provisions

    Provisions of the new title II, part G, include:
    Section 2601--Prohibition on Mandatory National 
Certification or Licensing of Teachers. Section 2601 prohibits 
the mandatory national certification or licensing of teachers 
as well as mandatory national teacher testing.
    Section 2602--Home Schools. Section 2602 prohibits Federal 
control of private, religious, or home school. Such schools may 
participate in title II programs.
    Section 206--New Century Program and Digital Education 
Content Collaborative. Section 206 establishes a new title II, 
part E, entitled ``New Century Program for Distributed Teacher 
Professional Development'', and a new part F, entitled 
``Digital Education Content Collaborative.''

Part E--New Century Program for Distributed Teacher Professional 
        Development

    Section 2401--Project Authorized. Section 2401 authorizes 
the Secretary to make a grant to a nonprofit telecommunications 
entity (or partnership of same) to carry out a national 
telecommunications-based program to improve teaching in core 
curriculum areas for the purpose of assisting students to meet 
State content standards.
    Section 2402--Application. Section 2402 sets out the 
contents of grant applications, including a demonstration that 
video and data will be delivered in an integrated service, an 
assurance that the project will be conducted in cooperation 
with appropriate State and local agencies and others, and an 
assurance that a significant portion of the benefits will be 
made available to schools in LEAs with a high percentage of 
title I children. School sites in at least 15 States must be 
included.
    Section 2403--Authorization of Appropriations. Section 2403 
authorizes $20 million in fiscal year 2001 and ``such sums'' in 
the 4 succeeding fiscal years for part E.

Part F--Digital Education Content Collaborative

    Section 2501--Digital Education Content Collaborative. 
Section 2501 authorizes the Secretary to make grants, 
contracts, or cooperative agreements for the development, 
production, and distribution of video programming for K-12 
students. Fund recipients must enter into multi-year content 
development arrangements with SEAs, LEAs, IHEs, businesses, or 
others.
    Section 2502--Educational Programming. Section 2502 
provides that the Secretary must make awards on a competitive 
basis for a period of 3 years to local public 
telecommunications entities for the development of programming 
which includes student assessment tools and teacher support and 
which relate to State content standards and may be distributed 
through digital broadcasting and school digital networks.
    Section 2503--Applications. Section 2503 requires the 
submission of an application to the Secretary.
    Section 2504--Matching Requirement. Section 2504 requires a 
100-percent match, which may include funds provided for the 
transition to digital broadcasting--as well as in-kind 
contributions.
    Section 2505--Administrative Costs. Section 2505 provides 
that no more than 5 percent of Part F funds be used for 
administrative costs.
    Section 2506--Authorization of Appropriations. Section 2506 
authorizes $25 million for FY 2001 and ``such sums'' for the 4 
subsequent fiscal years for Part F.

                   Title III--Enrichment Initiatives

    Section 301--21st Century Community Learning Centers. This 
section amends title III and inserts the following new 
provisions, renaming title III as ``ENRICHMENT INITIATIVES'' 
and part A as ``21st Century Community Learning Centers.''

Part A--21st Century Community Learning Centers

    The new part A retains current law with respect to ``21st 
Century Community Learning Centers'' (title X, part I), except 
for an increase in the authorized funding level to $500 million 
for fiscal year 2001 and ``such sums as may be necessary'' for 
the 4 succeeding fiscal years.
    Provisions of the new title III, part A include:
    Section 3101--Short Title. This section specifies that this 
part may be cited as the ``21st Century Community Learning 
Centers Act.''
    Section 3102--Purpose. This section repeals the 
congressional findings currently in the act and inserts the 
purpose of part A which is to provide local public schools with 
the opportunity to serve as centers for the delivery of 
education; to enable public schools, primarily in rural or 
inner-city communities, to collaborate with public and 
nonprofit agencies and organizations, local businesses, and 
educational institutions, to expand the opportunities available 
to the residents of the communities served by such schools; to 
use school facilities, equipment, and resources so that 
communities can promote a more efficient use of public 
education facilities; to enable schools to become centers of 
life-long learning; and to enable schools to provide 
educational opportunities for individuals of all ages.
    Section 3103--Program Authorization. This section 
authorizes the Secretary to award grants to rural and inner-
city public elementary or secondary schools to plan, implement, 
or expand projects that benefit the educational, health, social 
service, cultural, and recreational needs of a rural or inner-
city community. The Secretary is required to ensure an 
equitable distribution of assistance among the States, among 
urban and rural areas of the United States, and among rural and 
urban areas of a State. The time period for the distribution of 
grants may not exceed 3 years, and the Secretary may not award 
grants in an amount less than $35,000.
    Section 3104--Application Required. This section requires 
elementary or secondary schools seeking a grant under part A to 
submit an application with specific criteria. The Secretary 
shall give priority to applications describing projects that 
offer a broad selection of services which address the needs of 
the community.
    Section 3105--Uses of Funds. This section specifies that 
grant funds shall be used to plan, implement, or expand 
community learning centers which include not less than 4 of the 
following activities: literacy education programs; senior 
citizen programs; children's day care services; integrated 
education, health, social service, recreational or cultural 
programs; summer and weekend school programs; nutrition and 
health programs; expanded library service hours; 
telecommunications and technology education programs; parenting 
skills education programs; support and training for child day 
care providers; employment counseling, training, and placement; 
services for individuals who leave school before graduating 
from secondary school; and services for individuals with 
disabilities.
    Section 3106--Definition. This section provides the meaning 
of the term ``community learning center'' for the purposes of 
this part.
    Section 3107--Authorization of Appropriations. This section 
authorizes $500 million to be appropriated for fiscal year 2001 
and ``such sums as may be necessary'' for the 4 succeeding 
fiscal years to carry out the purposes of this part.

Part B--Initiatives for Neglected, Delinquent, or At Risk Students

    The new Part B retains current law with respect to 
``Prevention and Intervention Programs for Children and Youth 
Who are Neglected, Delinquent, or at Risk of Dropping Out'' 
(title I, part D), renaming title III, part B as ``Initiatives 
for Neglected, Delinquent, or At Risk Students.''
    Provisions of the new title III, part B include:
            Subpart 1--Prevention and Intervention Programs for 
                    Children and Youth Who Are Neglected, Delinquent, 
                    or at Risk of Dropping Out
    Section 3321--Purpose; Program Authorized. This section 
repeals the congressional findings currently in the act and 
states the purpose of subpart 1 which is to improve educational 
services in local and State institutions for neglected or 
delinquent children so that they have the opportunity to meet 
the same challenging State content and student performance 
standards that all children in the State are expected to meet; 
to provide such children with the services needed to make a 
successful transition from institutionalization to further 
schooling or employment; and to prevent at-risk youth from 
dropping out of school and to provide dropouts and youth 
returning from institutions with a support system to ensure 
their continued education.
    Section 3321(b) requires the Secretary to provide grants to 
State educational agencies so that they can award subgrants to 
State agencies and local educational agencies to establish or 
improve programs of education for neglected or delinquent 
children at risk of dropping out of school before graduation.
    Section 3322--Payments for Programs Under this Subpart. 
This section authorizes the Secretary to allocate to each State 
educational agency amounts necessary to make subgrants to State 
agencies under Chapter 1. Each State is required to retain 
funds generated throughout the State under title I, part A 
based on youth residing in local correctional facilities, or 
attending community day programs for delinquent children.

                    Chapter 1--State Agency Programs

    Section 3331--Eligibility. This section states that a State 
agency may be eligible for assistance under Chapter 1 if the 
State agency is responsible for providing free public education 
for children in institutions for neglected or delinquent 
children; attending community day programs for neglected or 
delinquent children; or in adult correctional institutions.
    Section 3332--Allocation of Funds. This section establishes 
the criteria by which a State agency, including those in Puerto 
Rico may be eligible to receive a subgrant under subpart 1. The 
Secretary is allowed to ratably reduce subgrants if the amount 
appropriated is insufficient to pay the full amount for which 
State agencies are eligible.
    Section 3333--State Reallocation of Funds. This section 
allows State educational agencies to reallocate unneeded funds 
from one State agency to another in need of additional funds.
    Section 3334--State Plan and State Agency Applications. 
This section requires each State educational agency seeking a 
grant under subpart 1 to submit for approval of the Secretary, 
a plan for meeting the needs of neglected and delinquent 
children at risk of dropping out of school. The Secretary is 
required to approve each State plan meeting the criteria 
detailed in this section. Each State agency seeking funds to 
carry out a program must submit an application with specific 
guidelines to the State educational agencies.
    Section 3335--Use of Funds. This section states that funds 
under Chapter 1 only be used by State agencies for programs and 
projects that are consistent with the State plan under section 
3334(a) and concentrate on providing participants with the 
knowledge and skills needed to make a successful transition to 
secondary school completion, further education, or employment. 
The number of hours of instruction students receive from State 
and local sources under Chapter 1 programs shall supplement and 
not supplant the requirements of section 1120A.
    Section 3336--Institution-Wide Projects. This section 
allows State agencies that provide education to neglected or 
delinquent children to use funds received under subpart 1 to 
upgrade the educational effort of the institutions or programs 
these children are educated in, if the State agency has 
developed and approved a plan for that institution or program. 
This section establishes specific guidelines for the plan.
    Section 3337--Three-Year Programs or Projects. This section 
authorizes State educational agencies to approve State agencies 
applications for subgrants if the State agency finds it likely 
that a child will participate in a program for more than 1 
year. An application may not be approved for a period exceeding 
3 years.
    Section 3338--Transition Services. This section authorizes 
State agencies to reserve 10 percent of the funds received 
under Chapter 1 to support projects that facilitate the 
transition of children from State-operated institutions to 
local educational agencies. Projects are to be conducted either 
by the State agency or through a contract with 1 or more local 
educational agencies, public agencies, or private non-profit 
organizations. Reserved funds shall be used only to provide 
transitional educational services, which may include pupil 
services and mentoring, to neglected and delinquent children in 
schools other than State-operated institutions.

                    Chapter 2--Local Agency Programs

    Section 3341--Purpose. This section states the purpose of 
Chapter 2 which is to support the operation of local 
educational agency programs that involve collaboration with 
locally operated correctional facilities to: (1) carry out high 
quality education programs to prepare youth for secondary 
school completion, training and employment, or further 
education; (2) provide activities to facilitate the transition 
of such youth from the correctional program to further 
education or employment; and (3) operate dropout prevention 
programs in local schools for youth at risk of dropping out of 
school and youth returning from correctional facilities.
    Section 3342--Programs Operated by Local Educational 
Agencies. This sectionauthorizes State educational agencies to 
award subgrants to local educational agencies with high numbers or 
percentages of youth residing in locally operated youth correctional 
facilities. In addition, a local educational agency which includes a 
correctional facility that operates a school is not required to operate 
a dropout prevention program if more than 30 percent of the youth 
attending reside outside of the local educational agency boundaries 
upon leaving the facility. State educational agencies are required to 
notify local educational agencies of subgrants.
    Section 3343--Local Educational Agency Applications. This 
section provides detailed criteria for applications to be 
completed by those local educational agencies seeking 
assistance from State educational agencies under Chapter 2.
    Section 3344--Uses of Funds. This section requires that 
funds provided to local educational agencies under Chapter 2 be 
used for dropout prevention programs which serve youth at 
educational risk; the coordination of health and social 
services for such individuals if there is a likelihood that the 
services will enable them to complete their education; and 
programs to meet the unique education needs of youth at risk of 
dropping out of school.
    Section 3345--Program Requirements for Correctional 
Facilities Receiving Funds Under this Section. This section 
requires correctional facilities that have agreements with 
local educational agencies to: ensure educational programs in 
juvenile facilities are coordinated with the student's home 
school; notify local schools if a youth is identified in need 
of special education services; provide transition assistance to 
help youth stay in school; provide support programs to 
encourage youth who have dropped out to re-enter school; work 
to ensure facilities are staffed with teachers and other 
qualified staff who are trained to work with children with 
disabilities; ensure educational programs in correctional 
facilities are related to assisting students to meet high 
educational standards; use technology to assist in coordinating 
educational programs between the juvenile facility and the 
community school; involve parents in efforts to improve the 
educational achievement of their children; coordinate funds 
received under this program with other local, State, and 
Federal funds available to provide services to participating 
youth; and work with local businesses to develop training and 
mentoring programs for participating youth.
    Section 3346--Accountability. This section authorizes a 
State educational agency to reduce or terminate funding for 
projects if a local educational agency doesn't reduce dropout 
rates or require juvenile facilities to demonstrate that there 
has been an increase in the number of youth returning to school 
or pursuing post-secondary opportunities.

                     Chapter 3--General Provisions

    Section 3351--Program Evaluations. This section requires 
State agencies and local educational agencies that conduct 
programs under Chapters 1 and 2 to evaluate the programs. The 
results of the evaluations should be submitted to the State 
educational agencies in order to improve subsequent programs.
    Section 3352--Definitions. This section provides the 
meanings of certain terms used in subpart 2, including ``adult 
correctional institution,'' ``at-risk youth,'' ``community day 
program,'' and ``institution for neglected or delinquent 
children and youth.''

Part C--Gifted and Talented Children

    The new Part C retains current law with respect to ``Gifted 
and Talented Children'' (title X, part B), renaming title III, 
part C as ``Gifted and Talented Children.''
    Provisions of the new title III, part C include:
    Section 3401--Short Title. This section specifies that part 
C may be cited as the ``Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented 
Students Education Act.''
    Section 3402--Statement of Purpose. This section repeals 
the congressional findings in current law and states the 
purpose of part C which is to provide grants to State 
educational agencies and public schools for programs designed 
for gifted and talented students in elementary and secondary 
schools; to encourage the development of challenging curricula 
for all students; and to supplement and use State and local 
funding for gifted and talented students more effectively.
    Section 3403--Construction. This section encourages States 
to educate gifted and talented students simultaneously with 
students of similar educational needs.
    Section 3404--Authorization of Appropriations; Trigger. 
This section authorizes $155 million for fiscal year 2001 and 
``such sums as may be necessary'' for the 4 succeeding fiscal 
years. Once the appropriation for this program reaches $50 
million, funding is to be distributed by formula to the States 
and competitively to local educational agencies and schools. If 
funding levels fall below $50 million, the current law 
provisions of the program will remain in effect.
    Section 3405--Allotment to States. This section authorizes 
the Secretary to reserve up to 1 percent of the authorized 
funds for payments to outlying areas in accordance with their 
assistance needs. The Secretary will allot funds to each State 
based on a ratio of a State's school-age population of all 
States. A small State minimum of \1/2\ percent is included. If 
more than $50 million is appropriated for this section in a 
fiscal year, the Secretary shall use the funding for grants or 
contract payments. All current grantees that have been awarded 
funds under this program will continue to receive funds under 
the original terms of the grant until the time period for that 
grant has expired.
    Section 3406--State Applications. This section requires 
States seeking assistance under part C to submit an application 
which (1) designates the State educational agency as the agency 
responsible for the administration of the program, including 
public dissemination of data; (2) contains an assurance that 
the State educational agency will have the ability to provide 
matching funds (in cash or in-kind); (3) provides for a 
biennial submission of data regarding the use ofgifted and 
talented funds; (4) provides an assurance that the SEA will keep 
records and provide such information as the Secretary requires; (5) 
contains an assurance that there is compliance with the requirements of 
this part; and (6) provides for timely public notice and public 
dissemination of data. The duration of the application is 3 years.
    Section 3407--State Uses of Funds. This section allows 
State educational agencies to use up to 10 percent of funding 
for the following activities: (1) a peer review process for 
grant applications; (2) supervision of the awarding of funds to 
elementary schools, secondary schools, or a consortia of these 
schools; (3) planning, supervision, and processing of funds 
made available under this part; (4) monitoring, evaluation, and 
dissemination of programs and activities assisted under this 
part; (5) providing technical assistance; and (6) 
supplementing, but not supplanting, State and local funds for 
the education of gifted and talented students. A State 
educational agency may use up to 2 percent of funding to 
provide education, information, and support to parents of 
gifted and talented students.
    Section 3408--Distribution to Local Educational Agencies. 
This section requires a State educational agency to use at 
least 88 percent of the funds under part C to award grants, on 
a competitive basis, to local educational agencies for programs 
designed to meet the needs of gifted and talented students.
    Section 3409--Local Application Requirements. This section 
requires a local educational agency seeking a grant to submit 
an application to the State educational agency, including: (1) 
an assurance that funds received under this program will be 
used to identify and support gifted and talented students from 
all economic, ethnic and racial backgrounds, such as students 
of limited English proficiency and students with disabilities; 
and (2) a description of how the school or consortium of 
schools will meet the educational needs of gifted and talented 
students, including the training of personnel.
    Section 3410--Local Uses of Funds. This section requires a 
local educational agency receiving a grant under part C to 
carry out 1 or more of the following activities: professional 
development; identification of students; model projects; and 
emerging technologies.
    Section 3411--Participation of Private School Children and 
Teachers. This section requires the Secretary to ensure that 
there is equitable participation of students and teachers in 
private, nonprofit elementary and secondary schools, including 
the participation of teachers and other personnel in 
professional development.
    Section 3412--Establishment of National Center. This 
section requires the Secretary to establish a ``National Center 
for Research and Development in the Education of Gifted and 
Talented Children and Youth'' through grants or contracts with 
1 or more institutions of higher education, State educational 
agencies, or a consortia of such institutions and agencies. The 
purpose of the National Center is to develop, devise, 
disseminate, and evaluate model projects and activities that 
serve gifted and talented students; to conduct research; and to 
provide technical assistance. The Secretary may not use more 
than 30 percent of the funds appropriated for the overall 
Javits Gifted and Talented Program for the National Center. A 
new provision allows the current grantee to continue to be the 
grantee for the duration of the current grant.

Part D--Arts in Education

    The new Part D retains current law with respect to ``Arts 
in Education'' (title X, part D), renaming title III, part D as 
``Arts in Education.''
    Provisions of the new title III, part D include:
            Subpart 1--Arts Education
    Section 3511--Support for Arts Education. This section 
repeals the congressional findings in current law and specifies 
the purposes of this part which are to support systemic 
education reform by strengthening arts education; to help 
ensure that all students have the opportunity to learn to 
challenging State standards; to support the national effort to 
enable all students to demonstrate competence in the arts; to 
support model partnership programs between schools and 
nonprofit cultural organizations designed to increase overall 
student achievement; and to support projects and programs in 
the performing arts through arrangements with the Kennedy 
Center for the Performing Arts.
    Section 3511(b) authorizes the Secretary to award grants to 
State educational agencies, local educational agencies, 
institutions of higher education, museums and other cultural 
institutions, and other public and private agencies, 
institutions and organizations.
    Section 3511(c) authorizes funds under subpart 1 to be used 
for: (1) the development and dissemination of model arts 
education programs or assessments based on high standards; (2) 
the development and implementation of curriculum frameworks for 
arts education; (3) the development of model preservice and 
inservice professional development programs for arts educators 
and other instructional staff; (4) supporting collaborative 
activities with other Federal agencies or institutions involved 
in arts education, (5) supporting models and programs in the 
performing arts for children and youth through arrangements 
made with the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts; (6) 
supporting model projects and programs by VSA Arts that assure 
the participation in mainstream settings in arts and education 
programs of individuals with disabilities; and (7) supporting 
collaborative projects between schools and nonprofit cultural 
organizations.
    Section 3511(d) requires a recipient of funds under subpart 
1 to coordinate projects with appropriate activities of public 
and private cultural agencies, institutions, and organizations, 
including museums, arts education associations, libraries and 
theaters.
    Section 3511(e) authorizes a funding level of $25 million 
for fiscal year 2001 and ``such sums as may be necessary'' for 
the 4 succeeding fiscal years. If the amountappropriated for 
any fiscal year is $10 million or less, then the amount shall be 
available to carry out only activities arranged with the Kennedy Center 
for the Performing Arts and VSA Arts.
            Subpart 2--Cultural Partnerships for At-Risk Youth
    Section 3521--Purpose. This section repeals the 
congressional findings and specifies the purposes of subpart 2 
which are to award grants to improve the educational 
performance and potential of at-risk youth by providing 
educational and cultural services.
    Section 3522--Program Authorized. This section authorizes 
the Secretary to award grants to pay the Federal share of the 
costs of the activities described in section 3523. Targeted 
groups and the objectives of programs receiving grants under 
subpart 2 are specified.
    Section 3523--Authorized Activities. This section specifies 
the activities which grants awarded under subpart 2 may be used 
for, including: (1) developing, acquiring, implementing, and 
expanding school-based coordinated educational and cultural 
programs; (2) providing at-risk youth with integrated cultural 
activities designed to improve academic achievement; (3) 
working with school personnel on staff development activities; 
(4) encouraging active participation of parents in the 
education of their children; and (5) assisting local artists to 
work with at-risk youth in schools. An application shall be 
submitted by entities seeking a grant under subpart 2.
    Section 3524--Payments; Amounts of Award; Cost Share; 
Limitations. This section requires the Secretary to pay 
eligible recipients the Federal share of the costs of the 
activities described in the application. Grants awarded under 
part D are to be used to supplement and not supplant the funds 
made available from non-Federal sources. The Secretary may use 
up to 5 percent of the grant funds for evaluation and 
replication of programs.
    Section 3525--Authorization of Appropriations. This section 
authorizes a funding level of $45 million for fiscal year 2001 
and ``such sums as may be necessary'' for the 4 succeeding 
fiscal years to carry out the activities of subpart 2.

Part E--Advanced Placement Programs

    Section 3601--Short Title. This section specifies that part 
E may be cited as the ``Access to High Standards Act.''
    Section 3602--Findings and Purposes. This section states 
the findings and purposes of this part. The purposes are to 
encourage more of the students who take advanced placement 
courses to take the exam; to build on the benefits of advanced 
placement programs for students; to support State and local 
efforts to raise academic standards through advanced placement 
programs; to increase the availability and broaden the range of 
schools that have advanced placement programs; to provide 
greater access to advanced placement courses; to provide access 
to advanced placement courses for students in schools that do 
not offer the courses; and toincrease the participation of low-
income individuals in taking advanced placement tests.
    Section 3603--Funding Distribution Rule. This section 
authorizes the Secretary to give priority to funding activities 
under section 3606 and shall distribute 70 percent of remaining 
funds to carry out section 3604 and 30 percent to carry out 
section 3605.
    Section 3604--Advanced Placement Program Grants. This 
section authorizes the Secretary to award grants for a period 
of 3 years to State educational agencies and local educational 
agencies in order to expand access for low-income individuals 
to advanced placement incentive programs that involve teacher 
training; pre-advanced placement course development; curriculum 
coordination and articulation between grade levels that prepare 
students for advanced placement courses; and curriculum 
development. All entities seeking a grant shall submit an 
application to the Secretary. Those entities receiving grants 
shall annually report to the Secretary: the number of students 
taking advanced placement courses; the number of advanced 
placement tests taken by students; the scores on the advanced 
placement tests; and demographic information regarding 
individuals taking the advanced placement courses.
    Section 3605--On-Line Advanced Placement Courses. This 
section authorizes the Secretary to award grants, on a 
competitive basis, to State educational agencies to enable them 
to award grants to local educational agencies to provide 
students with on-line advanced placement courses. State 
educational agencies seeking a grant shall submit an 
application to the Secretary and in awarding grants, priority 
should be given to local educational agencies that: serve high 
concentrations of low-income students; serve rural areas; and 
would not have access to on-line advanced placement courses. 
Grant funds may be used to purchase on-line curriculum or 
course materials.
    Section 3606--Advanced Placement Incentive Program. This 
section authorizes the Secretary to award grants to State 
educational agencies in order to reimburse low-income 
individuals to cover part or all of the costs of advanced 
placement test fees. If an excess of funds exists, State 
educational agencies may use the grant funds to increase the 
enrollment of low-income individuals in advanced placement 
courses; the participation of low-income individuals in 
advanced placement courses; and the availability of advanced 
placement courses in schools serving high-poverty areas. Grant 
funds shall supplement and not supplant other non-Federal funds 
that are available to assist low-income individuals in paying 
for the cost of advanced placement test fees.
    Section 3607--Definitions. This section provides the 
meanings of certain terms used in this part, including: 
``advanced placement incentive program,'' ``advanced placement 
test,'' ``high concentration of low-income students,'' ``low-
income individual,'' ``institution of higher education,'' and 
``State.''
    Section 3608--Authorization of Appropriations. This section 
authorizes $50 million for fiscal year 2001 and ``such sums as 
may be necessary'' for the 4 succeeding fiscal years.
    Section 302--Dissemination of Advanced Placement 
Information. This section requires each institution of higher 
education receiving Federal funds for research or for programs 
assisted under the Higher Education Act of 1965 to: (1) 
distribute ``information'' with respect to the amount and type 
of academic credit provided to students at the institution of 
higher education for advanced placement test scores; and (2) 
standardize the form and manner in which the ``information'' is 
disseminated by the various departments, offices, or other 
divisions of the institution of higher education.

          Title IV--Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities

    Section 401--Amendment to the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act of 1965. This section amends title IV and inserts 
the following:

Part A--State Grants

    The new part A retains current law with respect to ``State 
Grants for Drug and Violence Prevention Programs,'' renaming 
title IV, part A as ``State Grants.''
    Provisions of title IV, part A include:
    Section 4001--Short Title. This section specifies that part 
A may be cited as the ``Safe and Drug-Free Schools and 
Communities Act of 1994.''
    Section 4002--Findings. This section provides new 
congressional findings regarding this part, including: (1) 
every student should attend a school in a drug-and violence-
free learning environment; (2) the widespread illegal use of 
alcohol and drugs among the Nation's secondary school students, 
and increasingly by students in elementary schools, constitutes 
a grave threat to such students' physical and mental well-
being, and significantly impedes the learning process; (3) drug 
and violence prevention programs are essential components of a 
comprehensive strategy to promote school safety, youth 
development, positive school outcomes, and to reduce the demand 
for and illegal use of alcohol, tobacco and drugs throughout 
the Nation; (4) drug and violence prevention programs are most 
effective when implemented within a research-based, drug and 
violence prevention framework of proven effectiveness; (5) 
research clearly shows that community contexts contribute to 
substance abuse and violence; (6) substance abuse and violence 
are intricately related and must be dealt with in a holistic 
manner; and (7) research has documented that parental behavior 
and environment directly influence a child's inclination to use 
alcohol, tobacco or drugs.
    Section 4003--Purpose. This section states the purpose of 
Part A which is to support programs that prevent violence in 
and around schools and prevent the illegal use of alcohol, 
tobacco, and drugs; involve parents; and are coordinated with 
related Federal, State, school, and community efforts and 
resources.
    Section 4004--Funding. This section authorizes funding 
levels for fiscal year 2001 and``such sums as may be 
necessary'' for the 4 succeeding fiscal years for the following 
programs: $700 million for the State Grants program under subpart 1; 
$150 million for the National Programs under subpart 2; and $75 million 
for the National Coordinator Initiative under section 4122.
            Subpart 1--State Grants for Drug and Violence Prevention 
                    Programs
    Section 4111--Reservations and Allotments. This section 
requires the Secretary to: reserve 1 percent of the amount made 
available under section 4004(1) for Guam, American Samoa, the 
Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 
Islands; reserve 1 percent of the same amount for the Secretary 
of the Interior to carry out programs under this part for 
Indian youth; reserve not more than $2 million for the National 
impact evaluation required by section 4117(a); and reserve 0.2 
percent of above amount for programs for Native Hawaiians under 
section 4118.
    Section 4112--State Applications. This section requires 
States seeking an allotment to submit an application to the 
Secretary including: a comprehensive plan for the use of funds 
under the Governor's program and the State Department of 
Education's program; a needs assessment and results of ongoing 
State evaluation activities; assurances that stakeholders were 
consulted; measurable goals; a description of how the funds 
will be spent; and a comprehensive plan for using and 
monitoring the funds received under title IV. The State plan 
shall also include a comprehensive plan for the Governor's 
program by the chief executive officer.
    Section 4113--State and Local Educational Agency Programs. 
This section reserves 80 percent of the funds made available to 
States to be used for State support and grants to local 
educational agencies for drug and violence prevention 
activities. State and local programs must implement activities 
that are research-based initiatives, and States are required to 
implement a uniform management and information reporting system 
so that expenditures of these funds can be clearly tracked. A 
State educational agency may use up to 5 percent of available 
funds for technical assistance and 5 percent for the 
administrative costs of carrying out responsibilities.
    State educational agencies may choose between the following 
two options for allocating remaining funds to local educational 
agencies: (1) at least 70 percent to schools based on 
enrollment and up to 30 percent allocated at the State's 
discretion or to schools the State determines to have the 
greatest need; or (2) up to 70 percent on a competitive basis 
to those schools with the greatest need, and 30 percent to 
those schools the State determines require additional help to 
run a program but who might not meet the ``greatest need'' 
criteria. These options would allow States to choose and define 
a competitive or baseline minimum grant system and still allow 
them to help those schools that could not compete under that 
system.
    Section 4114--Governor's Programs. This section reserves 20 
percent of a State's allocation for Governors programs of which 
not less than 95 percent of the funds must be used for 
research-based substance abuse/violence reduction through a 
broad range of activities. Governors are authorized to add 
their money directly to the funds being sent to schools and 
communities to serve out of school youth and to undertake 
community mobilization activities related to substance abuse 
and violence.
    Section 4115--Local Applications. This section states that 
in order to be eligible for a distribution under section 
4113(d), a local educational agency must submit an application 
to the State educational agency. The application shall: include 
a needs assessment; set measurable goals and objectives; 
utilize effective research-based programs; ensure participation 
of community groups; and include a program evaluation.
    Section 4116--Local Drug and Violence Prevention Programs. 
This section requires local educational agencies to use funds 
received under subpart 1 to adopt and carry out a comprehensive 
drug and violence prevention program. The program shall be 
designed for all students and school employees in order to 
prevent the use, possession, and distribution of tobacco, 
alcohol, and illegal drugs; prevent violence and promote school 
safety; and create a disciplined environment conducive to 
learning.
    Section 4117--Evaluations and Reporting. This section 
requires the Secretary of Education to consult with the newly 
created National Advisory Committee to conduct an independent 
biennial evaluation of the impact of programs assisted under 
subpart 1 and on other recent and new initiatives to combat 
violence in schools. The evaluation shall determine whether 
funded programs conform to the principles of effectiveness; 
target research-based programs such as risk factors and/or 
protective factors/buffers or assets; and reduce drug use, 
school violence, and the presence of firearms at schools. The 
Department of Education, States, and the Governors are required 
to implement program and financial monitoring. Every 2 years, 
States shall provide the Secretary with a report detailing the 
implementation and outcomes of the State's and local 
educational agencies programs and their effectiveness, the 
State's progress toward attaining its goals for drug and 
violence prevention, and the State's efforts to inform parents 
of, and include parents in, violence and drug prevention 
efforts. In addition, local educational agencies are required 
to provide State educational agencies with the information they 
may need to complete the State reports.
    Section 4118--Programs for Native Hawaiians. This section 
authorizes the Secretary to provide grants to or enter into 
cooperative agreements with organizations that serve and 
represent Native Hawaiians in order to plan, conduct, and 
administer programs that are authorized by and consistent with 
the provisions of title IV for the benefit of Native Hawaiians. 
For the purposes of this section, Native Hawaiians are those 
individuals whose ancestors were natives, prior to 1778, of the 
area which now comprises the State of Hawaii.
            Subpart 2--National Programs
    Section 4121--Federal Activities. This section authorizes 
the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Health and 
Human Services, the Director of the Office of National Drug 
Control Policy, and the Attorney General, to carry out programs 
to prevent the illegal use ofdrugs and violence among students, 
and to promote safety and discipline for students. The Secretary may 
carry out programs directly or award grants to local educational 
agencies for the hiring and training of drug prevention and school 
safety program coordinators.
    Section 4122--National Coordinator Program. This section 
states that the Secretary shall provide for the establishment 
of a National Coordinator Program under which grants are 
awarded to local educational agencies for the hiring of drug 
prevention and school safety program coordinators. Coordinators 
shall be responsible for developing, conducting, and analyzing 
assessments of drug and crime problems at their schools, and 
administering the safe and drug free grant program.
    Section 4123--Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities 
Advisory Committee. This section creates a Safe and Drug Free 
Schools and Communities Advisory Committee. The Advisory 
Committee shall: coordinate Federal drug and violence 
prevention programs; develop core data sets and evaluation 
programs; provide technical assistance and training; provide 
for the diffusion of research-based programs; and review other 
regulations and standards developed under this title. The 
committee will include representatives from the Department of 
Education, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the 
National Institute on Drug Abuse, the National Institute on 
Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse, the Center for Substance Abuse 
Prevention, the Center for Mental Health Services, the Office 
of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, the Office of 
National Drug Control Policy, and the State and local 
government education agency representatives. The Advisory 
Committee shall annually consult with State and local 
coordinators of school and community-based substance abuse and 
violence prevention programs and other interested groups.
    Section 4124--Hate Crime Prevention. This section 
authorizes the Secretary to make grants to local educational 
agencies and community-based organizations for the purpose of 
providing assistance to localities most directly affected by 
hate crimes. Grants may be used to: (1) develop education and 
training programs designed to prevent and reduce the incidences 
of crimes motivated by hate; (2) develop curriculum to improve 
conflict or dispute resolution skills of students, teachers and 
administrators; (3) develop equipment and instructional 
materials to meet the needs of hate crime or conflict programs; 
and (4) provide professional training and development for 
teachers and administrators on the causes, effects, and 
resolutions of hate crimes.
    Section 4124(b)(2) requires local educational agencies 
seeking a grant under this section to submit an application to 
the Secretary that includes a request for funds, a description 
of the schools and communities to be served by the grants, and 
an assurance that the Federal funds will be used to supplement 
and not supplant non-Federal funds. Applications shall also 
include a comprehensive plan describing the hate crime problems 
within the school or community and a description of the program 
to be developed or augmented by Federal funds.
    Section 4124(c) requires the Secretary, in awarding grants, 
to consider the incidence of crimes in the community and should 
attempt to achieve an equitable geographic distribution. If 
possible, the Secretary shall make available information 
regarding successful hate crime prevention programs. Every 2 
years, the Secretary shall submit a report to Congress 
describing the grants and awards, the activities of grant 
recipients, and an evaluation of programs established by this 
section.
            Subpart 3--General Provisions
    Section 4131--Definitions. This section provides the 
meanings of certain terms used in this subpart, including, 
``community-based organization,'' ``drug and violence 
prevention,'' ``hate crime,'' ``nonprofit,'' ``objectively 
measurable goals,'' ``protective factor, buffer, or asset,'' 
``risk factor,'' ``school-aged population,'' and ``school 
personnel.''
    Section 4132--Materials. This section states that drug 
prevention programs supported under part A should convey a 
message that the use of drugs and alcohol is illegal and 
harmful. In addition, the Secretary may not prescribe the use 
of specific curriculum for programs supported under this part, 
but may evaluate the effectiveness of the curriculum.
    Section 4133--Prohibited Uses of Funds. This section 
prohibits the use of funds under part A for construction and 
medical services, drug treatment or rehabilitation, except for 
pupil services or referral to treatment for students who are 
victims or witnesses to crime or who use alcohol or drugs.
    Section 4134--Quality Rating. This section encourages 
States to establish a standard of quality for drug and alcohol 
prevention programs implemented in elementary and secondary 
schools and to identify and designate a school that achieves 
such standard as a quality program school. The standard shall 
address: a comparison of the rate of illegal use of drugs and 
alcohol by students; the rate of suspensions or expulsions of 
students for offenses; the effectiveness of the prevention 
programs; the involvement of parents and community members in 
the design of prevention programs; and the extent of review of 
existing community prevention programs before implementation of 
the public school program. Schools wishing to receive a quality 
school program designation shall submit a request to the State 
and the State shall create a list of the designated schools for 
the public.
    Section 402--Gun-Free Requirements. This section amends 
title IV by adding the following:

Part B--Gun Possession

    Part B retains current law with respect to ``Gun 
Possession'' (title XIV, part F), but moves the provisions to 
title IV, part B.
    Section 4201--Gun-Free Requirements. This section specifies 
that this part may be cited as the ``Gun-Free Schools Act of 
1994.'' Part B requires States receiving Federal funds under 
thisact to have a State law requiring local educational 
agencies to expel from school for at least 1 year any student who 
brings a weapon to school. This part should not prevent a local 
educational agency that has expelled a student from the student's 
regular school setting from providing educational services to the 
student in an alternative setting. Local educational agencies seeking 
assistance from State educational agencies, shall provide to the State 
an assurance that such local educational agency is in compliance with 
the State law and a description of the circumstances surrounding any 
expulsions imposed under the State law. States shall report this 
information to the Secretary on an annual basis.
    Section 4202--Policy Regarding Criminal Justice System 
Referral. This section states that no funds under part B shall 
be made available to a local educational agency unless the 
agency has a policy requiring referral to the criminal justice 
or juvenile delinquency system of any student who brings a 
firearm or weapon to a school served by the agency.
    Section 4203--School Safety and Violence Prevention. This 
section amends title IV by adding the following new provisions:

Part C--School Safety and Violence Prevention

    Section 4301--School Safety and Violence Prevention. This 
section states that Federal funds under title IV and VI of this 
act may be used for training school personnel to identify 
potential threats; to identify troubled youth; to make 
comprehensive school security assessments; to purchase metal 
detectors, locks, and surveillance cameras; to engage in 
collaborative efforts with community-based organizations to 
reduce violence; to establish school uniform policies; and to 
utilize other innovative programs to reduce school violence.
    Section 4302--School Uniforms. This section states that 
nothing in this act should be construed to prohibit schools 
from establishing a school uniform policy. Funds under title IV 
and title VI may be used to establish a school uniform policy.
    Section 4303--Transfer of School Disciplinary Records. This 
section requires States receiving Federal funds under this act 
to assure the Secretary that the State has a procedure in place 
by which local educational agencies must transfer the 
suspension and expulsion records of any student to any private 
or public elementary or secondary school in which that student 
seeks enrollment. This requirement does not apply to private 
schools.
    Section 4304--Disclaimer on Materials Produced, Procured or 
Distributed from Funding Authorized by this Act. This section 
requires that all materials produced, procured or distributed, 
as a result of Federal funding authorized under this act, 
contain a statement indicating that it has been made available 
at the expense of the Federal Government. The statement must 
also indicate that any individual who objects to the material 
or to representations made in it is encouraged to contact the 
Department of Education. The address of the office at the 
Department assigned to receive comments must also be listed. 
Every six months, the Secretary is to summarize the comments 
received and provide them to appropriate congressional 
committees and to the House and Senate leadership.
    Section 404--Background Checks. This section amends the 
National Child Protection Act of 1993 to specify that 
individuals who are employed, or seek employment, with schools 
are included in the provisions of that act relating to 
background checks.
    Section 405--Constitutionality of Memorial Services and 
Memorials at Public Schools. This section provides 
congressional findings stating that the saying of a prayer, the 
reading of a scripture, the performance of religious music, and 
the design or construction of any memorial which includes 
religious symbols and which is placed on school grounds does 
not violate the First Amendment of the Constitution. In 
addition, this section ensures that anyone seeking to challenge 
such memorials as unconstitutional must pay its own attorney's 
fees. The Attorney General of the United States is authorized 
to provide assistance to any school district defending the 
legality of the memorial service.
    Section 406--Environmental Tobacco Smoke. This section 
amends title IV by adding the following provision:

Part D--Environmental Tobacco Smoke

    The ``environmental tobacco smoke'' provisions currently 
contained in title X, part C of the Goals 2000: Educate America 
Act have been transferred to this act and are described below.
    Section 4401--Short Title. This section specifies that this 
part may be cited as the ``Pro-Children Act of 2000.''
    Section 4402--Definitions. This section provides the 
meanings of certain terms used in Part D, including: 
``children,'' ``children's services,'' ``indoor facility,'' 
``person,'' and ``secretary.''
    Section 4403--Nonsmoking Policy for Children's Services. 
This section prohibits smoking within any indoor facility owned 
or leased or contracted for, and utilized for the provision of 
regular or routine kindergarten, elementary or secondary 
education or library services to children; or regular or 
routine health care or day care or early childhood development 
(Head Start services). Any portion of a facility that is used 
for inpatient hospital treatment of individuals dependent on, 
or addicted to drugs or alcohol and private residences are 
exempt from the provision. The prohibitions shall be published 
in the Federal Register by the Secretary. Such prohibitions 
shall be effective 90 days after such notice is published or 
270 days after the enactment of this act, whichever occurs 
first. Failure to comply with a prohibition shall be considered 
a violation of this act and a civil penalty in an amount not to 
exceed $1,000 shall be charged. A civil penalty may be assessed 
in a written notice, or an administrative compliance order may 
be issued.
    Section 4404--Preemption. This section states that nothing 
in this part is intended to preempt a provision of a State law 
or a political subdivision of a State that is more restrictive 
than a provision in this part.

              Title V--Educational Opportunity Initiatives

    Section 501--Educational Opportunity Initiatives. This 
section amends title V and inserts the following new 
provisions, renaming title V as ``Educational Opportunity 
Initiatives'' and part A as ``Technology Education.''
    Section 511--Technology Education. This section amends 
``Technology for Education of All Students,'' which is 
currently authorized as part A of title III of the act, and 
transfers it to part A of title V.

Part A--Technology Education

    Section 5111--Statement of Purpose. This section repeals 
the congressional findings in current law and states the new 
purpose of part A, which is to: provide all classrooms with 
educational technology including access to the Internet; ensure 
effective use of educational technology through professional 
development; improve capability of teachers to implement new 
learning experiences using technology; support efforts by State 
and local educational agencies to create learning environments 
designed to prepare students to achieve State performance 
standards; support technical assistance to all relevant 
educational agencies; support partnerships among business, 
industry, and the education community; support research on the 
effective use of classroom technology; encourage collaborative 
relationships among State agencies in the area of technology 
support in order to ensure that technology is accessible to all 
students; ensure that every child is computer-literate by the 
end of 8th grade; and support the use of educational technology 
to facilitate parental involvement.
    Section 5112--Definitions. This section provides the 
meanings of certain terms used in this part, including: ``adult 
education,'' ``all students,'' ``information infrastructure,'' 
``instructional programming,'' ``interoperable and 
interoperability,'' ``office,'' ``public telecommunications 
entity,'' ``regional educational laboratory,'' ``State 
educational agency,'' ``State library administrative agency,'' 
and ``technology.''
    Section 5113--Authorization of Appropriations. This section 
authorizes an increase in funding to $815 million for fiscal 
year 2001 and ``such sums as necessary'' for the 4 succeeding 
fiscal years to carry out subparts 1, 2, and 3. Of that amount, 
$5 million is available for Federal leadership activities 
(subpart 1) and $10 million for the Regional Technology in 
Education Consortia (subpart 3) in fiscal year 2001, not to 
exceed 0.5 percent of total appropriations in the remaining 
fiscal years. For any remaining funds, 70 percent shall be 
available for the Technology Literacy Fund (formula program to 
States) and 30 percent for Technology Innovation Grants 
(competitive grant). This new section ensures that the formula 
grant programs to States will not receive less than it did in 
fiscal year 2000.
    Section 5114--Limitation on Costs. This section restricts 
the use of funds for administrative costs to less than 5 
percent of total funding.
            Subpart 1--National Programs for Technology in Education
    Section 5121--National Long-Range Technology Plan. This 
section amends section 3121 of the act to require the Secretary 
to update, publish, and disseminate not later than 12 months 
after the date of enactment of the Educational Opportunities 
Act, the national long-range plan that supports the overall 
national technology policy.
    Section 5121(c) amends section 3121(c) of the act by adding 
two new activities for the Secretary to undertake in order to 
promote the purposes of title V. The new activities include: 
(1) how the Secretary will promote the full integration of 
technology into learning, including the creation of new 
instructional opportunities through access to challenging 
courses and information that would otherwise not have been 
available, and independent learning opportunities for students 
through technology; and (2) how the Secretary will encourage 
the creation of opportunities for teachers to develop through 
the use of technology, their own networks and resources for 
sustained and intensive, high quality professional development.
    Section 5122--Federal Leadership. This section amends 
section 3122 of the act by requiring the Secretary to consult 
with the White House Office of Science and Technology, instead 
of the United States National Commission on Libraries and 
Information Sciences, in order to provide Federal leadership in 
promoting the use of technology in education.
    Section 5122(b) amends section 3122(b) of the act by 
deleting the language which requires the Secretary to provide 
assistance to States in effectively using technology in the 
classroom in accordance with the purpose and requirements of 
the Goals 2000: Educate American Act. The new language simply 
requires the Secretary to provide assistance to the States to 
enable such States to plan effectively for the use of 
technology in all schools throughout the State.
            Subpart 2--State and Local Programs for School Technology 
                    Resources
    Section 5131--Allotment and Reallotment. This section 
amends section 3131 of the act by adding a provision to require 
the Secretary to reserve an amount equal to one-half of 1 
percent of the amount available to carry out section 5132 for 
each fiscal year to provide grants to outlying areas in amounts 
that are based on the relative needs of such areas in 
accordance with the purposes of section 5132.
    Section 5132--Technology Literacy Fund. This section 
authorizes the Secretary, through the Office of Educational 
Technology, to award grants to State educational agencies with 
approved applications. Grant funds shall be used to award 
grants to local educational agencies to enable them to carry 
out various education technology activities. Grants shall be 
targeted toward local educational agencies with the highest 
rates of poverty and the greatest need for technical 
assistance.
    Section 5133--State Application. This section requires 
State educational agenciesseeking funds under Subpart 2 to 
submit a statewide educational technology plan to the Secretary. The 
criteria for the statewide plan remains the same as current law, except 
for a new provision requesting the submission of the State educational 
agency's specific goals for using advanced technologies to improve 
student achievement and performance to challenging State academic 
content and performance standards.
    Section 5134--Local Uses of Funds. This section describes 
the various initiatives in which funds provided through grants 
from State educational agencies shall be used by local 
educational agencies. The initiatives remain the same except 
for a few additions, including: (1) adapting or expanding 
existing and new applications of technology to enable teachers 
to help students achieve to challenging State academic content 
and student performance standards through the use of research-
based teaching practices and advanced technologies; (2) 
carrying out programs that prepare prospective teachers to use 
advanced technology to foster learning environments conducive 
to preparing all students to achieve challenging State and 
local content and student performance standards through the use 
of various models including school-based professional 
development; (3) supporting in-school and school-community 
collaboration to make more effective and efficient use of 
existing investments in technology; (4) utilizing technology to 
develop or expand efforts to connect schools and teachers with 
parents to promote parental involvement and increase 
communication about curriculum, assignments, and assessments; 
(5) providing support to help parents understand the technology 
being applied in their children's education so that parents 
will reinforce their children's learning; (6) using web-based 
learning resources; and (7) providing education technology for 
advanced placement instruction.
    Section 5135--Local Applications. This section requires 
local educational agencies seeking assistance from a State 
educational agency to submit an application consistent with the 
objectives of the systemic statewide plan. The requirements of 
the application are the same as those in current law, except 
for an update to current references and a few additions to the 
list of application requirements. The additional requirements 
include: a description of how parents will be informed of the 
use of technologies so that parents can reinforce at home the 
instruction their children receive in school; a description of 
how the local educational agency will improve parental 
involvement in schools; a description of how the consortia of 
schools will develop or redesign teacher preparation programs 
to enable prospective teachers to use technology effectively in 
their classroom; and a description of how the local educational 
agency will effectively use technology to promote parental 
involvement and increase communication with parents.
    Section 5136--National Technology Innovation Grants. This 
section authorizes the Secretary to award grants to a consortia 
containing 1 local educational agency with a high number of 
children living below the poverty line. This new section amends 
section 3136 of the act by allowing the Secretary to award 
``continuation'' grants to entities receiving grants under the 
Preparing Tomorrow's Teachers to Use Technology Program. This 
section also amends current law to enhance parental involvement 
and use education technology for advanced placement 
instruction. In addition, this new section allows members of 
the consortium of schools to serve as fiscal agents for the 
consortium.
    Section 5137--Federal Administration. This section requires 
the Secretary to develop procedures for State and local 
evaluations of the programs under Subpart 2. This new section 
amends section 3137 of the act by requiring the Secretary to 
submit to Congress an evaluation of the State and local 
outcomes of the technology literacy challenge funds program and 
of the technology innovations challenge grant program, no later 
than 3 years after the enactment of this title; and to submit 
to Congress a summary of the State evaluations of programs 
under Subpart 2, no later than 2 years after the enactment of 
this title.
            Subpart 3--Regional Technical Support and Professional 
                    Development
    Section 5141--Regional Technical Support and Professional 
Development. This section authorizes the Secretary, through the 
Office of Educational Technology, to make grants to regional 
entities, ensuring that each geographic region of the United 
States is served by a consortium. Each consortium receiving a 
grant shall provide technical assistance and professional 
development to local educational agencies and schools to 
increase and improve education technology information. This new 
section also requires entities receiving grants under this 
section to prepare and submit to the Secretary a report 
concerning activities undertaken with grant funds, no later 
than 3 months after the enactment of this title.
    Unfunded programs including ``Product Development,'' 
currently Subpart 4 of title III, part A and ``Elementary 
Mathematics and Science Equipment Program,'' currently title 
III, part E are eliminated.
    Section 522--Star Schools. This section amends ``Star 
Schools Program,'' which is currently authorized as part B of 
title III of the act, and transfers it to part B of title V.

Part B--Star Schools

    Section 5201--Short Title. This section states that the 
short title of part B is the ``Star Schools Act.''
    Section 5202--Purpose. This section states that the purpose 
is to encourage improved instruction in mathematics, science, 
and foreign languages and challenging and advanced courses to 
serve underserved populations, through a Star Schools program 
under which grants are made to eligible telecommunications 
partnerships, to enable partnerships to develop 
telecommunications facilities, and equipment in order to 
promote educational instructional programming.
    Section 5203--Grants Authorized. This section authorizes 
the Secretary, through the Office of Educational Technology, to 
make grants to eligible entities to pay the Federal share of 
the cost of the development of interactive instructional 
programming and web-based teacher training. The section 
authorizes a funding level of $50 million for fiscal year 2001 
and ``such sums as necessary'' for the 4 succeeding fiscal 
years.
    Section 5203(i) authorizes the Advanced Placement 
Instruction program, to encourage entities receiving funds 
under part B to provide advanced placement instruction to 
underserved communities.
    Section 5204--Eligible Entities. This section authorizes 
the Secretary to make grants to any eligible entity, if at 
least one local educational agency is participating in the 
project. This section defines an eligible entity for the 
purposes of this section and amends provisions of current law 
to update references. Other provisions of current law are 
maintained.
    Section 5205--Applications. This section requires eligible 
entities seeking a grant under this section to submit an 
application to the Secretary. Requirements of the application 
and those projects receiving priority are described. Other 
provisions of current law are maintained.
    Section 5206--Definitions. This section provides the 
meanings for certain terms used in this part, including 
``educational institution,'' ``instructional programming,'' and 
``public broadcasting entity.'' Other provisions of current law 
are maintained.
    Section 5207--Administrative Provisions. This section 
provides guidelines for entities to apply for a second grant 
and provides that the Secretary may assist grant recipients in 
acquiring transmissions technologies. Other provisions of 
current law are maintained.
    Section 5208--Other Assistance. This section provides that 
the Secretary may make grants to State and local 
telecommunication networks. The new section authorizes the 
Secretary to provide grants to eligible entities for continuing 
education. Other provisions of current law are maintained.
    Section 531--Magnet Schools Assistance. This section amends 
``Magnet Schools Assistance,'' which is currently authorized as 
part A of title V of the act, and transfers it to part C of 
title V.

Part C--Magnet Schools Assistance

    Section 5301--Findings and Statement of Purpose. This 
section provides congressional findings and the purpose of this 
part which is to assist in the desegregation of schools served 
by local educational agencies by providing financial assistance 
to: (1) eliminate, reduce, or prevent minority group isolation; 
(2) promote systemic reform efforts; (3) develop innovative 
educational methods and practices; (4) develop courses of 
instruction which strengthen knowledge of academic subjects and 
marketable skills; (5) improve capacity of magnet schools to 
operate after Federal funding is terminated; and (6) ensure 
that magnet schools students have equitable access to the 
education necessary to succeed.
    Section 5302--Program Authorized. This section authorizes 
the Secretary to make grants to local educational agencies for 
magnet schools.
    Section 5303--Definition. This section defines the term 
``magnet school.''
    Section 5304--Eligibility. This section defines eligibility 
standards for the receipt of magnet school grants.
    Section 5305--Applications and Requirements. This section 
requires a local educational agency seeking assistance under 
this part to submit an application to the Secretary. This 
section also includes a description of the requirements of the 
application.
    Section 5305(b)(2)(E) amends current law to provide 
equitable consideration for students in the local attendance 
area, consistent with desegregation guidelines and the capacity 
of the program to accommodate these students. Other provisions 
of current law are maintained.
    Section 5306--Priority. This section provides guidelines 
for the prioritization of applicants by the Secretary. This 
section amends current law by giving priority to applicants 
that propose activities to build local capacity to operate the 
program once Federal assistance has ended. Other provisions of 
current law are maintained.
    Section 5307--Use of Funds. This section specifies the 
allowable uses of grant funds. This new section amends current 
law to: allow grant recipients to use funds for professional 
development in order to facilitate self-sufficiency after 
Federal assistance has ended; offer the flexibility of a magnet 
school program in order to serve local students not enrolled in 
a magnet school program; and enable the local educational 
agency to have flexibility in designing magnet schools for 
students of all grades. Other provisions of current law are 
maintained.
    Section 5308--Prohibition. This section prohibits the use 
of funds for transportation or any activity that does not 
augment academic improvement.
    Section 5309--Limitations. This section provides for the 
duration of awards, limits on planning funds, and amount and 
timing of awards. This section increases the percentage of 
funds which may be expended for planning in the second and 
third years to 25 and 15 percent respectively. This section 
also clarifies that professional development is not planning.
    Section 5310--Innovative Programs. This section authorizes 
the Secretary to award grants to local educational agencies to 
conduct innovative programs that involve strategies other than 
magnet schools to achieve desegregation goals and assist 
students in meeting State and local standards. This section 
amends provisions of current law to update references. Other 
provisions of current law are maintained.
    Section 5311--Evaluations. This section provides guidelines 
for evaluations of projects under this part and for technical 
assistance for grant recipients. This new section amends 
current law to provide that evaluations shall address how 
magnet school programs will continue once assistance under this 
part has ended. This section also amends current law to require 
the Secretary to collect and disseminate information to the 
public on successful magnet school programs. Finally, this 
section amends provisions of current law to update references. 
Other provisions of current law are maintained.
    Section 5312--Authorization of Appropriations; Reservation. 
This section authorizes a funding level of $125 million for 
fiscal year 2001 and ``such sums as may be necessary'' for the 
4 succeeding fiscal years. Other provisions of current law are 
maintained.

Part D Public--Charter Schools

    Section 541--Public Charter Schools. This section amends 
``Public Charter Schools,'' which is currently authorized as 
part C of title X of the act, and transfers it to part D of 
title V. This section amends ``Public Charter Schools'' to: (1) 
eliminate the congressional findings and the purposes of this 
part; (2) increase the funding level to $175 million for fiscal 
year 2001; and (3) make minor drafting changes for purposes of 
clarification and consistency. Other provisions of current law 
are maintained.

Part E--Women's Educational Equity

    Section 521 of the bill amends the Women's Educational 
Equity Act (WEEA), which is currently authorized as Part B of 
title V of the act, and transfers it to part E of title V. 
Section 521 amends WEEA to: (1) eliminate the statement of 
findings; (2) make minor drafting changes for purposes of 
clarification and consistency; (3) change the reference to 
``the National Education Goals'' to ``America's Education 
Goals''; (4) delete an obsolete reference to the School-to-Work 
Opportunities Act of 1994; (5) update deadlines for issuance of 
reports by the Secretary dealing with the status of educational 
equity for girls and women (due January 1, 2004) and with 
evaluation materials and programs (due January 1, 2004); (6) 
authorize $5 million for fiscal year 2001 and ``such sums as 
may be necessary'' for the 4 succeeding fiscal years to carry 
out this part; and (7) delete provisions providing that two-
thirds of the funds are to be used to support the development 
and implementation of equity programs.
    Section 551 of the bill amends title V of the act to add 5 
additional parts to the title. Each of these additional parts 
includes amended versions of programs authorized under current 
law. Part F (Civic Education) includes programs currently 
authorized under part F of title X (Civic Education) and under 
title VI of Goals 2000: Educate America Act (International 
Education Exchange Program). Part G (Fund for the Improvement 
of Education) is currently authorized under part A of title X 
of the act. Part H (Allen J. Ellender Fellowship Program) is 
currently authorized under part G of title X of the act. Part I 
(Ready-to-Learn Television) is currently authorized under part 
C of title III of the act. Part J (Inexpensive Book 
Distribution) is currently authorized under part E of title X 
of the act.

Part F--Civic Education

    New Section 5601--Short Title. This section provides that 
the short title of part F is the ``Education for Democracy 
Act''.
    New Section 5602--The Study of the Declaration of 
Independence, United States Constitution, and the Federalist 
Papers. This section includes sense-of-the-Congress 
languagethat students should be encouraged to study the Declaration of 
Independence, the Constitution, and the Federalist Papers.
    New Section 5603--Purpose. This section states that the 
purpose of the part is to: improve the quality of civics and 
government education; foster civic competence and 
responsibility; and improve the quality of civic and economic 
education through cooperative exchanges with other democracies.
    New Section 5604--General Authority. This section provides 
that the Secretary is authorized to award grants or contracts 
to the Center for Civic Education, the National Council on 
Economic Education, or other nonprofit educational 
organizations to carry out this part.
    New Section 5605--We The People Program. This section 
provides authority for 2 domestic programs: (1) The Citizen and 
the Constitution and (2) Project Citizen. Both programs are to 
be made available to public and private schools in all 435 
congressional districts, all 50 States, Bureau of Indian 
Affairs schools, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the 
United States Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the 
Northern Mariana Islands.
    New section 5605(a) authorizes the Citizen and the 
Constitution program, which is to provide: a course of 
instruction on the principles of our Nation's constitutional 
democracy and on the history of the United States Constitution 
and the Bill of Rights; simulated Congressional hearings; an 
annual national competition for secondary schools students 
wishing to participate in such a program; advanced teacher 
training; and civic education materials and services to address 
specific problems such as school violence and the abuse of 
drugs and alcohol.
    New section 5605(b) authorizes the Project Citizen program, 
which is to provide: a course of instruction at the middle 
school level on the roles of State and local governments in the 
Federal system; optional simulated State legislative hearings; 
an annual showcase or competition; advanced teacher training; 
materials and services to address problems such as school 
violence and the abuse of drugs and alcohol.
    New Section 5606--Civic Education and Economic Education 
Exchange Programs. This section updates and makes minor changes 
to the existing cooperative education exchange programs in 
civics and government education and economics education 
authorized under title VI of Goals 2000: Educate America Act. 
The purpose of these programs is to provide to eligible 
countries cooperative education exchange programs in both 
civics and government education and economics education. 
Program activities include: (1) seminars on the major 
governmental and economic institutions and systems in the 
United States, including visits to such institutions; (2) 
visits to schools systems, institutions of higher education, 
and organizations conducting exemplary programs; (3) 
development of relevant materials on eligible countries for use 
in U.S. classrooms; (4) translations and adaptations of 
materials; and (5) research and evaluation. In administering 
the program, the Secretary of Education is to consult with the 
Secretary of State to ensure that the activities do not 
duplicate other efforts in the eligible countries and to ensure 
that partner institutions in the eligible countries are 
creditable. Eligible countries include any Central or Eastern 
European country, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, any independent 
State of the former Soviet Union, and may include Northern 
Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, and any developing country as 
so defined in the Education of the Deaf Act.
    New Section 5607--Authorization of Appropriations. This 
section authorizes $10 million for fiscal year 2001 for each 
component (domestic and international) and ``such sums as may 
be necessary'' for the 4 succeeding fiscal years.

Part G--Fund for the Improvement of Education

    The new part G of the bill reauthorizes and makes 
substantial revision in the Fund for the Improvement of 
Education (FIE), which is currently authorized as part A of 
title X. The Comprehensive School Reform Program currently 
funded under FIE is transferred to title I, and the lengthy 
list of permissive uses of funds included in current law is 
deleted.
    New Section 5701--Fund for the Improvement of Education. 
This section authorizes the Secretary to award competitive 
grants to support nationally significant programs to improve 
the quality of elementary and secondary education. Funds may be 
used for the character education, scholar-athlete competitions, 
school counseling, smaller learning communities, and mock 
election programs specifically authorized in part G--as well as 
for the identification and recognition of exemplary schools and 
programs and for the development and evaluation of model 
strategies for professional development for teachers and 
administrators. A funding level of $100 million is authorized 
for fiscal year 2001 and ``such sums as may be necessary'' for 
the 4 succeeding fiscal years.
    New Section 5702--Partnerships in Character Education 
Program. This section authorizes the Secretary to award grants 
to implement character education programs incorporating the 
elements of caring, civic virtue and citizenship, justice and 
fairness, respect, responsibility, and trustworthiness. The new 
section amends provisions of current law to: (1) expand the 
pool of eligible applicants (which are currently limited to 
State educational agencies in partnership with local 
educational agencies); (2) strike language restricting a State 
educational agency to no more than $1 million in character 
education grants; (3) reduce the grant duration period from 5 
years to 3 years; (4) revise the application provisions to 
reflect the expanded array of eligible applicants and to place 
greater emphasis on program objectives, evaluation, community 
outreach, and links to student performance; (5) revise the 
evaluation and program development provisions to reflect the 
expanded array of eligible applications; (6) include new 
provisions regarding national research, evaluation, and 
dissemination--for which up to 5 percent of the funds available 
for character education may be used and for which the Secretary 
may enter into partnerships with national, nonprofit character 
education organizations with expertise in implementing local 
programs; (7) revise the use of funds provisions to reflect the 
addition of eligible applicants; (8) provide that State 
educational agency recipients may use up to 10 percent of funds 
for administrative purposes and specify the activities for 
which the remaining 90 percent of funds may be used; (9) revise 
the selection of grantees provisions to reflect the expanded 
arrayof eligible applicants and to place greater emphasis on 
community outreach and links to student performance; and (10) add new 
provisions dealing with the participation of private school students 
and teachers.
    New Section 5703--Promoting Scholar-Athlete Competitions. 
This section authorizes the Secretary to award a grant to a 
nonprofit organization for the purpose of conducting scholar-
athlete games. The new section amends provisions of current law 
to update references. Other provisions of current law are 
maintained.
    New Section 5704--Elementary School Counseling 
Demonstration. This section authorizes the Secretary to award 
grants to establish or expand elementary school counseling 
programs. The new section amends provisions of current law to 
update the definitions of ``school psychologist'' and ``school 
social worker''. Other provisions of current law are 
maintained.
    New Section 5705--Smaller Learning Communities. This 
section authorizes the Secretary to award grants to local 
educational agencies to assist in the establishment of smaller 
learning communities. The new section amends provisions of 
current law to: (1) expand the pool of eligible applicants to 
include not only local educational agencies but also an 
elementary or secondary school, a Bureau funded school, or any 
of these entities in partnership with other public agencies or 
private nonprofit organizations; (2) make technical and 
conforming changes; and (3) add new provisions requiring 
recipients to submit an annual report to the Secretary which 
describes the use of grant funds and evidence of the impact of 
the grant on student performance and school safety. Other 
provisions of current law are maintained.
    New Section 5706--National Student and Parent Mock 
Election. This section authorizes the Secretary to award grants 
to national nonprofit, nonpartisan organizations that work to 
promote voter participation in elections. The new section 
amends provisions of current law to: (1) expand participation 
by including students and parents from the Territories, 
Department of Defense Dependent schools, and other 
international locales where Americans are based; and (2) 
require that all votes be recorded at least 5 days prior to the 
date of the general election. Other provisions of current law 
are maintained.

Part H--Allen J. Ellender Fellowship Program

    The new part H of the bill reauthorizes the Allen J. 
Ellender Fellowship Program currently authorized under part G 
of title X of the act. The program is amended to delete the 
findings and substitute a statement of purpose for the program 
and to authorize funds for fiscal years 2001 through 2005. 
Other provisions of current law are maintained.
    New Section 5801--Purpose. This section provides that the 
purpose of the program is to provide fellowships to low-income 
students, recent immigrants, students of migrant parents and 
the teachers who work with them, as well as older Americans, to 
participate in Close Up Foundation programs.
            Subpart 1--Programs for Middle and Secondary School 
                    Students
    New section 5811--Establishment. This section authorizes 
the Secretary to make grants to the Close Up Foundation to make 
financial aid available to low-income middle and secondary 
school students to allow them to participate in programs to 
increase their understanding of the Federal Government.
    New section 5812--Applications. This section provides that 
applications for grants under subpart 1 contain assurances that 
funds will be used to assist economically disadvantaged middle 
and secondary school students, to assure the participation of 
students from both rural and urban areas, and to give special 
consideration to students with special educational needs.
            Subpart 2--Program for Middle and Secondary School Teachers
    New Section 5821--Establishment. This section authorizes 
the Secretary to make grants to the Close Up Foundation to make 
financial aid available to middle and secondary school teachers 
for enhancement of teaching skills.
    New section 5812--Applications. This section provides that 
applications for grants under subpart 2 contain assurances that 
funds will be used to assist teachers who work with a student 
or students participating in the programs authorized under 
subpart 1 and that no more than 1 teacher in each participating 
school receives a fellowship in any fiscal year.
            Subpart 3--Programs for Recent Immigrants, Students of 
                    Migrant Parents and Older Americans
    New Section 5831--Establishment. This section authorizes 
the Secretary to make grants to the Close Up Foundation to make 
financial aid available to low-income older Americans, recent 
immigrants, and students of migrant parents to allow them to 
participate in programs to increase their understanding of the 
Federal Government.
    New section 5832--Applications. This section provides that 
applications for grants under subpart 3 contain assurances that 
funds will be used to assist economically disadvantaged older 
Americans, recent immigrants, and students of migrant parents; 
to assure the participation of these individuals from both 
rural and urban areas; and to give special consideration to 
those with special needs.
            Subpart 4--General Provisions
    New section 5841--Administrative Provisions. This section 
provides for audits by the Comptroller General.
    New section 5842--Authorization of Appropriations. This 
section authorizes $1.5 million for fiscal year 2001 and ``such 
sums as may be necessary'' for the 4 succeeding fiscal years. 
No more than 30 percent of the funds may be used for financial 
aid to teachers.

Part I--Ready-To-Learn Television

    Section 5901--Ready-To-Learn. This section authorizes the 
Secretary to award grants to eligible entities to develop, 
produce and distribute educational and instructional video 
programming for preschool and elementary school children and 
their parents, and to make them available to as wide an 
audience as possible. This section amends provisions of current 
law to update references.
    Section 5902--Educational Programming. This section 
authorizes the Secretary to award grants to eligible entities 
to facilitate the development of educational programming for 
preschool and elementary school children, and defines an 
eligible entity. This section amends current law by awarding 
grants to entities to develop programming for distribution over 
the Internet.
    Section 5902(b)(1) removes the provision that an entity 
shall be a nonprofit organization.
    Section 5903--Duties of Secretary. This section authorizes 
the Secretary to award grants to: address the learning needs of 
young children in limited English proficient households; 
develop materials to increase family literacy skills; support 
programs that promote school readiness; develop training 
materials adaptable to distance learning technologies; and 
establish a clearinghouse of information, reference materials, 
and programming.
    Section 5904--Applications. This section requires each 
entity seeking a grant under this part to submit an application 
to the Secretary. The application shall include such 
information as the Secretary may require.
    Section 5905--Reports and Evaluation. This section requires 
eligible entities to submit an annual report to the Secretary 
and details minimum content of the report. This section also 
instructs the Secretary to submit a biannual report to 
Congress. In addition, this section amends provisions of 
current law to update references.
    Section 5906--Administrative Costs. This section limits to 
5 percent the use of grant funding for administrative costs.
    Section 5907--Definition. This section defines the term 
``distance learning'' for the purposes of this part.
    Section 5908--Authorization of Appropriations. This section 
authorizes an increase in funding from the current $16 million 
to $50 million for fiscal year 2001 and ``such sums as may be 
necessary'' for the 4 succeeding fiscal years. This section 
repeals the requirement in current law that 10 percent of the 
funds be allocated for innovative programs that promote school 
readiness.

Part J--Inexpensive Book Distribution Program

    Section 5951--Inexpensive Book Distribution Program for 
Reading Motivation. This section authorizes the Secretary to 
enter into a contract with the ``Reading is Fundamental'' 
program designed to enhance distribution of inexpensive books 
in order to motivate children to read. This section details 
requirements of ``Reading is Fundamental'' program contracts. 
In addition, a funding level of $25 million is appropriated for 
fiscal year 2001 and ``such sums as may be necessary'' for the 
4 succeeding fiscal years.

                     Title VI--Innovative Education

    Section 601 of the bill rewrites title VI of the act. Under 
the bill, title VI contains 8 parts. Part A (Innovative 
Education Program Strategies) includes the programs and 
activities authorized under title VI of the current law. Part B 
(Rural Flexibility) is a new initiative which is designed to 
provide adequate funding to rural school districts for 
improving student performance. Part C (Education Flexibility 
Partnerships) incorporates the Education Flexibility 
Partnership Act, which was signed into law in 1999 as a free-
standing bill, into the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. 
Part D (Flexibility in the Use of Administrative and Other 
Funds) includes the provisions of part B of title XIV of the 
current law. Part E (Coordination of Programs; Consolidated 
State and Local Plans and Applications) includes the provisions 
of part C of title XIV of the current law. Part F (Waivers) 
includes the provisions of part D of title XIV of the current 
law. Part G (Education Performance Partnerships) is a new 
initiative which is designed to give States the opportunity to 
combine federal education formula grant funds in ways which 
will increase the academic achievement of their students. Part 
H (Academic Achievement for All Demonstration) is another new 
State flexibility initiative which will provide up to 15 States 
with broad authority to combine federal education formula grant 
funds in exchange for improving the performance of all 
students.

Part A--Innovative Education Program Strategies

    Title VI, part A makes modifications to the current law and 
includes the following provisions:
    Section 6101--Purpose; State and Local Responsibility. 
Section 6101(a) lists the purposes for title VI which are: to 
support local and state education reform efforts; to provide a 
continuing source of innovation and educational improvement, 
including support for library services and instructional and 
media materials; and to develop education programs to improve 
school, student, and teacher performance including professional 
development and class size reduction programs.
    Section 6101(b) specifies that the administration of these 
funds are the responsibility of the State educational agencies 
and the responsibility for design and implementation of the 
programs rests primarily with local educational agencies.
    Section 6102--Authorization of Appropriations; Duration of 
Assistance. Section 6102(a) authorizes $850 million for fiscal 
year 2001 and such sums for fiscal years 2002 through 2005.
    Section 6102(b) authorizes the Secretary to make payments 
to State educational agencies in accordance with the purposes 
described under section 6101(a).
    Section 6103--Definition of Effective Schools Program. 
Section 6103 describes an effective schools program as: 
promoting school-level planning; instructional improvement; and 
staff development for all personnel; and increasing academic 
performance for all children.
            Subpart 1--State and Local Programs
    Section 6111--Allotment to States. Section 6111(a) 
specifies the percentage of funds reserved for the outlying 
areas for title VI activities.
    Section 6111(b) establishes the State allotment formula.
    Section 6111(c) defines school-age population and State as 
they apply to State allotment.
    Section 6112--Allocation to Local educational agencies. 
Section 6112(a) describes the allocation of funds to local 
educational agencies.
    Section 6112(b) describes the calculation of enrollments.
    Section 6112(c) specifies the distribution of funds from 
the State educational agency to the local educational agency.
            Subpart 2--State Programs
    Section 6121--State Use of Funds. Section 6121(a) 
authorizes the State educational agency activities which 
include: State administration; support for planning and 
implementing charter schools; support for designing and 
implementing student assessments; support for State and local 
standards implementation; and technical assistance.
    Section 6121(b) specifies the amount of funds available for 
State administration.
    Section 6122--State Applications. Section 6122(a) specifies 
the State application requirements.
    Section 6122(b) specifies that the State application is for 
a period of 3 years and may be amended annually.
    Section 6122(c) specifies that a local educational agency 
that receives less than an average of $10,000 under this part, 
for 3 years will not be audited more than once every 5 years.
            Subpart 3--Local Innovative Education Programs
    Section 6131--Targeted Use of Funds. Section 6131(a) 
establishes that local educational agencies shall use the funds 
awarded under title VI, part A, for innovative assistance.
    Section 6131(b) describes an array of activities, programs, 
and initiatives that may be used for innovative assistance. 
These include: programs for the acquisition of instructional 
and educational materials (such as library services, media 
materials, and assessments); professional development programs; 
activities designed to advance student performance; parental 
involvement initiatives; programs to reduce class size; 
programs to improve academic performance of educationally 
disadvantaged students; expansion of best practice models; 
literacy programs; technology activities; school improvement 
programs; activities for gifted and talented students; programs 
to provide same gender schools or classrooms; service learning 
programs; and school safety programs. All activities shall be: 
tied to promoting high academic standards; used to improve 
student performance; and part of an overall education reform 
strategy.
    Section 6132--Administrative Authority. Section 6132 allows 
a State educational agency or a local educational agency to 
enter into grants or contracts with higher education 
institutions, libraries, museums, and public and private 
nonprofit entities.
    Section 6133--Local Application. Section 6133(a) specifies 
the contents of a local educational agency application.
    Section 6133(b) specifies that the local educational agency 
application shall be for a period of 3 years and may be amended 
annually.
    Section 6133(c) gives the local educational agency complete 
discretion in determining how funds are expended at the local 
level.
            Subpart 4--General Administrative Provisions
    Section 6141--Maintenance of Effort; Federal Funds 
Supplementary. Section 6141(a) describes maintenance of effort 
requirements.
    Section 6141(b) specifies that a State or local educational 
agency may only use funds received under title VI, part A, to 
supplement (not supplant) other funding sources.
    Section 6142--Participation of Children Enrolled in Private 
Schools. Section 6142(a) specifies that State education 
agencies shall provide benefit for children enrolled in private 
schools with the title VI, part A program.
    Section 6142(b) describes expenditures of title VI, part A, 
funds for children enrolled in private schools.
    Section 6142(c) requires that the funds provided under this 
part must be controlled by a public agency and that public 
agency employees must provide the services.
    Sections 6142(d) through (i) describes the arrangement for 
provision of services to private school children if a State or 
local educational agency, through either State or local law, is 
prohibited from providing title VI, part A, services.
    Section 6143--Federal Administration. Section 6143(a) 
requires the Secretary, upon request, to provide technical 
assistance to State and local educational agencies.
    Section 6143(b) gives the Secretary authority to issue 
regulations.
    Section 6143(c) requires that funds become available on 
July 1 of each fiscal year.

Part B--Rural Education Initiative

    Part B of title VI establishes a new rural education 
initiative known as the ``Rural Education Achievement 
Program.''
    New section 6202 of title VI states the purpose of the part 
is to address the unique needs of rural school districts which 
frequently lack the personnel and resources needed to compete 
for Federal competitive grants and frequently receive formula 
allocations in amounts too small to be effective in meeting 
their intended purposes.
    New section 6203 authorizes $125 million for fiscal year 
2001 and such sums as may be necessary for each of the four 
succeeding years. $62.5 million of this amount is targeted 
during fiscal year 2001 toward subpart 1.
    New section 6211 authorizes rural educational agencies with 
an average daily attendance of 600 students or fewer to 
consolidate the funds they receive under Titles II, IV, and VI 
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. These funds may 
be used to improve student achievement in accordance with the 
provisions of part A of title VI.
    New section 6212 authorizes the Secretary to award grants 
to small rural educational agencies to carry out innovative 
assistance activities. The grant will be equal to $100 
multiplied by the total number of students in excess of 50 
students that are in average daily attendance. No grant may be 
less than $20,000 or more than $60,000.
    New section 6213 requires that each participating 
educational agency must administer an assessment, consistent 
with the assessment used pursuant to section 1111(b) of the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act, to assess the academic 
achievement of students in schools served by the local 
educational agency. At the end of 5 years of participation in 
this program, the state educational agency shall determine 
whether students served by the participating local educational 
agency have improved their performance on the assessments. If 
student achievement has not improved, the local educational 
agency may no longer participate in the program.
    New section 6214 provides for ratable reductions in case of 
insufficient appropriations.
    New section 6221 provides definitions for use in Subpart 2 
of Part B of Title VI which provides funding for the Low-Income 
and Rural School Program.
    New section 6222 authorizes the Secretary of Education to 
make grants to state educational agencies that are located in 
rural communities and that have student populations of which 20 
percent or more come from families with incomes below the 
poverty line.
    New section 6223 describes the authorized uses of funds and 
provides that the state educational agency may distribute funds 
to local educational agencies on a competitive basis or on the 
basis of a formula based on the number of students in average 
daily attendance at the eligible local educational agency.
    New section 6224 requires each state educational agency or 
local educational agency in a non-participating state to submit 
an application to the Secretary of Education. The application 
shall, at a minimum, include measurable goals and objectives, 
including specific goals and objectives relating to increased 
student academic achievement, decreased student drop out rates.
    New section 6225 requires each state educational agency to 
prepare and submit to the Secretary an annual report that 
describes the method that funds were distributed to local 
educational agencies, how the funds were used by these 
agencies, and the degree to which the State made progress 
toward meeting the goals and objectives described in the 
application. The section also provides that a participating 
local educational agency that receives a grant under this 
subpart may not continue to participate if after five years it 
has not improved student academic achievement.
    New section 6226 provides that funds shall be used to 
supplement and not supplant other Federal, State, or local 
education funds.
    New section 6227 provides that no local educational agency 
may concurrently participate in both subpart I and subpart II.

Part C--Education Flexibility Partnerships

    Section 6301--Short Title. Section 6301 cites part C as the 
Education Flexibility Partnership Act of 2000.
    Section 6302--Definitions. Section 6302 defines eligible 
school attendance area, school attendance area, and State. 
These definitions apply to title VI, part C.
    Section 6303--Education Flexibility Partnership. Section 
6303(a) establishes the Educational Flexibility (Ed-Flex) 
Program.
    Section 6303(b) describes the programs that are included 
under Ed-Flex.
    Section 6303(c) describes waivers that are not authorized 
under Ed-Flex.
    Section 6303(d) describes the treatment of existing Ed-Flex 
Partnership States.
    Section 6303(e) requires the Secretary to publish a notice 
in the Federal Register which describes the Secretary's 
decision to authorize State educational agencies to issue 
waivers.

Part D--Flexibility in the Use of Administrative and Other Funds

    Section 6401--Consolidation of State Administrative Funds 
for Elementary and Secondary Education Programs. Section 
6401(a) establishes the process for a State educational agency 
to consolidate administrative funds if the State educational 
agency chooses the consolidation process.
    Section 6401(b) establishes that a State educational agency 
may use consolidated administrative funds for activities that: 
strengthen coordination of programs; disseminate model programs 
and practices; and provide technical assistance.
    Section 6401(c) provides for consolidated recordkeeping for 
State educational agencies that consolidate administrative 
funds.
    Section 6401(d) requires the Secretary to review State 
educational agencies that consolidate administrative funds.
    Section 6401(e) enables a State educational agency that 
does not use all of its administrative funds to use those 
remaining funds for program activities.
    Section 6401(f) gives a State educational agency the 
ability to consolidate funds for standards and assessment 
development as described under title I of this Act.
    Section 6402--Single Local Educational Agency States. 
Section 6402 requires a State educational agency that also 
serves as a local educational agency to describe how 
duplication of administrative functions will be eliminated.
    Section 6403--Consolidation of Funds for Local 
Administration. Section 6403(a) establishes that a local 
educational agency may consolidate administrative funds.
    Section 6403(b) requires the State educational agency to 
establish procedures for responding to requests from local 
educational agencies to consolidate administrative funds.
    Section 6403(c) specifies the conditions for a local 
educational agency to consolidate administrative funds.
    Section 6403(d) describes the use of administrative funds 
for a local educational agency that chooses to consolidate 
administrative funds.
    Section 6403(e) provides for consolidated recordkeeping for 
local educational agencies that consolidate administrative 
funds.
    Section 6404--Administrative Funds Evaluation. Section 
6404(a) requires the Secretary to conduct an evaluation of 
State and local uses of administrative funds for programs 
covered under this act.
    Section 6405--Consolidated Set-Aside for Department of the 
Interior Funds. Section 6405 establishes a transfer of funds 
mechanism to the Department of Interior for those consolidated 
funds pertaining to part A of title 9 and to subtitle B of 
title 7 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act.
    Section 6406--Availability of Unneeded Program Funds. 
Section 6406(a) allows a local educational agency to transfer 
not more than 5 percent of a program's unused funds to another 
program.
    Section 6406(b) enables a local educational agency, school, 
or consortium of schools to use not more than 5 percent of 
total funds for a coordinated services project.

Part E--Coordination of Programs; Consolidated State and Local Plans 
        and Applications

    Section 6501--Purpose. Section 6501 describes the purpose 
for coordinating and consolidating State and local plans and 
applications.
    Section 6502--Optional Consolidated State Plans or 
Applications. Section 6502(a) establishes the authority for 
compiling consolidated State plans or applications.
    Section 6502(b) requires the Secretary to collaborate with 
State educational agencies, local educational agencies, public 
and private entities, parents, students, and teachers to 
establish criteria and procedures for consolidated planning.
    Section 6503 General Applicability of State Educational 
Agency Assurances. Section 6503(a) requires a State educational 
agency that submits a consolidated plan to have on file with 
the Secretary a single set of assurances that are applicable to 
each programs.
    Section 6503(b) establishes that section 441 of the General 
Education Provisions Act does not apply to part E of title VI.
    Section 6504--Additional Coordination. Section 6504(a) 
directs the Secretary to seek coordination of programs with 
other members of the Cabinet for the purpose of enhancing 
coordination and reducing administrative burdens.
    Section 6505--Consolidated Local Plans or Applications. 
Section 6505(a) enables a local educational agency to submit a 
consolidated plan or application to a State educational agency.
    Section 6505(b) specifies that a State educational agency 
that has submitted and had approved a consolidated State plan 
or application may require local educational agencies in the 
State to submit consolidated local plans.
    Section 6505(c) requires a State educational agency to 
collaborate with local educational agencies in establishing 
procedures for the submission of consolidated plans and 
applications.
    Section 6505(d) specifies that a State educational agency 
will require a local educational agency to submit only 
necessary material as part of its plan or application.
    Section 6506--Other General Assurances. Section 6506(a) 
requires any applicant that submits a plan under this Act to 
have on file, with the State educational agency, a set of 
assurances for each program for which a plan or application has 
been submitted.
    Section 6506(b) specifies that section 442 of the General 
Education Provisions Act does not apply to part E of title VI.
    Section 6507--Relationship of State and Local Plans to 
Other Plans. Section 6507(a) specifies that each State plan 
submitted for part A of title I, part C of title I, title II, 
title IV, part A of title VI, and subpart 4 of part A of title 
IX shall be integrated with one another and the State's 
improvement plan.
    Section 6507(b) specifies that each local educational 
agency plan submitted for part A of title I, title II, title 
IV, part A of title VI, subpart I of part A of title VII, part 
C of title VII, and subpart 4 of part A of title IX shall be 
integrated with one another.

Part F--Waivers

    Section 6601--Waivers of Statutory and Regulatory 
Requirements. Section 6601(a) gives the Secretary waiver 
authority.
    Section 6601(b) describes the waiver process. A State 
educational agency, local educational agency, or Indian tribe 
seeking a waiver will submit a waiver request to the Secretary 
that identifies the Federal programs affected by the waiver, 
describes which Federal requirements are to be waived and how 
the waiving will improve quality of instruction or improve 
student academic performance, (if applicable) describes which 
similar State and local requirements will be waived, describes 
specific outcomes for all students, and describes how schools 
will continue to provide assistance to the same populations 
served by programs for which waivers are requested.
    Section 6601(c) specifies that the Secretary shall not 
waive certain statutory or regulatory requirements that pertain 
to the following: allocation of funds to States, local 
educational agencies, or other recipients; maintenance of 
effort; comparability of services; use of Federal funds to 
supplement (not supplant) non-Federal funds; equitable 
participation of private school students and teachers; parental 
participation and involvement; applicable civil rights 
requirements; charter school requirements; prohibitions 
regarding State aid or use of funds for religious worship or 
instruction; or the selection of a school attendance area or 
school under subsections (a) and (b) of section 1113 (except 
that the Secretary may grant a waiver to allow a school 
attendance area or school to participate in activities under 
part A of title I if the percentage of children from low-income 
families in the school attendance area of such school or who 
attend such school is not less than 10 percentage points below 
the lowest percentage of such children for any school 
attendance area or school within the local educational agency 
that meets the requirements of subsections (a) and (b) of title 
1).
    Section 6601(d) establishes that an approved waiver under 
this section may be for 3 years. The Secretary may extend the 
period of time for the waiver if the Secretary determines that 
the waiver has been effective and the waiver is in the public 
interest.
    Section 6601(e) requires a local educational agency that 
receives a waiver under this section to submit a report to the 
State educational agency at the end of the second year and each 
subsequent year for which a waiver is received. This section 
also requires a State educational agency that receives local 
educational reports to submit a report to the Secretary . In 
addition, the Secretary is also required to submit a report to 
the House and Senate Education Committees summarizing the use 
of waivers and whether the waivers increased the quality of 
instruction or student academic performance.
    Section 6601(f) authorizes the Secretary to terminate a 
waiver if the Secretary determines that the waiver has been 
inadequate or if the waiver is no longer necessary to achieve 
its original purposes.
    Section 6601(g) requires that a notice of the Secretary's 
decision to grant each waiver will be published in the Federal 
Register.

Part G--Education Performance Partnerships

    New section 6701--Short Title. This section provides that 
the short title of part G is the ``Education Performance 
Partnerships Act.''
    New section 6702--Purpose. This section states that the 
purpose of the part is to improve the academic achievement of 
all students by providing States and localities with maximum 
flexibility in exchange for accountability for increasing 
academic achievement and narrowing achievement gaps between the 
lowest and highest performing groups of students.
    New section 6703--Performance Partnership Agreements. New 
section 6703(a) provideseach State with the option to execute a 
performance partnership agreement with the Secretary.
    New section 6703(b) provides that the State Governor, in 
consultation with the individual or body responsible under 
State law for education programs, will determine whether or not 
the State participates.
    New section 6703(c) provides that the Secretary will 
approve a performance partnership agreement unless the 
Secretary provides written notification within 60 days that 
portion of the agreement do not comply with the provisions of 
part G. The section provides for negotiation in the event that 
such notification is provided, with the negotiation to be 
completed within 4 months. This period may be extended for 30 
days if both the Secretary and the State agree to the 
extension. If negotiations are not completed within this time 
frame, the partnership agreement will be subject to peer 
review. A State may also request peer review in cases where the 
agreement is rejected by the Secretary. The peer review 
committee is to be composed of 7 members: 2 appointed by the 
State, 2 appointed by the Secretary, and 3 appointed by the 
National Academy of Sciences. The committee is to make advisory 
recommendations within 60 days. The Secretary is to make a 
decision within 30 days of receiving the recommendations, 
although negotiations may continue for as long as the Secretary 
and State agree.
    New section 6703(d) provides that: (1) the term of the 
partnership agreement may not exceed 5 years; (2) no program 
requirement of any program included in the agreement will apply 
unless specifically provided for in part G; (3) the State must 
provide a list of the programs it wishes to include in the 
agreement; (4) the State must provide a 5-year plan (which is 
aligned with the State's reform plan) for using funds from the 
programs included in the agreement to advance the education 
priorities of the State, to improve student achievement, and to 
narrow achievement gaps; (5) the State must provide the 
opportunity for public review and comment prior to submission 
of the agreement to the Secretary; (6) if part A of title I 
programs are included in the agreement, the State must have: 
(A) implemented the State standards and assessments described 
in title I or a system to measure the degree of change from 1 
school year to the next on aligned assessments, (B) provided 
for disaggregation of assessment data at the State, local 
educational agency, and school levels by race, ethnicity, 
English proficiency status, and socioeconomic status, (C) 
established specific and measurable student performance 
objectives, and (D) implemented a statewide system for holding 
local educational agencies and schools accountable for student 
performance which includes provisions related to school 
improvement, technical assistance, and corrective action; (7) 
the State must establish student performance goals which meet 
specified minimum requirements, including a requirement that 
all students participating in a program included in the 
partnership agreement make substantial gains in achievement, 
and must maintain the same performance standards and aligned 
assessments throughout the term of the agreement; (8) the State 
must issue a report no later than 2 years after entering into 
the partnership agreement and annually thereafter which 
includes disaggregated student performance data and a 
description of how funds have been used to improve student 
performance and reduce achievement gaps; (9) the State must 
have been in compliance with the requirements of the Elementary 
and Secondary Education Act as they existed prior to the 
enactment of the Educational Opportunities Act; and (10) the 
State must provide assurances of fiscal control and fund 
accounting, an implementation schedule, and a timeline for 
reporting student performance data.
    New section 6703(e) provides that a State may modify its 
performance partnership agreement. The requirement that the 
State maintain the same performance standards and aligned 
assessments throughout the term of the agreement may not be 
amended. Modifications to withdraw or include programs or to 
add a new performance objective must be approved by the 
Secretary. Any other term of the agreement may be modified by 
the State at its discretion.
    New section 6704--Treatment of Eligible Programs under 
Agreements. New section 6704(a) provides that the following 
programs may be included in the performance partnership 
agreement: (1) Improving Basic Programs Operated by Local 
Educational Agencies (part A of title I); (2) Even Start (part 
B of title I); (3) Education of Migratory Children (part C of 
title I); (4) Demonstrations of Innovative Practices (section 
1502); (5) Teacher Empowerment Grants to States, Subgrants to 
Eligible Partnerships, and Subgrants to Local Educational 
Agencies (subparts 1, 2, and 3 of part A of title II); (6) 
Initiatives for Neglected, Delinquent, or At Risk Students 
(part B of title III); (7) Technology Literacy Fund (section 
5132); (8) Innovative Education (title VI); (9) Emergency 
Immigrant Education (part C of title VII); (10) any other State 
formula grant program authorized under the Elementary and 
Secondary Education Act which was not in effect prior to the 
date of enactment of the Educational Opportunities Act; (11) 
Class-Size Reduction (section 310 of the Department of 
Education Appropriations Act, 2000); (12) State and Local 
Education Systemic Improvement (title III of the Goals 2000: 
Educate America Act); and (13) Education for Homeless Children 
and Youth (subtitle B of title VII of the Stewart B. McKinney 
Homeless Assistance Act).
    New section 6704(b) provides that States must comply with 
any statutory or regulatory requirement applicable to a program 
included in the partnership agreement relating to maintenance 
of effort, comparability of services, equitable participation 
of private school students and professional staff, parental 
participation and involvement, the serving of eligible school 
attendance areas in rank order under section 1113(a)(3), the 
selection of a school attendance area or school under section 
1113 except in cases where the percentage of low-income 
children in the area or school is at least 10 percentage points 
below the percentage of such children served by the local 
educational agency, supplement-not-supplant, and applicable 
civil rights requirements.
    New section 6704(c) provides that a State may combine funds 
from any or all of the programs listed in subsection (a) 
without regard to program requirements unless otherwise 
provided in part G. In addition, formulas for the distribution 
of Federal funds to the States will remain the same.
    New section 6704(d) provides an illustrative list of 
educational activities for which funds may be used under a 
performance partnership agreement.
    New section 6705--Local Participation in Agreements. New 
section 6705 provides that any local educational agency located 
in a State which does not enter into a performance partnership 
agreement may submit its own agreement. The State must agree to 
the local educational agency's proposal. The local educational 
agency is to meet the same requirements as a State applicant, 
with the exception of provisions relating to the intra-state 
distribution of funds and the use of funds for State 
administrative activities.
    New section 6706--Within State Distribution of Funds. With 
the exception of part A of title I funds, a State may 
distribute funds from programs included in the agreement to 
local educational agencies in any way provided by the State law 
or constitution. Part A of title I funds are to be distributed 
within the State in accordance with the requirements of Federal 
law.
    New section 6707--State Administrative Expenditures. New 
section 6707 provides that a State may retain 1 percent of 
title I funds (if applicable) for administrative purposes. For 
non-title I programs included in the agreement, the State may 
retain for administrative purposes the same amount provided in 
the preceding school year, with gradual annual reductions in 
that amount leading to a limit of 5 percent in the fifth year 
of the program and any subsequent renewal of the program. A 
State may use up to 7 percent of non-title I funds for 
administrative and nonadministrative expenses associated with 
state- or district-wide initiatives directly affecting 
classroom learning. A local educational agency may not use more 
than 5 percent of funds for administration.
    New section 6708--Performance Review. The Secretary is to 
prepare a written performance review at the end of the third 
year of a State's performance partnership agreement. The review 
is to include recommendations for improvement in cases where 
the State has failed to carry out requirements of the 
agreement, to implement an accountability system, or to make 
adequate progress in improving student performance. In these 
cases, the Secretary is to conduct a second performance review 
the following year. If the problems persist, the Secretary may 
either withhold a percentage of State administrative funds or 
terminate the agreement. If student achievement in the State 
has declined significantly, the Secretary is to terminate the 
agreement unless the State can demonstrate that the decline was 
based on exceptional or uncontrollable circumstances.
    New section 6709--Renewal of Performance Partnership 
Agreement. A State which wishes to renew a partnership 
agreement must notify the Secretary at least 6 months prior to 
the end of the agreement. The Secretary is to renew the 
agreement for another 5-year term if the State submits required 
data showing that the State has made substantial progress 
toward meeting its performance goals.
    New section 6710--Closing the Achievement Gap Bonus Awards. 
New section 6710(a) requires the Secretary to provide bonus 
awards to States which make significant progress in eliminating 
achievement gaps by raising the achievement levels of the 
lowest performing student groups. A State is eligible for a 
bonus award whether or not it participates in a performance 
partnership agreement.
    New section 6710(b) establishes State eligibility 
requirements, which include the use of the National Assessment 
of Educational Progress tests for the 4th and 8th grade levels 
or another non-State auditing device to measure student 
academic progress. A State which reduces the achievement gap 
between its lowest and highest performing students in at least 
3 of the 4 measured categories (math and English at the 4th and 
8th grade levels) by a percentage that exceeds the national 
average will receive a bonus award.
    New section 6710(c) establishes procedures for determining 
the national average and individual State reductions in the 
achievement gap. In both cases, the Secretary is to compare the 
baseline and final levels of achievement of students eligible 
for free and reduced-price school lunches with that of all 
other students in each of the 4 categories. The baseline is set 
by test scores during the 2001-2002 academic year, and the 
final level is set by test scores during the fifth academic 
year in which performance partnerships are formed. A reduction 
in the achievement gap resulting from a reduction in the 
achievement levels of the highest performing students will not 
qualify a State to receive a bonus award.
    New section 6710(d) provides that the Secretary is to 
review the improvement a State has made in closing the 
achievement gap as measured by State assessments.
    New section 6710(e) provides that bonus award amounts will 
be based on the number of individuals in a State between the 
ages of 5 and 17 with family incomes below the poverty line 
relative to the total number of such individuals in all States.
    New section 6710(f) provides for a directed appropriations 
of $2.5 billion for the fifth full fiscal year for which 
performance partnership agreements are made under this part.
    New section 6711--Performance Report. This section provides 
that the Secretary will submit to the appropriate congressional 
committees each annual State report within 60 days of receipt 
of the report.

Part H--Academic Achievement for All Demonstration

    New section 6801--Short Title. This section provides that 
the short title of part H is ``Academic Achievement for All 
Demonstration Act (Straight A's Act)''.
    New section 6802--Purpose. This section states that the 
purpose of the part is to improve the academic achievement of 
all students, improve teacher quality, and empower parents 
bygiving States and localities maximum freedom and holding them 
accountable for boosting achievement and narrowing the achievement gap.
    New section 6803--Performance Agreement. New section 
6803(a) provides that up to 15 States may execute a performance 
agreement with the Secretary. The first 15 States with 
approvable agreements will participate.
    New section 6803(b) requires States to provide notice and 
opportunity for comment on any proposed performance agreement 
as provided under State law.
    New section 6803(c) provides that the performance agreement 
will be considered approved 60 days after its receipt by the 
Secretary unless the Secretary provides a written determination 
within that time that the agreement does not meet the 
requirements of part H.
    New section 6803(d) provides that: (1) the term of the 
partnership agreement will be 5 years; (2) no program 
requirement of any program included in the agreement will apply 
unless specifically provided for in part H; (3) the State must 
provide a list of the programs it wishes to include in the 
agreement; (4) the State must provide a 5-year plan for using 
funds from the programs included in the agreement to advance 
the education priorities of the State, to improve student 
achievement, and to narrow achievement gaps; (5) if any title I 
programs are included in the agreement, the State must have: 
(A) implemented the State standards and assessments described 
in title I or a system to measure the degree of change from 1 
school year to the next, (B) developed and implemented a 
statewide accountability system, (C) provided for 
disaggregation of assessment data at the State, local 
educational agency, and school levels by race, ethnicity, 
gender, English proficiency status, migrant status, and 
economically disadvantaged students compared to other students, 
(D) established specific, measurable, numerical student 
performance objectives--including a definition of the 
proficient level, and (E) implemented a statewide system for 
holding local educational agencies and schools accountable for 
student performance which includes provisions related to school 
improvement, technical assistance, and corrective action; (6) 
if part A of title I is included in the performance agreement, 
the State must establish annual student performance goals 
which: (A) establish a single high standard for all students, 
(B) take into account the progress of students in all local 
educational agencies and schools in the State, (C) are based on 
State standards and assessments, (D) include specific annual 
improvement goals in each subject and grade included in the 
State assessment, (E) compare the proportions of students at 
levels of performance with those in the same grade level during 
the previous school year, (F) include annual numerical goals 
for improving the performance of each group for which 
disaggregated data is collected and for narrowing the 
achievement gap, and (G) require all students to make 
substantial gains in achievement; (7) the State must maintain 
the same performance standards and aligned assessments 
throughout the term of the agreement; (8) the State must 
provide assurances of fiscal control and fund accounting; (9) 
the State must meet the requirements of applicable civil rights 
laws; (10) the State must assure the equitable participation of 
private school students and staff; (11) the State must not 
reduce State funding for elementary and secondary education 
during the term of the agreement; (12) the State must issue and 
widely disseminate a report no later than 1 year after entering 
into the performance agreement and annually thereafter which 
includes disaggregated student performance data and a 
description of how funds have been used to improve student 
performance and reduce achievement gaps.
    New section 6803(e) provides that, if a State does not 
include part A of title I funds in its performance agreement, 
it must develop a system to measure the academic performance of 
all students and establish academic performance goals which: 
(A) establish a single high standard for all students, (B) take 
into account the progress of students in all local educational 
agencies and schools in the State, (C) are based on State 
standards and assessments, (D) include specific annual 
improvement goals in each subject and grade included in the 
State assessment, (E) compare the proportions of students at 
levels of performance with those in the same grade level during 
the previous school year, and (F) require all students to make 
substantial gains in achievement. The performance goals do not 
have to include annual numerical goals for improving the 
performance of each group for which disaggregated data is 
collected or for narrowing the achievement gap.
    New section 6803(f) provides that a State may amend its 
performance agreement to withdraw or add programs or to add a 
new performance objective if the amendment is approved by the 
Secretary. The amendment will be considered approved 60 days 
after its receipt by the Secretary unless the Secretary 
provides a written determination within that time that the 
amendment does not meet the requirements of part H.
    New section 6803(g) provides that a State or local 
educational agency may not enter into agreements under both 
parts G and H. A local educational agency may not enter into an 
agreement under either part if the agency is located in a State 
which has agreement under either part G or H.
    New section 6804--Eligible Programs. New section 6804(a) 
provides that the following programs may be included in a 
performance agreement: (1) Improving Basic Programs Operated by 
Local Educational Agencies (part A of title I); (2) Even Start 
(part B of title I); (3) Education of Migratory Children (part 
C of title I); (4) Teacher Empowerment Grants to States, 
Subgrants to Eligible Partnerships, and Subgrants to Local 
Educational Agencies (subparts 1, 2, and 3 of part A of title 
II); (5) Initiatives for Neglected, Delinquent, or At Risk 
Students (part B of title III); (6) Technology Literacy Fund 
(section 5132); (7) Innovative Education (title VI); (8) 
Emergency Immigrant Education (part C of title VII); (9) Class-
Size Reduction (section 307 of the Department of Education 
Appropriations Act of 1999); (10) Demonstrations of Innovative 
Practices (section 1502 as described on pages 96-99 of House 
Report 105-390); (11) Vocational Education Assistance for the 
Outlying Areas, Native American Program, State Provisions, and 
Local Provisions (sections 115 and 116, and parts B and C of 
title I of the Carl D. Perkins Vocational Technical Education 
Act); and (12) Education for Homeless Children and 
Youth(subtitle B of title VII of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless 
Assistance Act).
    New section 6804(b) provides that a State may combine funds 
from any or all of the programs listed in subsection (a) 
without regard to program requirements except that the 
proportion of funds made available for national programs and 
formulas for the distribution of Federal funds to the States 
will remain the same.
    New section 6704(c) provides that funds may be used under a 
performance partnership agreement for any elementary and 
secondary educational purposes permitted by State law.
    New section 6805--Within-State Distribution of Funds. The 
Governor and State legislature or, if applicable, the 
individual or entity responsible for education under the State 
constitution or law will determine how funds from programs 
included in the agreement will be distributed to local 
educational agencies. The State must provide for notice and 
opportunity to comment on the proposed allocation of funds. If 
part A of title I funds are included in the agreement, the 
State must provide each local educational agency an amount at 
least equal to the part A funds the agency received in the 
fiscal year preceding the one in which the performance 
agreement took effect.
    New section 6806--Local Participation. New section 6806 
provides that any local educational agency located in a State 
which does not enter into a performance agreement may submit 
its own agreement. The State must agree to the local 
educational agency's proposal. The local educational agency is 
to meet the same requirements as a State applicant, with the 
exception of provisions relating to the intra-state 
distribution of funds and the use of funds for State 
administrative activities.
    New section 6807--Limitations on State and Local 
Educational Agency Administrative Expenditures. New section 
6807 provides that a State may retain for administrative 
purposes 1 percent the funds for programs included in the 
agreement if part A of title I funds are included. If part A of 
title I funds are not included in the agreement, the State may 
retain 3 percent of funds for administrative purposes. A local 
educational agency may use 4 percent of funds for 
administration.
    New section 6808--Performance Review and Penalties. This 
section provides that the Secretary may terminate the agreement 
if student achievement in a State declines for 3 consecutive 
years. The Secretary must terminate the agreement if the State 
has not substantially met its performance goals at the end of 
the 5-year term. In cases where a State has made no progress at 
all by the end of the term, the Secretary may reduce up to half 
of State administrative funds for the programs included in the 
agreement in each of the 2 years following termination of the 
agreement.
    New section 6809--Renewal of Performance Agreement. A State 
which wishes to renew a performance agreement must notify the 
Secretary at least 6 months prior to the end of the agreement. 
The Secretary is to renew the agreement for another 5-year term 
if the State submits required data showing that the State has 
made, met or made substantial progress toward meeting its 
performance goals.
    New section 6810--Achievement Gap Reduction Rewards. New 
section 6810(a) mandates the Secretary to set aside sufficient 
funds under the Fund for the Improvement of Education to reward 
States that make significant progress in eliminating 
achievement gaps by the end of the term of their performance 
agreement. The reward amount is not less than 5 percent of the 
funds received by the State for programs included in the 
agreement during the first year the agreement was in place.
    New Section 6810(b) provides that a State is entitled to 
the reward if, over the 5-year term of the agreement, the State 
either: (1) reduces by at least 25 percent the difference 
between the percentage of the highest and lowest performing 
groups of students for which data is disaggregated that meet 
the State's proficient level of performance in at least two 
content areas and at least two grade levels or (2) increases by 
25 percent the proportion of two or more groups of students for 
which data is disaggregated that meet the proficient level. One 
of the two content areas must be math or reading.
    New section 6810(c) provides that a reduction in the 
achievement gap resulting from a decrease in the average 
performance of the highest performing quintile of students will 
not qualify a State to receive a reward.
    New section 6811--Straight A's Performance Report. This 
section provides that the Secretary will submit to the 
appropriate congressional committees each annual State report 
within 60 days of receipt of the report.
    New section 6812--Applicability of Title X. This section 
states that the provisions of part H are to be construed to 
supersede the provisions of Title X of the Elementary and 
Secondary Education Act (General Provisions).
    New section 6813--Applicability of General Education 
Provisions Act. This section states that the provisions of part 
H are to be construed to supersede the provisions of the 
General Education Provisions Act--with the exception of 
provisions dealing with civil rights, the withholding of funds 
and enforcement authority, and family educational and privacy 
rights.
    New section 6814--Applicability to Home Schools. This 
section states that nothing in part H shall be construed to 
affect home schools whether or not a home school is treated as 
a private school or home school under State law.
    New section 6815--General Provisions Regarding Non-
Recipient, Nonpublic Schools. This section states that nothing 
in part H shall be construed to permit, allow, encourage, or 
authorize any Federal control over any aspect of any private, 
religious, or home school.
    New section 6816--Definitions. This section provides 
definitions for the terms ``all students'' and ``State.''
    New section 6817--Effective date. This section provides an 
effective date of October 1, 2000.

                    Title VIII--Bilingual Education

    Section 701--Purpose. Section 701 amends section 7102 of 
the act to strike the heading and inserting a new purpose which 
is to promote systemic improvement for educational programs 
serving limited English proficient students.
    Section 702--Authorization of Appropriations. Section 702 
amends section 7103(a) of the act to authorize a funding level 
of $300 million for fiscal year 2001.
    Section 703--Repeal of Program Development and 
Implementation Grants. Section 703 repeals section 7112 of the 
act.
    Section 704--Program Enhancement Projects. Section 704(a) 
amends section 7113 of the act to establish a new purpose for 
the Program Enhancement Projects, which: provide grants to 
entities for locally designed, high quality instruction to 
children and youth of limited English proficiency; help 
children and youth develop English language proficiency; and 
help children and youth in attaining the standards established 
under section 1111(b) of this act.
    Section 704(b) amends section 7113(b) of the act to 
authorize the activities for Program Enhancement projects which 
shall include: developing comprehensive preschool, elementary, 
or secondary education programs for limited English proficient 
children and youth; providing high quality professional 
development; and annually assessing the English proficiency of 
all limited English proficient students. Other activities may 
include: upgrading reading and other academic skills; 
developing accountability systems to monitor academic progress 
of limited English proficient and formerly limited English 
proficient students; implementing family education programs; 
acquiring and applying effective instructional materials; 
providing intensified instruction; adapting best practice 
models; assisting limited English proficient students with 
disabilities; and implementing applied learning activities.
    Section 704(c) amends section 7113 of the act to authorize 
the Secretary, if the Secretary so chooses, to give priority in 
awarding grants to an entity that serves a school district with 
a total enrollment of less than 10,000 students or has a large 
percentage or number of limited English proficient students; 
and has limited or no experience in serving limited English 
proficient students.
    Section 705--Comprehensive School and Systemwide 
Improvement Grants. Section 705 amends section 7114 of the act 
to list the purposes of the Comprehensive School and Systemwide 
Improvement Grants. The purposes are to: provide financial 
assistance to schools and local educational agencies for 
implementing bilingual education programs; assist limited 
English proficient students in meeting the standards 
established under section 1111(b); and improve instructional 
programs in schools and local educational agencies that serve 
significant percentages of students with limited English 
proficiency or significant numbers of students.
    New Section 7114(b) specifies that grants awarded under 
this section shall be used for: improving instructional 
programs for limited English proficient students; aligning 
activities with State and local school reform efforts; 
providing training to improve instruction and assessment of 
limited English proficient students; implementing culturally 
and linguistically appropriate family education programs; 
coordinate training activities with title II of the Higher 
Education Act; coordinate activities with other programs; 
providing services to meet the full range of the educational 
needs of limited English proficient students; annually 
assessing the English proficiency of limited English proficient 
students; and developing accountability systems. This section 
also lists several permissible activities.
    New Section 7114(c) specifies the reservation of funds for 
payments.
    Section 706--Repeal of Systemwide Improvement Grants. 
Section 706 repeals section 7115 of the act.
    Section 707--Applications. Section 707(a) amends section 
7116(b) of the act to make technical changes.
    Section 707(b) amends section 7116(f) of the act to require 
that an application includes a documentation that qualified 
personnel will administer the program proposed in the 
application.
    Section 707(c) amends section 7116(g) of the act to require 
that a grant application include data on the number and the 
characteristics of the limited English proficient students to 
be served under the proposed grant.
    Section 707(d) amends section 7116(i) of the act to include 
a priority provision. Under this provision, the Secretary shall 
give priority to a grant applicant who: experiences a dramatic 
increase in the number or percentage of limited English 
proficient students enrolled in the applicant's programs and 
has limited or no experience in serving limited English 
proficient students; is a local educational agency that serves 
a school district that has a total district enrollment of less 
than 10,000 students; demonstrates that the applicant has a 
proven record of success in helping limited English proficient 
children and youth learn English and meet high academic 
standards; proposes programs that provide for the development 
of bilingual proficiency in English and another language; or 
serves a school district with a large percentage or number of 
limited English proficient students.
    Section 708--Repeal of Intensified Instruction. Section 708 
repeals section 7117 of the act.
    Section 709--Repeal of Subgrants, Priority, and 
Coordination Provisions. Section 709 repeals sections 7119 
through 7121 of the act.
    Section 710--Evaluation. Section 710 amends section 7123 of 
the act to require each grant recipient to conduct an 
evaluation which will review the progress of the recipient in 
achieving the objectives of the program and determine whether 
the students being served by the program are meeting the 
State's student performance standards.
    Section 711--Research. Section 711 amends section 
7132(c)(1) of the act to make technical changes.
    Section 712--Academic Excellence Awards. Section 712 amends 
section 7133 to authorize the Secretary to make grants to State 
educational agencies to assist in recognizing local educational 
agencies and other public and nonprofit entities whose programs 
have demonstrated significant progress in assisting limited 
English proficient students to learn English and achieving the 
content standards. Each State seeking a grant shall submit an 
application.
    Section 713--State Grant Program. Section 713(a) amends 
section 7134(b) of the act to increase the funding level to 
$200,000.
    Section 713(b) makes technical amendments to section 
7134(c) and adds a new use of funds which specifies that a 
State educational agency will assist local educational agencies 
with program design and data collection.
    Section 714--National Clearinghouse. Section 714 amends 
section 7135(b) of the act to make technical amendments.
    Section 715--Instructional Materials Development. Section 
715 amends section 7136 of the act to add other low-incidence 
languages to this section.
    Section 716--Training for All Teachers Program. Section 716 
amends section 7142(b) and (c) of the Act to add a list of 
activities which grantees may use to conduct high-quality 
professional development activities. These activities include: 
developing induction programs; implementing school-based 
collaborative efforts; coordinating activities with other 
programs; implementing education technologies to improve 
instruction; establishing professional networks; and developing 
curricular materials.
    Section 717--Graduate Fellowships. Section 717 amends 
section 7145(a) to make technical amendments.
    Section 718--Repeal of Program Requirements. Section 718 
repeals section 7147 of the act.
    Section 719--Program Evaluations. Section 719 amends 
section 7149 of the act to specify that the evaluation shall 
provide information regarding the number of participants, the 
effectiveness of the program, and the teaching effectiveness of 
graduates of the program.
    Section 720--Special Rule. Section 720 amends section 7161 
of the act to make technical changes.
    Section 721--Repeal of Finding Relating to Foreign Language 
Assistance. Section 721 repeals section 7202 of the act.
    Section 722--Foreign Language Assistance Applications. 
Section 722 amends section 7204(b) of the act to add references 
to technology, foreign language immersion and encouraging the 
formation of a consortium.
    Section 723--Emergency Immigrant Education Purpose. Section 
723 amends section 7301 of the act to make technical 
amendments.
    Section 724--Emergency Immigrant Education State 
Administrative Costs. Section 724 amends section 7302 of the 
act to change the percentage to 2 percent if the State 
educational agency distributes funds to local educational 
agencies competitively.
    Section 725--Conforming Amendment. Section 725 amends 
section 7304(a) of the act to make a conforming amendment.
    Section 726--Emergency Immigrant Education Authorization of 
Appropriations. Section 726 amends section 7309 of the act to 
increase the authorization to $200 million for fiscal year 
2001.
    Section 727--Coordination and Reporting Requirements. 
Section 727 amends section 7405(d) of the act make a technical 
change.

                         Title VIII--Impact Aid

    Section 801--Short Title. Section 801 of the bill 
designates the short title of title VIII as the ``Impact Aid 
Act''.
    Section 802--Purpose. Section 802 of the bill amends 
section 8001 of the act to delete the reference in the purpose 
to sudden and substantial increases or decreases in enrollments 
because of military realignments, as authority for such 
payments is repealed in the bill.
    Section 803--Payments Relating to Federal Acquisition of 
Real Property. Section 803(1) of the bill amends section 
8002(a) of the act to change the fiscal year reference from 
October 1, 1999, to October 1, 2005.
    Section 803(2) of the bill amends section 8002(b) of the 
act to: strike the provisionproviding for a ratable reduction 
in payments to local educational agencies in the event that 
appropriations are insufficient to make full payment and replace it 
with a reference to the calculations specified in subsection (h); and 
to provide that a local educational agency may not receive in combined 
payments under sections 8002 and 8003(b) an amount which exceeds the 
maximum amount for which the agency is eligible under either section 
individually--with the payment cap set at the greater of the two 
amounts.
    Section 803(3) of the bill amends section 8002(h) of the 
act to repeal the current hold-harmless provisions and replace 
them with provisions dealing with the distribution of funds if 
appropriations are insufficient. These new provisions include 
the establishment of a ``foundation payment'' equal to 37 
percent of the full entitlement of local educational agencies 
eligible to receive funds between 1989 and 1994. The funds 
remaining between the fiscal year 1995 appropriations level 
($16.3 million) and the amount needed for the foundation 
payment is to be prorated among eligible districts based on 
each district's percentage of the total assessed value of all 
section 8002 districts, in accordance with the ``highest and 
best'' formula included in the 1994 amendments. Funding is then 
to be provided for the ``special needs'' districts described in 
subsection (i), in an amount not to exceed $1.2 million. 
Seventy-five percent of the funds in excess of $17.5 million 
are to be allocated under the ``highest and best'' formula, and 
the remaining 25 percent to increase funding above the 
foundation payment.
    Section 803(4) of the bill amends section 8002(i) of the 
act to provide that the special needs districts described in 
the subsection may receive an increased payment under section 
8002 in fiscal years where appropriations exceed the fiscal 
year 1996 level. Total payments to special needs districts may 
not exceed $1.2 million.
    Section 803(5) of the bill amends section 8002(j) of the 
act to update the reference to the authorization of 
appropriations, to correct drafting errors, and to delete 
language relating to the distribution of funds in the event 
that appropriations for subsection (j) fall below or exceed the 
maximum amount a local educational agency is eligible to 
receive under the subsection.
    Section 803(6) of the bill amends section 8002 of the act 
by adding new subsections (l) and (m). New subsection (l) 
requires any local educational agency applying for a payment 
under section 8002(b) to submit expeditiously the data required 
to compute the payment and requires the Secretary to make a 
preliminary payment of 60 percent of the amount received by a 
local educational agency in the previous year no later than 60 
days following enactment of appropriations (provided that the 
local educational agency has submitted to the Secretary all 
data necessary for computation of its payment). In addition, 
that the Secretary is to make every effort to provide final 
payments no later than 12 months following the application 
deadline. New subsection (m) establishes a 5-year time frame 
following Federal acquisition of property in which districts 
may apply for section 8002 payments.
    Section 804--Payments for Eligible Federally Connected 
Children. Section 804(a)(1)(A) of the bill amends section 
8003(a)(2) of the act to increase from .10 to .25 the weight 
assigned to children who have a parent who is on active duty in 
the uniformed services or is an official of a foreign 
government and is a foreign military officer, but do not reside 
on Federal property.
    Section 804(a)(1)(B) of the bill amends section 8003(a)(4) 
of the act to institute a maximum 3-year time limit for current 
law provisions which permit military dependents living off-base 
to be counted as on-base students in situations where their 
base housing is being renovated and to clarify that the 
rebuilding of on-base housing will be treated in the same 
manner as renovation.
    Section 804(a)(1)(C) of the bill amends section 8003(a) of 
the act by adding a new paragraph (5) which permits military 
dependents to be counted as on-base students if they reside in 
housing initially acquired or constructed under the ``Build to 
Lease'' program if the property is within the fenced security 
perimeter of the military facility. If the property is subject 
to taxation, the impact aid payment to the local educational 
agency will be reduced by the amount of revenues received from 
the property taxes.
    Section 804(a)(2) of the bill amends section 8003(b)(1) of 
the act by adding a new subparagraph (D) which provides that, 
in calculating a local educational agency's maximum payment 
amount, the Secretary shall use data from the most recent 
fiscal year for which satisfactory data is available in 
instances where data from the third preceding fiscal year are 
not available for State or national average per-pupil 
expenditures.
    Section 804(a)(3) of the bill amends section 8003(d) of the 
act to indicate that a local educational agency receiving funds 
under subsection (d) is to use those funds to provide services 
in accordance with the Individuals with Disabilities Education 
Act.
    Section 804(a)(4) of the bill amends section 8003(e) of the 
act to replace the current hold-harmless provisions with a 
hold-harmless based on based on a per-weighted-student-unit 
basis. Under the hold-harmless, each local educational agency 
will receive the same amount per weighted student as it did in 
the prior year. Amounts to a local educational agency could 
decrease if its weighted student count drops, if it has a 
reduced Learning Opportunity Threshold, if its local 
contribution rate drops, or if a decrease in appropriations 
leads to proration.
    Section 804(a)(5) and (6) of the bill amends section 8003 
of the act to strike subsections (f) and (g) and to redesignate 
subsections (h) and (i) as (f) and (g), respectively. Current-
law subsection (f) deals with additional assistance for heavily 
impacted local educational agencies. Under the bill, payments 
to these local educational agencies will be made through 
section 8003(b)(2). Current-law subsection (g) deals with 
additional payments for local educational agencies with high 
concentrations of children with severe disabilities.
    Section 804(b) of the bill amends section 8003(b) of the 
act by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as (3) and (4), 
respectively, and creating a new paragraph (2) which folds into 
the basic payment structure the payments for heavily impacted 
local educational agencies currently authorized under 
subsection (f), consistent with the provisions of a pilot 
program which has been in operation for the past 2 years.
    New section 8003(b)(2)(A) provides that heavily impacted 
districts will receive payments under section 8003(b)(2), in 
lieu of basic support payments under section 8003(b)(1).
    New section 8003(b)(2)(B) describes heavily impacted local 
educational agencies as those which received assistance under 
the current subsection (f) and which meet one of the following 
criteria: (1) are coterminous; (2) have an enrollment of at 
least 35 percent federally connected children, have a tax rate 
at least 95 percent of the State average, and (if student 
enrollment exceeds 350) have a per-pupil expenditure below 
State average; (3) have an enrollment of at least 30 percent 
federally connected children and have a tax rate at least 125 
percent of the State average; (4) have a student enrollment of 
at least 25,000, at least 50 percent of whom are federally 
connected, and at least 6,000 of whom are military or civilian 
on-post students; or (5) meet the requirements of current-law 
subsection (f)(2). In order to avoid delays in the issuance of 
payments to eligible local educational agencies, the bill 
provides for a 1-year delay in instances where a local 
educational agency either loses or resumes eligibility for 
payment as a heavily impacted district.
    New section 8003(b)(2)(C) provides that local educational 
agencies which have not received assistance under the current 
subsection (f) authority may receive payments under section 
8003(b)(2) in fiscal year 2002 or subsequent fiscal years if 
they meet one of the following criteria: (1) are coterminous; 
or (2) have an enrollment of at least 50 percent federally 
connected children if the district receives payment for 
children who have a parent who is on active duty in the 
uniformed services or is an official of a foreign government 
and is a foreign military officer but do not reside on Federal 
property or an enrollment of at least 40 percent federally 
connected children if the district does not receive payment for 
such children, have a tax rate at least 95 percent of the State 
average, and (if student enrollment exceeds 350) have a per-
pupil expenditure below State average or (if student enrollment 
is below 350) have a per-pupil expenditure below comparable 
local educational agencies. A 1-year delay is provided in 
instances where a local educational agency loses, gains, or 
resumes eligibility for payment as a heavily impacted district.
    New section 8003(b)(2)(D) provides for the calculation of 
maximum payment amounts for regular heavily impacted local 
educational agencies. (Regular heavily impacted local 
educational agencies are those described in subparagraphs (B) 
and (C), with the exception of those with a student enrollment 
of at least 25,000, at least 50 percent of whom are federally 
connected, and at least 6,000 of whom are military or civilian 
on-post students.) The local contribution rate for these 
agencies is to be calculated on the basis of the greater of 
four-fifths of average State per-pupil expenditures or four-
fifths of average national per-pupil expenditures. The 
determination of weighted student units is the same as that 
provided for subsection (b)(1) payment calculations, with the 
following special provisions: (1) districts with an enrollment 
of at least 35 percent of children who have a parent who is on 
active duty in the uniformed services or is an official of a 
foreign government and is a foreign military officer but do not 
reside on Federal property or who live in low-income housing 
may assign a weight of .55 to those students; (2) districts 
with a total enrollment 100 or fewer federally connected 
students may assign a weight of 1.75 to such students; and (3) 
districts with total enrollment of more than 100 but less than 
750 federally connected students may assign a weight of 1.25 to 
such students. Finally, regular heavily impacted local 
educational agencies may count all federally connected students 
in the calculation of the maximum payment amount.
    New section 8003(b)(2)(E) provides for the calculation of 
maximum payment amounts for large heavily impacted local 
educational agencies. Large heavily impacted local educational 
agencies are those with a student enrollment of at least 
25,000, at least 50 percent of whom are federally connected, 
and at least 6,000 of whom are military or civilian on-post 
students. The maximum payment amounts for these agencies will 
be calculated on the same basis as basic payments under section 
8003(b)(1), except that a weight of 1.35 will be assigned to 
children who are military or civilian on-post students.
    New section 8003(b)(2)(F) provides that the Secretary shall 
use student, revenue, expenditure, and tax data from the third 
preceding fiscal year in providing payments to heavily impacted 
local educational agencies.
    Section 804(c) of the bill amends section 8003(b)(3) [as 
redesignated] of the act to provide that the Learning 
Opportunity Threshold of all heavily impacted local educational 
agencies will be 100.
    Section 804(d) of the bill amends section 8003 of the act 
to make conforming changes.
    Section 804(e) of the bill provides that the new time 
limits included in the section 8003(a)(4) provisions relating 
to the renovation or rebuilding of base housing will apply to 
payments made beginning on or after the date of enactment of 
the Educational Opportunities Act.
    Section 805--Sudden and Substantial Increases in Attendance 
of Military Dependents. Section 805 of the bill repeals section 
8006 of the act.
    Section 806--School Construction and Facility 
Modernization. Section 806 of the bill amends section 8007 of 
the act to expand the authority for construction and facility 
modernization assistance, focusing on schools serving large 
proportions of federally connected students in districts which 
have no bonding authority or are at their limit for bonded 
indebtedness. Twenty percent of funds are reserved for the 
current-law construction authority, and the remaining funds are 
made available for the new school modernization provisions 
contained in section 8007A.
    Section 806(a) of the bill amends section 8007 of the act 
to provide that 20 percent of the funds appropriated for school 
construction and facility modernization be made available to 
current recipients on the same basis provided in current law. 
The current-law exclusion ofchildren attending a school 
assisted or provided by the Secretary under section 8008 from being 
counted in the calculation of payments under section 8007 is revised to 
permit such children to be counted in fiscal years in which the 
Secretary does not provide assistance to the schools they attend.
    Section 806(b) of the bill establishes a new section 8007A 
to provide assistance for school facility modernization.
    New section 8007A(a) provides that 80 percent of the funds 
appropriated for school construction and facility modernization 
be made available for activities authorized under the section. 
Of that amount:
    Forty-five percent is to be made available to local 
educational agencies which receive Federal property payments 
under section 8002 and have assessed taxable property values 
below the State average or which have an enrollment of at least 
25 percent of children who reside on Indian lands.
    Forty-five percent is to be made available to local 
educational agencies which have an enrollment of at least 25 
percent of children whose parents both work and live on Federal 
property or whose parents are active-duty military but do not 
live on Federal property. Modernization funds may be used only 
for schools within the local educational agency which enrol at 
least 50 percent federally connected children.
    Ten percent is to be made available to local educational 
agencies which have an enrollment of at least 50 percent of 
children who reside on Indian lands and which have a facility 
emergency that poses a health or safety hazard.
    New section 8007A(b) establishes eligibility requirements. 
In addition to meeting one of the criteria described above, a 
local educational agency must have no capacity to issues bonds 
or be at its limit in bonded indebtedness for the purpose of 
generating funds for capital expenditures. Heavily impacted 
local educational agencies are deemed to have met this 
requirement.
    New section 8007A(c) sets out the criteria the Secretary is 
to use in awarding facility modernization grants. The Secretary 
is to consider 1 or more of the following factors: lack of 
fiscal capacity; extent to which property is nontaxable; extent 
to which federally connected children are served; need for 
modernization to address safety concerns, overcrowding, or 
needs resulting from actions of the Federal Government; and age 
of the facility.
    New section 8007A(d) provides that, in determining the 
amount of the grant award, the Secretary must consider the cost 
of modernization and the ability of the local educational 
agency to carry it out. Subsection (d) also requires a local 
match of 50 percent (in cash or in-kind) and caps at $3 million 
the amount a local educational agency can receive during any 5-
year period.
    New section 8007A(e) sets out local application 
requirements. The application for grant support must include: 
documentation of the lack of bonding capacity; descriptions of 
the facilities to be modernized, the number of federally 
connected children in those facilities, the ownership of the 
property, any health or safety hazard, and the planned 
modernization activities; and a cost estimate of the project.
    New section 8007A(f) includes special provisions related to 
the emergency grants for which 10 percent of Section 8007A 
funds are reserved. In addition to the application requirements 
included in subsection (e), an applicant must provide 
certification of a health or safety deficiency. Emergency 
grants are not subject to local-match requirements or to the $3 
million cap. Priority will be given to grants based on when an 
application was received and the severity of the emergency. The 
application of a local educational agency which does not 
receive assistance will be carried over for consideration in 
the following fiscal year.
    New section 8007A(g) establishes general limitations 
regarding grant funds, which include a prohibition on use of 
funds for real property or for athletic and similar school 
facilities. All projects must comply with environmental laws 
and regulations.
    New section 8007A(h) provides that Federal funds will 
supplement, not supplant, non-Federal resources for school 
facility modernization.
    Section 807--State Consideration of Payments in Providing 
State Aid. Section 807 of the bill amends section 8009 of the 
act to delete obsolete references.
    Section 808--Federal Administration. Section 808 of the 
bill amends section 8010 of the act to delete a special rule 
which applied only to fiscal year 1995.
    Section 809--Administrative Hearings and Judicial Review. 
Section 809 of the bill amends section 8011 of the act to add a 
provision requiring a State or local educational agency to file 
a request for an administrative hearing within 60 days of 
notice that an action adversely affecting the State or local 
educational agency has been taken. No time limit is currently 
specified.
    Section 810--Forgiveness of Overpayments. Section 810 of 
the bill amends section 8012 of the act to update obsolete 
references.
    Section 811--Definitions. Section 811 of the bill amends 
section 8013 of the act to: update references to low-income and 
affordable housing under the definition of ``Federal 
property''; clarify that average ``local contribution 
percentage'' is to be based on data from the 50 States and the 
District of Columbia; add a definition of ``modernization''; 
and revise the definition of ``school facilities'' to 
specifically mention laboratories, libraries, and media 
centersand to state that their primary purpose is the instruction of 
public elementary or secondary school students.
    Section 812--Authorization of Appropriations. Section 812 
of the bill amends section 8014 of the act to authorize funds 
for title VIII programs for the fiscal years 2001 through 2005. 
For each of the program authorities, a dollar figure is 
specified for fiscal year 2001 and ``such sums as may be 
necessary'' are provided for the 4 succeeding fiscal years. 
Funding levels authorized for fiscal year 2001 include:

Payments for Federal Acquisition of Real Property.......     $35,000,000
Basic Payments..........................................    $875,000,000
Payments for Children with Disabilities.................     $60,000,000
Construction and Facilities Modernization...............     $62,500,000
Facilities Maintenance..................................      $7,000,000
Additional Assistance for Certain Federal Property LEAs.        $500,000

     Title IX--Indian, Native Hawaiian, and Alaska Native Education

    These sections restate current law except where noted. 
Section 901 amends parts A, B, and C of Title IX to read as 
follows:

Part A--Indian Education

            Subpart 1--Formula grants to Local Educational Agencies
    New section 9113--Amount of Grants. This section sets out 
grant awards. The order of the subsections has changed in that 
the subsection related to schools operated or supported by the 
Bureau of Indian Affairs is now subsection (b).
    New section 9115--Authorized Services and Activities. This 
section adds four new kinds of services and activities to the 7 
services and activities in current law. These activities 
include: activities that promote the incorporation culturally 
responsive teaching and learning strategies; activities that 
incorporate American Indian and Alaska Native specific 
curriculum content; activities that promote coordination and 
collaboration between tribal, Federal, and State public 
schools; and family literacy services; and limits the amount of 
funds spent on administrative costs to not more than 5 percent.
    New section 9116--Integration of Services Authorized. This 
section allows local educational agencies which receive formula 
grants under part A the ability to commingle all of the Federal 
funding they receive for educating Indian children, regardless 
of which agency provides it, into one coordinate comprehensive 
program to meet the specific needs of Indian children. Local 
educational agencies that choose to do this will submit a 
single plan describing how they intend to consolidate funding 
and specifying the student achievement goals that they will 
meet.
    New section 9117--Student Eligibility Forms. This section 
allows the Secretary to use either the count certified by the 
Bureau of Indian Affairs, or the count of the number of 
students for whom the school has eligibility forms when 
awarding grants to tribal schools. It also allows each local 
educational agency to select either a particular date or period 
(up to 31 days) to count the number of children it will claim 
for purposes of receiving a grant. The choice of the child 
counts allows the schools to avoid the burden of 2 separate 
counts.
    New section 9119--State Educational Agency Review. This 
section modifies the current requirements for application 
review by the Secretary (as the requirement that a local 
educational agency must submit an application to the Secretary 
is already in section 9114(a)) while maintaining the 
requirement that the local educational agency must submit the 
application to State educational agency for its possible 
comments.
            Subpart 2--Special Programs and Projects to Improve 
                    Educational Opportunities for Indian Children
    New section 9121--Improvement of Educational Opportunities 
for Indian Children. This section maintains the 11 types of 
grants authorized under this section while adding a provision 
for family literacy service and adds two new provisions as 
requirements for applications for dissemination grants: that 
the application must include information demonstrating that the 
proposed program is a research-based program, and that the 
application must contain a description of how the applicant 
will incorporate the proposed activities into the ongoing 
school program involved once the grant period is over. New 
section 9121 limits the amount of funds spent on administrative 
costs to not more than 5 percent.
    New section 9122--Professional Development. This section 
modifies the preference for programs that train Indian 
students. The obligation of service has been modified to 
include only those persons who receive pre-service training.
    (Current law provisions are restated for Subpart 3--Special 
Programs Relating to Adult Education for Indians, Subpart 4-
National Research Activities, and Subpart 5--Federal 
Administration.)
            Subpart 6--Definitions; Authorizations of Appropriations
    New section 9162--Authorization of Appropriations. This 
section authorizes a funding level of $62 million for fiscal 
year 2001 and such sums as may be necessary for each of the 
succeeding fiscal years to carry out subpart 1; $4 million for 
fiscal year 2001 and such sums as may be necessary for each of 
the succeeding fiscal years to carry out subparts 2 through 4; 
and deletes the appropriation for carrying out subpart 5.

Part B--Native Hawaiians

    New section 9202--Findings. This section sets forth 
Congressional findings regarding Native Hawaiians and education 
and includes new findings that reflect the new legal position 
ofthe United States relative to the status of Native Hawaiians 
as set forth in the brief filed by the United States in the U.S. 
Supreme Court on July 28, 1999.
    New section 9204--Native Hawaiian Education Council and 
Island Councils. This section authorizes the Secretary to make 
direct grants to Native Hawaiian educational organizations; 
provides that the Native Hawaiian Education Council will be 
reduced to 21 members; changes the composition, appointment, 
terms of Council members; and authorizes seven Island councils, 
so that each island will now have its own council.
    New section 9205--Program Authorized. This section 
consolidates the following programs: the Family-Based Education 
Centers program; the Higher Education program; the Gifted and 
Talented; Curriculum Development, Teacher Training and 
Recruitment program; and Community-Based Education Learning 
Center into a single authority and adds three new permissible 
activities: family literacy services; activities which enhance 
beginning reading and literacy among K-3rd grade; and early 
education and care services for children pre-natal to age 5. 
New section 9205 also establishes priorities for the award of 
contracts or grants; includes special rules and conditions; 
provides that qualified Native Hawaiian student attending a 
post-secondary institution outside the State of Hawaii shall 
not be prevented from receiving a fellowship; that individuals 
who receive a fellowship are required to serve the Native 
Hawaiian community either during their fellowship period or 
upon completion of the program of post-secondary education. New 
section 9205 also limits the amount of funds spent on 
administrative costs to not more than 5 percent and authorizes 
$23 million for fiscal year 2001 and such sums as may be 
necessary for the 4 succeeding fiscal years for these 
activities.

Part C--Alaska Native Education

    New section 9304--Program Authorized. This section 
consolidates the following programs serving Alaska Native 
children and adults: The Educational Planning, Curriculum, 
Development, Teacher Training, and Recruitment program; Home-
Based Education for Preschool Children program; and Student 
Enrichment Programs into a single authority and adds family 
literacy services as an additional activity. New section 9304 
also limits the amount of funds spent on administrative costs 
to not more than 5 percent and authorizes $17 million for 
fiscal year 2001 and such sums as may be necessary for the 4 
succeeding fiscal years for these activities.

                      Title X--General Provisions


Part A--Uniform Provisions

    Section 10001--Uniform Provisions. This section amends 
title X of the act by: transferring the ``Fund for the 
Improvement of Education,'' currently part A of title X to part 
G of title V; transferring ``Uniform Provisions,'' currently 
Part E of title XIV to part A of title X; making minor drafting 
changes to update references for consistency and clarification; 
and renaming title X as ``General Provisions'' and part A as 
``Uniform Provisions.''
    Section 10115--Construction. This section amends current 
law by inserting a provision stating that nothing in this act 
shall be construed to prohibit recruiters for the Armed Forces 
of the United States from receiving the same access to and 
information concerning secondary school students, as is 
provided to postsecondary educational institutions or 
prospective employers of such students.
    Section 10002--Evaluations. This section of the bill amends 
``Evaluations'' which is currently authorized as part G of 
title XIV of the act, and transfers it to part B of title X.

Part B--Evaluations

    Section 10201--Evaluations. This section requires the 
Secretary to: carry out comprehensive evaluations of all 
programs and demonstration projects; evaluate the cost-
efficiencies of Federal elementary and secondary education 
programs; assess the impact of programs in relation to student 
and school performance; and disseminate broadly the results of 
these evaluations.
    Section 10201(b)(1)(D) amends current law by requiring the 
Secretary to provide for a study conducted by the National 
Academy of Sciences regarding the relationship between time and 
learning which shall include an analysis on the impact of 
increasing education time on student learning; an analysis of 
how schools, teachers and students use time and the quality of 
instructional activities; an analysis of how time outside of 
school may be used to enhance student learning; and cost 
estimates for increasing time in school.
    Section 10003--America's Education Goals. This section of 
the bill amends ``National Education Goals'' which is currently 
authorized as title I of the Goals 2000: Educate America Act, 
and transfers it to part C of title X of this act.

Part C--America's Education Goals

    Section 10301--America's Education Goals. This section 
reauthorizes and retains current law with respect to the 
National Education Goals, renaming the provision as ``America's 
Education Goals'' and deleting references to completing the 
goals by the year 2000.
    Section 10004--America's Education Goals Panel. This 
section of the bill amends the ``National Education Goals 
Panel'' which is currently authorized as part A, title II of 
the Goals 2000: Educate America Act, and transfers it to part D 
of title X of this act.

Part D--America's Education Goals Panel

    Section 10401--America's Education Goals Panel. This 
section reauthorizes the National Education Goals Panel, 
renaming the panel as ``America's Education Goals Panel.'' The 
Goals Panel shall work with the Secretary to disseminate 
information regarding best practices. A funding level of $2.5 
million is authorized for fiscal year 2001 and ``such sums as 
may benecessary'' for the 4 succeeding fiscal years to carry 
out this part. In addition, each individual who is a member or an 
employee of the Goals Panel on the date of enactment of this title, 
shall continue to be a member or employee without interruption or loss 
of service or status.
    Section 10005--Comprehensive Regional Assistance Centers. 
This section of the bill amends title V by adding the 
following:

Part E--Comprehensive Regional Assistance Centers

    Section 10501--Program Authorized. This section authorizes 
the Secretary to award grants to public or private nonprofit 
entities in order to establish a networked system of 15 
comprehensive regional assistance centers to provide 
comprehensive training and technical assistance, related to 
administration and implementation of programs under this act, 
to States, local educational agencies, schools, tribes, 
community-based organizations, and other recipients of funds 
under this act.
    Section 10501(a)(2) specifies that in establishing the 
Centers, the Secretary shall consider the geographic 
distribution of students assisted under title I, students of 
limited-English proficiency, and Indian students; and the 
special needs of students living in urban and rural areas, and 
States and outlying areas in geographic isolation.
    Section 10501(a)(3) states that one Center shall be 
established in Hawaii.
    Section 10501(b) requires the Secretary to ensure that each 
Center serving a region with a significant population of Indian 
or Alaska Native students shall be awarded to a consortium 
which includes a tribally controlled community college or other 
Indian organization and assist in the development and 
implementation of instructional strategies, methods and 
materials which address the specific cultural and other needs 
of Indian or Alaska Native students.
    Section 10501(c) requires the Secretary to ensure the 
quality and effectiveness of the networked system of 
comprehensive regional assistance centers supported under this 
part.
    Section 10501(d) states that grants under this section 
shall be awarded for a period of 5 years.
    Section 10502--Requirements of Comprehensive Regional 
Assistance Centers. This section requires Centers established 
under this part to: (1) maintain appropriate staff expertise 
and provide support, training, and assistance to State 
educational agencies, tribal divisions of education, local 
educational agencies, schools, and other grant recipients to 
meet the needs of children served under this act; (2) ensure 
that technical assistance staff have sufficient training, 
knowledge, and expertise in how to integrate and coordinate 
programs under this act; (3) provide technical assistance using 
the highest quality and most cost-effective strategies 
possible; (4) coordinate services, work cooperatively, and 
share information with the regional educational laboratories, 
research and development centers, State literacy centers, and 
other entities; (5) work collaboratively with the Department's 
regional offices; (6) consult with representatives of State 
educational agencies and local educational agencies; (7) 
provide services to States, local educational agencies, tribes, 
and schools in order to better implement the purposes of this 
part; and (8) provide professional development services to 
State educational agencies and local educational agencies to 
increase the capacity of such entities to provide high-quality 
technical assistance in support of programs under this act.
    Section 10503--Maintenance of Service and Application 
Requirements. This section requires the Secretary to ensure 
that the Centers provide technical assistance services that 
address the needs of educationally disadvantaged students.
    Section 10503(b) requires entities seeking assistance under 
this part to submit an application to the Secretary 
demonstrating how the Center will provide expertise and 
services in the areas described in section 10502, and work to 
conduct outreach to local educational agencies. The application 
shall also demonstrate support from States, local educational 
agencies and tribes, and demonstrate how such centers will 
ensure a fair distribution of services to urban and rural 
areas.
    Section 10504--Transition. This section authorizes the 
Secretary to use funds appropriated under this part to extend 
or continue contracts and grants for existing Centers and to 
take necessary steps to ensure a smooth transition of services 
provided under this part so that services are not interrupted, 
curtailed, or diminished.
    Section 10505--Authorization of Appropriations. This 
section authorizes a funding level of $70 million for fiscal 
year 2001 and ``such sums as may be necessary'' for the 4 
succeeding fiscal years in order to carry out this part.
    Section 10506--Repeals. This section repeals parts F 
through K of title X, and titles XI, XII, XIII, and XIV of 
current law.

                   Title XI--Amendments to Other Laws


Part A--Repeals

    Section 11101--Goals 2000: Educate America Act. Section 
11101 of the bill repeals the Goals 2000: Educate America Act.
    Section 11102--Higher Education Amendments of 1998. Section 
11102 of the bill repeals the Advanced Placement Incentive 
Program currently authorized as Part B of title VIII of the 
Higher Education Amendments of 1998. The program is replaced by 
new provisions included as a new part E of title III of the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

Part B--Education for Homeless Children and Youth

    Part B of the bill amends the Education for Homeless 
Children and Youth authorized as Subtitle B of Title VII of the 
Stewart D. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act.
    Section 11201--Statement of Policy. Section 11201 of the 
bill amends section 721 of the act to state that homelessness 
alone is not sufficient reason to separate students from the 
mainstream school environment.
    Section 11202--Grants for State and Local Activities. 
Section 11202(1) of the bill amends section 722(c) of the act 
to eliminate Palau as part of those receiving reserved funds 
and to drop the reference to Palau in the definitions.
    Section 11202(2) amends section 722(e) of the act to add a 
new paragraph (3) to prohibit the segregation of homeless 
students. A State is required to provide a free public 
education to a homeless child or youth, and it may not 
segregate such child or youth, either in separate school, or in 
a separate program within a school, based on such child or 
youth's status as homeless, except as provided in cases of 
health or safety emergency or to provide special or 
supplementary services to those children.
    Section 11202(3) amends section 722(f) of the act, which 
deals with the functions of the Coordinator of Education of 
Homeless Children and Youth in each State, to: (1) strike the 
provision that the coordinator estimate the number of homeless 
children in the state, and/or the number of youth served under 
this subtitle; (2) permit the Secretary to set reporting dates 
for the collection and transmittal of data the coordinator 
gathers; (3) clarify the coordination of services provisions, 
emphasizing not only ``coordination'' but also 
``collaboration'' of services; and (4) add local educational 
agency liaisons for homeless children and youth and community 
organizations representing such children and their families 
among those in the coordination/ collaboration effort.
    Section 11202(4)(A) amends section 722(g)(1) of the act, 
which deals with State plans, to strengthen assurances that 
homeless children will not be isolated or stigmatized and to 
provide that local educational agencies serving homeless 
children and youth designate an appropriate staff person (who 
may also be in charge of administering other Federal programs) 
to serve as liaison for homeless children and youth and post 
public notice of the educational rights of such children and 
youth in locations such as family shelters, and soup kitchens.
    Section 11202(4)(B) amends section 722(g)(3) of the act, 
which deals with local educational agency requirements, to 
expand provisions related to school of origin and to provide 
for prompt enrollment. A child who becomes homeless is to be 
served in the school of origin for the duration of the child's 
homelessness, rather than for the remainder of the academic 
year. A child who becomes permanently housed is to be served in 
the school of origin for the remainder of the school year. (The 
current option of enrolling the child in the attendance area 
where he or she is actually living is retained.) To the extent 
feasible, a local educational agency must keep a student in the 
school of origin except when that is contrary to the wishes of 
the parent or guardian. The bill includes a new requirement 
that a written explanation be provided to the parent or 
guardian if the child is sent to a school other than the school 
of origin or the school requested by the parent or guardian. In 
addition, the bill adds a new provision stipulating that a 
school must immediately enroll homeless youth, even if they are 
unable to produce required records. The new school must also 
contact the old school for the records and refer the child to 
proper place for immunization if he or she lacks needed shots.
    Section 11202(4)(C) amends section 722(g)(6) of the act, 
which deals with coordination of services, to consolidate 
current law provisions regarding coordination of agencies and 
programs and to add language stating the purpose of 
coordination, which is to ensure that homeless children and 
youth have access to available education and related support 
services and to raise the awareness of school personnel and 
service providers of the effects of short-term stays in a 
shelter and other challenges associated with homeless children 
and youth.
    Section 11202(4)(D) amends section 722(g)(7) of the act, 
which deals with the local educational agency liaison, to add 
provisions that the liaison ensure that: (1) homeless youth 
have full and equal opportunity to succeed; (2) parents are 
informed of the education and related opportunities available 
to their children and are provided with the opportunity to 
participate in the education of their children; and (3) public 
notice of the educational rights of homeless children and youth 
is posted at places such as family shelters and soup kitchens. 
The bill also includes new provisions requiring local liaisons 
to coordinate and collaborate with state coordinators and 
community/school personnel responsible for the education of 
homeless children and youth and to assist in the resolution of 
disputes.
    Section 11203--Local Educational Agency Grants. Section 
11203(1) of the bill amends section 723(a) of the act, which 
deals with the services provided by local educational agencies, 
to clarify current law provisions and to prohibit the 
segregation of homeless children and youth from the general 
education population except as is necessary for health and 
safety emergencies or to provide temporary, special, 
supplementary services.
    Section 11203(2) of the bill amends section 723(b) of the 
act, which deals with local applications, to add a requirement 
that the application include an assessment of the educational 
and related needs of homeless youth (which can be undertaken as 
a part of needs assessment for other disadvantaged groups).
    Section 11203(3) of the bill amends section 723(c) of the 
act, which deals with grant awards to local educational 
agencies, to provide that grants be awarded on a competitive 
basis and that grant awards be based on both need and on the 
quality of the application. Factors to be considered in 
determining quality include: (1) needs assessment and the 
likelihood the program will meet those needs; (2) the types, 
intensity, and coordination of services; (3) involvement of 
parents; (4) integration of homeless students; (4) quality of 
evaluation plans; (5) how services under this title will be 
coordinated with other services; and (6) other indicators as 
established by the State educational agency.
    Section 11204--Secretarial Responsibilities. Section 11204 
of the bill amends section 724 of the act to add new provisions 
requiring the Secretary to issue guidelines regarding the 
immediate enrollment of homeless children and youth and to 
collect data regarding homeless education. In addition, the 
reporting requirement is updated, and not later than 4 years 
after enactment, the Secretary is to prepare and submit to the 
President and appropriate congressional committees a report on 
the status of education of homeless youth, which includes 
information on the actions of the Department and the 
effectiveness of programs supported under this subtitle. 
Specifically, the Secretary is to publish in the Federal 
Register, not later than 60 days after date of enactment, 
guidelines to States describing ways in which a State may 
assist local educational agencies in immediately enrolling 
homeless students and how States can review their immunization 
and medical or school records to make such revisions as 
appropriate and necessary in order to more quickly enroll 
homeless students. Under the new information provisions, the 
Secretary to periodically collect and disseminate data 
regarding the number and locale of homeless youth, the 
education and services provided, the extent to which needs are 
being met, and other data needed to carry out homeless 
education programs. The Secretary is to coordinate such 
collection and dissemination with all entities that receive and 
administer programs for the education of homeless children and 
youth.
    Section 11205--Definitions. Section 11205 of the bill 
amends section 725 of the act to include definitions of ``local 
educational agency'' and ``State educational agency.''
    Section 11206--Authorization of Appropriations. Section 
11206 of the bill amends section 726 of the act to authorize a 
funding level of $40 million for fiscal year 2001 and ``such 
sums as may be necessary'' for each of the 4 succeeding fiscal 
years.

Part C--Albert Einstein Distinguished Educator Fellowship Act

    Section 11301 of the bill amends the Albert Einstein 
Distinguished Educator Act of 1994, which is part A of title V 
of the Improving America's Schools Act of 1994. This program is 
administered by the Secretary of Energy and supports 
fellowships for 12 elementary or secondary school mathematics 
or science teachers each fiscal year in the Senate, House, and 
specified Federal agencies. Two revisions are made to the 
current provisions of the act: (1) The order of priority 
provisions, which provide for the order of placement of fellows 
in fiscal years where funding is not sufficient to support 12 
fellows, are amended to specify that first priority will be 
given to the placement of 2--rather than 3--fellows in the 
Department of Energy; and (2) a funding level of $700,000 is 
authorized for fiscal year 2001 and ``such sums as may be 
necessary'' for each of the 4 succeeding fiscal years.

                          IX. ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                              ----------                              


                  Additional Views of Senator Collins

    I strongly support many of the provisions of S. 2, 
especially the opportunity for greater flexibility in the use 
of Federal education grants and the stronger emphasis on State 
and local accountability for student performance. The bill 
approved by the committee gives States and local school 
districts options and flexibility in the use of Federal funding 
which will allow them to meet local needs.
    Specifically, the committee decided to allow States to 
select one of three alternatives to receive federal funds. They 
can either: (1) continue under the traditional ESEA approach of 
receiving formula grants for specific Federal programs for 
specific purposes and applying for competitive grants; (2) 
apply to the Secretary of Education to enter into a 
``Performance Partnership,'' which gives them somewhat more 
flexibility than under current law; or (3) apply to be 1 of 15 
States to have much more flexibility in spending Federal funds 
in return for strict accountability focused on student 
achievement. This is called the ``Academic Achievement for 
All''or ``Straight A's'' program.
    No matter how a State decides to receive its funding, the 
State, all local education agencies, and all schools are held 
accountable for student performance. The committee's bill 
requires that all students must achieve adequate progress each 
year in order to meet the State's definition of proficiency 
within 10 years. Furthermore, the legislation clearly outlines 
the corrective actions that must be taken when schools or 
education agencies fail to meet this goal, and it gives States 
greater resources to help struggling schools.
    The Straight A's program offers the most promise of 
innovative local efforts to improve public education for all 
children. I am concerned, however, that its language could be 
interpreted to authorize states to use federal funds for 
vouchers for private schools. Although the language does not 
explicitly allow this use, the committee debate suggested that 
it could be interpreted as allowing for vouchers. I am opposed 
to the use of Federal funds for private school vouchers, and I 
believe that the language of the Academic Achievement for All 
program must be modified to prevent this potential diversion of 
Federal funds to private schools. I intend to offer or support 
a floor amendment to make certain that language in S. 2 clearly 
prohibits Federal funding of private school vouchers.

                                                  Susan M. Collins.

   Additional Views of Senators Gregg, Frist, Hutchinson, Brownback, 
                          hagel, and Sessions

            academic achievement for all act (straight a's)

    Straight A's, permits 15 interested States and school 
districts to enter into an agreement with the Secretary of 
Education in which the States agree to specific academic 
improvements for their lowest performing students in return for 
the ability to consolidate their share of Federal funds to 
better serve their neediest students. This flexibility in 
return for accountability model is based on the successful 
charter school model.
    Straight A's is a voluntary demonstration program. No State 
would be forced into Straight A's, rather only those States 
with an interest in this innovative education reform and a 
willingness to be held accountable for reducing the achievement 
gap between the most disadvantaged and advantaged students 
would participate.
    Under current law, States are not held accountable for 
increasing student performance, nor are they required to 
increase student achievement for their most disadvantaged 
students. In fact, under current law, States and school 
districts may use aggregate scores to mask achievement gaps 
between disadvantaged and nondisadvantaged children. Current 
law merely requires States to have some accountability system 
in place, it doesn't require States to improve student 
achievement or to demonstrate any measurable gains from Federal 
programs.
    Straight A's is modeled after the most highly touted 
accountability system in the Nation--Texas. Harvard 
University's Civil Rights Project cited research that found 
Texas' accountability measures led to greater achievement by 
poor and minority students. In fact, Texas has seen the most 
significant gains in student achievement and reducing the 
achievement gap in the Nation.
    Unlike current law, the 15 States who choose to participate 
in Straight A's would be required to establish specific, 
numeric goals for improving student performance for all 
children. For the first time, States would be required to set 
specific academic goals for every major race and ethnic group, 
for economically disadvantaged students, for students with 
limited English proficiency and for migrant students and then 
be held accountable for meeting those goals. Establishing 
specific goals for the neediest students was the foundation of 
Texas's accountability system and is carried over to the 
Straight A's accountability system.
    Under Straight A's, States are required to establish 
specific goals for increased student performance of their most 
disadvantaged students and to also stipulate exactly how much 
they will reduce the achievement gap between their highest and 
lowest performing students. The original purpose of Title I was 
to reduce the achievement gap. Unfortunately, 35 years later, 
the achievement gap has widened and poor children remain 2-4 
grade levels behind their peers in reading and math. Despite 
this disturbing data, Title I does not require States or school 
districts to reduce the achievement gap. Under Straight A's, 
States and school districts would have to commit to reducing 
the achievement gap.
    Furthermore, unlike current law, Straight A's includes a 
deadline for increased student improvement--it requires States 
to reduce the achievement gap and to improve student 
achievement for all students within 5 years. If after 3 years, 
States and school districts have not made significant strides 
in meeting their student academic performance measures, the 
Secretary of Education may terminate the charter. If States 
don't meet those performance measures after 5 years, they lose 
a portion of their Federal funding.
    Straight A's compels participating States and school 
districts to increase student achievement for disadvantaged 
children. For the first time, States will be held accountable 
for academic achievement and they will be rewarded for 
improving student performance or penalized for failing to meet 
their goals of increased performance.
    Straight A's has been called a voucher and a block grant by 
its opponents. Neither charge is merited. Straight A's is 
completely neutral toward vouchers, neither adding to, nor 
subtracting from State laws in this area. Current law contains 
no prohibition on vouchers, leaving that decision to States, 
and Straight A's merely continues this practice.
    Straight A's is clearly not a block grant. No programs are 
repealed, consolidated or folded into Straight A's. Rather, 
States are given the option of consolidating some of their 
Federal funds to better support their reform efforts aimed at 
increasing student achievement.
    Straight A's reform model is based on the belief that 
States and local school districts can be trusted with education 
decision making. States and locals have led the way in popular 
and effective education reform initiatives. Charter schools, 
school performance report cards and merit pay for teachers are 
just a few examples of education reforms that began in the 
States.
    A 1998 National Education Goals Panel Report reported on 
the rapid achievement gains in NC and TX. The study did not 
attribute gains to Federal programs. ``The Study concludes that 
the most plausible explanation for test score gains are found 
in the policy environment established in each State.'' Straight 
A's recognizes that States, when freed from burdensome 
regulations, can make significant educational reforms and 
improve student performance.
    Under welfare, States were provided financial incentives 
and increased flexibility in return for a commitment to reduce 
the welfare rolls. Due to State policies and commitment, the 
number of individuals on welfare has decreased 50 percent over 
five years. (In 1994, 5 million people were on welfare, in 
1999, only 2.5 million people were on welfare).
    If reform-minded States can reduce the number of people on 
welfare by 50 percent in 5 years, we certainly think we should 
give them the opportunity to reduce the number of disadvantaged 
children who can't read at grade level. Straight A's provides 
this opportunity.
    Straight A's isn't for everyone, but it is for 15 States 
and we have already heard from 15 Governors who wish to 
participate in Straight A's. Straight A's frees States and 
schools districts from federal rules, regulations and 
paperwork, in return States agree to have the Federal 
government hold them accountable for substantially increasing 
student achievement for disadvantaged students and for reducing 
the achievement gap in 5 years. Furthermore, it puts access to 
Federal dollars on the line, because at the end of 5 years you 
either win or lose Federal funding based on student 
achievement--not class-size, not technology, not-after school 
care--but on student achievement and student achievement alone.

                                   Judd Gregg.
                                   Tim Hutchinson.
                                   Chuck Hagel.
                                   Bill Frist.
                                   Sam Brownback.
                                   Jeff Sessions.

   Additional Views of Senators Gregg, Frist, Hutchinson, Brownback, 
                          Hagel, and Sessions

                         child centered funding

    The reported bill would allow States and school districts, 
at their discretion, to convert Title I from a school-based 
program to a child-centered program in which the money follows 
the child to the public school they attend. Currently, Title I 
is a school based program. Fully 1/3 of eligible disadvantaged 
children never receive Title I services, not for lack of funds, 
but rather due to a financing system which sends money to 
schools, not students.
    Title I is the largest Federal education program. It was 
created to address the educational needs of disadvantaged 
students and to reduce the achievement gap between 
disadvantaged and advantaged students. While every child has 
access to a public school, 70 percent of children in high 
poverty schools score below even the most basic level of 
reading. Children in high poverty schools are two grade levels 
behind their peers in math and three to four grade levels 
behind in reading. A disadvantaged child only has a 50/50 
chance of even graduating. These are not issues of aptitude but 
the quality of schools these children attend.
    The disparity in the quality of schools disproportionally 
impacts poor students who lack educational alternatives. Since 
ESEA's Title I programs are by far the largest source of 
Federal assistance for disadvantaged students, any ESEA 
reauthorization process should be aimed at improving education 
for Title I students.
    The very serious and real problem of under-serving our 
neediest students can be alleviated, to some extent, by giving 
States and school districts the freedom to establish a per 
pupil amount for each eligible child (portability). This amount 
may be used at the school the child attends or, if the child is 
not receiving the services they need at school, the child's 
parents may ask that the child's per pupil amount be used to 
purchase supplemental services from another school or tutorial 
assistance provider, such as a Sylvan learning center.
    This type of child-centered program creates a much needed 
market for change. Parents would have the ability to take their 
Federal dollars out of a school that is not using them 
effectively and purchase services somewhere else. Parents would 
have the power to choose the best program for their child. 
Under portability, families are empowered and schools are 
compelled to improve in order to keep their students.
    Critics assert that changing Title I to a child-centered 
program would drain resources away from poor public schools. 
Rather than draining resources, portability actually ensures 
for the first time that each eligible child get the services 
they are entitled to. Under current law, the number of unserved 
children is compounded in urban areas. In order to receive 
supplemental services, a disadvantaged child in Houston has to 
be enrolled in a school where 70 percent of the students are 
below the poverty line. In Philadelphia, only children in 
schools where 65 percent of the student population are poor 
receive services. In both cases, if you are an eligible child 
who doesn't happen to be enrolled in a designated Title I 
school you do not receive the Title I dollars you are entitled 
to. In most large cities, hundreds, if not thousands, of poor 
children do not receive the educational assistance to which 
they are entitled.
    Under a child-centered funding stream, schools who enroll 
the largest number of poor children receive the most money. 
This amendment is actually a fairer way to distribute funds 
because it ensures that all eligible children receive services, 
while simultaneously concentrating dollars on high poverty 
schools. Schools will only see a decrease in Title I dollars if 
they don't have as many low income (eligible) children--this is 
how it should be. Money should be going to benefit the needy 
student, not guaranteed to certain schools.
    Furthermore, portability includes a $500 million 
authorization to ensure that all eligible children in a 
participating State or district receives their share of Title I 
dollars. We support a significant increase in Title I funding 
to ensure all eligible children are served, but in return for 
this increase, we believe that States and districts should be 
able to redirect their Title I dollars to the neediest 
students.
    Portability specifically requires participating States and 
school districts to improve the achievement levels of their 
disadvantaged students. States and districts would have to 
establish specific educational goals and a system to measure 
academic progress of all Title I students. In addition, States 
and schools would be required to submit student performance 
data, disaggregated by race, family income, gender and limited 
English proficiency, to the Secretary. The bill also requires 
that GAO conduct an evaluation of participating States and 
school districts. GAO will examine the impact a child-centered 
program will have on student achievement and parental 
satisfaction.
    Portability is a new option for States and school 
districts. Up to 10 States and 20 districts may participate, 
but only if they choose to participate, and only if they are 
willing to be held accountable for improving the performance of 
their most disadvantaged children. Although portability is only 
an option, it does do 3 very important things: it provides 
greater accountability than under current law, ensures that all 
eligible children receive Title I dollars, and provides parents 
with real options so that if they are unhappy with the service 
their child is receiving, they can request that their child 
receive services from another provider.
    Some critics have alleged that portability is a voucher 
program. That is not true. Under a child-centered program, 
parents are not permitted to use their child's per pupil amount 
to cover cost of admission at a private school. Rather, a 
parent may move their child to a better performing public 
school or use their child's per pupil amount to access tutorial 
services by a private provider such as a Sylvan learning 
center. Current law already allows this type of limited access 
to private providers in the Reading Excellence Act.
    These same critics want to prevent children from accessing 
education services from anywhere else other than the schools. 
Despite the fact that over 7,000 schools have been identified 
as failing and some as long as 4, 6 and even 10 years, critics 
of portability would rather have children stuck in these 
schools, than give a few States and school districts the 
freedom to use Title I dollars to allow poor parents to access 
tutorial services from private providers.
    On the issue of tutorial service providers, Democrats 
assert that the per-pupil amount would be so small that parents 
couldn't access tutorial services. They're wrong. The average 
per-pupil expenditure, which is between $400-$600, could be 
used for weekly tutoring services from the very successful 
Sylvan learning Center for an entire school year or summer 
school.
    Portability provides a monetary incentive for schools to 
improve educational services to disadvantaged children. Good 
schools will be rewarded, failing schools will be forced to 
improve, and families will have more options.

                                   Judd Gregg.
                                   Tim Hutchinson.
                                   Chuck Hagel.
                                   Bill Frist.
                                   Sam Brownback.
                                   Jeff Sessions.

                           X. MINORITY VIEWS

                              ----------                              


 Minority Views of Senators Kennedy, Dodd, Harkin, Mikulski, Bingaman, 
                      Wellstone, Murray, and Reed

    In the early days of the Republic, our Nation's founders 
placed the establishment of public schools among the highest 
priorities for our young nation. Thomas Jefferson--one of the 
earliest and most ardent advocates of public schools--stated 
that ``it is * * * imperative that the Nation see to it that a 
suitable education be provided for all its citizens.''
    It is our view that many of our Nation's public schools 
have fallen short of this great goal in recent times. Ninety 
percent of American children attend public schools. We owe it 
to them to ensure that every public school and every teacher is 
able to help all school children in the nation reach their full 
potential.
    From its beginnings, the Federal Government's investments 
in education have centered on providing opportunities for 
individuals and achievements for the Nation. Because education 
has improved the quality of life for generations of American 
families, it should marshal the best of the Nation's resources 
and talent, and be one of the top priorities on our national 
agenda. The Federal role in education is narrow in scope, to 
allow for maximum State and local initiative, but the Federal 
Government has unique responsibilities as well:
          It must meet the overarching needs that no average 
        parent, community or State can satisfy on their own, 
        particularly the needs of the most disadvantaged 
        families and communities;
          It must invest in educational statistics, research, 
        and development to chart national progress in 
        education, create innovations for schools, and improve 
        communication among all participants in education at 
        all levels--Federal, State, and local.
          It must extend educational opportunities and 
        innovations to those who otherwise would be left out.
          It must provide targeted leadership, technical 
        assistance, and financial support for areas where 
        national needs have been identified, so that all 
        Americans have access to the support they need to 
        improve education in their schools.
    Within these roles, families, communities, and States still 
retain the primary responsibility for deciding how to educate 
children and how to pay for that education. But, how well they 
perform that role is a matter of great national interest. The 
Nation depends upon them to provide an education that 
contributes to the overall well-being of the country. For 
example, public expectations were expressed in 1989 in the form 
of national education goals, not Federal Government goals but 
national goals. States and local communities should adopt these 
goals and make them their own, because they have the ultimate 
responsibility to meet them.
    Members of the majority argue that, because states have 
paramount responsibilities for education, the Federal 
Government should have a diminished role. This argument ignores 
the nation's vital interest in education--an interest as 
fundamental as the Nation's interest in its security and 
economy. Others say that, since federal spending is such a 
small part of the overall total spent on education, the federal 
role is relatively unimportant. It is true that the Federal 
financial role is small. Only about 8 percent of overall 
government spending for elementary and secondary schools comes 
from the Federal Government. But to say that the federal role 
can be downgraded because of this fact is to ignore the major 
benefit that these funds have provided.
    Six years ago, Congress and President Clinton took urgent 
steps to begin to turn around failing schools. In the 
reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 
in 1994, and with passage that year of the GOALS 2000 
legislation, we established bold new goals for schools to 
prepare children to succeed in today's world by mastering the 
basics and reaching high standards of achievement.
    These were important actions that launched changes in 
schools across America. We need to build on the progress we 
have made in recent years. But more change is necessary--much 
more--if we are to turn around failing schools and give 
students the education they need and deserve.
    We believe the committee should have--and could have--acted 
together, and can still act together, to strengthen and expand 
the federal helping hand to support innovative change and help 
all children meet high standards of achievement.
    In recent years, we have set the stage for major further 
reforms, helping states put high standards and genuine 
accountability in place. We know we can do more to bring these 
reforms to life in every classroom across the country. The need 
is urgent, and we can't stop now. Too many schools and the 
children in them are in urgent need of help.
    During the committee's deliberations, we put forward common 
sense proposals to empower parents and strengthen the 
partnership between the Federal Government, the states, and 
local schools.
    We want to work with parents and communities to improve 
public schools. We cannot afford to stand on the sidelines and 
watch schools fail, when we can do so much more to help parents 
and communities achieve better results for their children and 
their schools.
    We want to help schools put a qualified teacher in every 
classroom, and provide every new teacher with a qualified 
mentor. We want to help reduce class sizes, so that students 
get the individual attention they need and teachers can 
maintain better discipline and concentrate more effectively on 
teaching and learning. We want to help communities build modern 
schools, where all students will be safe and can learn cutting-
edge technologies. We want to help communities expand after-
school activities to keep children off the streets and out of 
trouble, and stay on top of their studies.
    We want to work to increase the federal investment in 
education to help states, communities, and schools rescue 
failing schools, deal with rising enrollments, meet the 
demandsof higher standards of achievement, and address the challenges 
of diversity and poverty in the nation's schools. We need to do all we 
can to target resources to the neediest communities, so that the most 
disadvantaged students get a good education.
    We should also require states, districts, and schools, in 
spending federal funds for education, to use strategies that 
have proven effective--no fancy schemes or risky ventures, just 
programs and initiatives with a proven track record of success. 
We should do more to see that schools are held accountable for 
doing what it takes to help all children meet high standards of 
achievement. That means closing the achievement gap between 
minority and non-minority students--between poor and non-poor 
students--and between English-speaking students and those with 
limited proficiency in English.
    Schools should be held accountable for ensuring a qualified 
teacher, one who is trained in both content and teaching 
methods, in every classroom. We need greater parental 
involvement in schools. Parents and the general public can help 
make schools accountable if they receive better information 
about the quality of their schools and the progress by their 
schools in meeting goals for student achievement.
    This kind of partnership ensures that the federal 
government will be a strong helping hand for states, 
communities, schools, parents, and children. It will help to 
ensure that the neediest students receive the help they 
deserve. It is the right direction for education, and the right 
direction for the nation.
    Parents and educators know from experience that these 
common sense initiatives will work--smaller classes, better 
teachers, more parental involvement, safer modern schools, and 
holding schools accountable for results. We are prepared to 
provide the resources to local schools and work hand-in-hand 
with parents to make these initiatives a reality.
    We believe that we owe the nation's children no less. But, 
unfortunately, the legislation adopted by the committee fails 
children, fails parents, and fails to assure change and 
improvement in troubled public schools.
    We have an opportunity to build on recent progress and 
invest in programs that we know will bring about change. But 
the committee bill simply throws money at the problem in the 
form of block grants, sets up vague guidelines, and hopes 
things will get better. As Senator Murray noted during the 
committee's deliberations, we owe our children more than just 
``blind faith.''
    To make matters worse, instead of improving public schools, 
the committee bill allows the transfer of scarce federal 
education dollars away from public schools into private school 
vouchers.
    We are disappointed that the committee bill fundamentally 
turns its back on public schools and the nation's 
schoolchildren. At best, it endorses the status quo, and at 
worst, it back-tracks on our commitment to the neediest 
children and schools.
    For these reasons, we voted ``no.'' The needs of public 
schools are too great. We intend to press forward to strengthen 
public schools.

   Overview of ESEA Reform Since the Bipartisan 1994 Reauthorization

Standards-Based Reform Is Working

    In 1994, President Clinton and the Congress completed a 
major overhaul of the federal role in education through the 
reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 
and the enactment of the Goals 2000 Act with strong bipartisan 
support. For the first time, we established the clear 
expectation that all children can and should reach high 
standards. The Acts included provisions to improve teaching and 
learning, increase flexibility and accountability, strengthen 
parent and community involvement, and target resources to the 
highest poverty schools and communities. The 1994 statutes sent 
a clear message that the status quo was unacceptable and that 
major changes were needed in our education system. They 
provided increased flexibility to facilitate these changes, in 
exchange for greater accountability for improving student 
achievement. Largely because of these statutes, states have put 
in place standards and assessments.
    There is strong evidence that the new emphasis in federal 
education statutes, particularly the emphasis on high 
standards, systemic reform, and new flexibility to innovate, 
has helped states, districts, and schools carry out the 
difficult work of education reform.
          Student achievement is improving.
          Schools are becoming safer.
          Most states, districts, and schools agree that 
        federal education programs provide them with more than 
        enough flexibility to improve their schools.

Student Achievement Is Improving--But There Is Still More To Be Done

    The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), has 
shown significant increases in math scores at the 4th, 8th, and 
12th grades. Reading and math performance among nine-year-olds 
in high-poverty public schools and among the lowest-achieving 
fourth-graders has improved significantly.
    The achievement gap between black and Hispanic students and 
white students has narrowed since 1982; the greatest gains in 
science were made by black and Hispanic students.
    Average SAT scores--math and verbal--were higher in 1999 
than the averages for either 1983 or 1989. These improvements 
come at the same time that the proportion of test-takers with a 
native language other than English has been increasing (to 8 
percent in 1999). ACT scores are continuing a 10-year trend of 
stable or increasing scores, at the same time that record 
numbers of students are taking the exams.
    More students are staying in school and taking challenging 
courses. Dropout rates are lower today than in the 1970's and 
1980's, and are particularly lower for black youth. In 1972, 21 
percent of black students dropped out of school. By 1997, that 
rate was down to 13%. For Hispanics, the rate fell from 34 
percent to 25 percent. It fell from 12% to 8% for whites. In 
1997, 89 percent of persons age 16-24 had completed high school 
or attained a GED.
    Today's students are taking more challenging courses than 
the students of the 1980s. The percentage of students 
completing a core curriculum that includes 4 years of English 
and 3 years each of social studies, science, and mathematics 
more than tripled between 1982 and 1994. Similarly, the 
percentage of students taking higher-level courses such as 
algebra II, trigonometry, chemistry, and physics has increased 
significantly. For example, in 1982, 36 percent of all students 
were enrolled in Algebra II. In 1994, that rate was 58 percent. 
The increase was even more dramatic for black students (24 
percent to 44 percent) and Hispanic students (20 percent to 50 
percent). The number of advanced placement exams taken by high 
school students nearly tripled between 1984 and 1997.
    College attendance is at an all time high and is increasing 
for all students. College enrollment for high school graduates 
(ages 16-24) has increased from 53 percent in 1983 to 67 
percent in 1997. The increase has been particularly significant 
for blacks (39 percent to 60 percent), Hispanics (54 percent to 
66 percent), and women (55 percent to 68 percent). College 
completion is also on the increase. In 1998, 31 percent of 
adults age 25-29 had completed a bachelor's degree.
    North Carolina, for example, has made exceptional gains in 
math and reading on the National Assessment of Educational 
Progress between 1992 and 1996. A recent study by Rand 
researchers concluded that the most plausible explanation for 
the gains in test scores in the state is its aligned system of 
standards, curriculum, and assessments, and its efforts to hold 
schools accountable for the improvement of all students.
    Three-year trends reported by states and districts show 
progress in the percentage of students in the highest-poverty 
schools meeting state standards for proficiency in mathematics 
and reading. Across the country, in urban and rural schools, 
among poor and minority students, and across content areas, 
academic performance is improving.

Schools Are Becoming Safer--Though We Still Have a Way To Go

    The Annual Report on School Safety for 1999 concluded that 
nationally, schools--compared to the community or the home--are 
safe places, and that students in school today are not 
significantly more likely to be victimized than in previous 
years.
    The overall school crime rate decreased from 1993 to 1997. 
Crime in school facilities or on the way to or from school has 
fallen. Most school crime is theft, not violent crime.
    The percentage of high school students who carried a weapon 
on school property or were involved in a physical fight at 
school has decreased significantly since 1993.
    States and school districts are becoming increasingly 
attentive to the need to ensure that all students attend 
schools where they are known by and feel connected to adults in 
the school.

States, Districts, and Schools Have the Flexibility They Need to Carry 
        Out Reform

    In 1994, under the leadership of President Clinton, many 
innovative ways to make federal support for education more 
flexible were included in ESEA. Consolidated plans, additional 
schoolwide programs, consolidated administrative funding, broad 
waiver authority, and the ED-Flex program have reduced 
burdensome paperwork and other requirements, in exchange for 
focusing on better results for students.
    The Clinton Administration also took a leadership role in 
reducing unnecessary regulations and increasing regulatory 
flexibility. In 1994, before the reauthorization of ESEA, the 
Department of Education had 42 sets of regulations that 
governed elementary and secondary education. That number has 
been reduced to 10 since 1994. The two largest of the remaining 
of regulations, Title I, Part A and Impact Aid, have both been 
significantly reduced from their pre-1995 sizes. For example, 
Title I regulations have been cut from 54 pages to 24 pages.
    In addition, in the implementation of the 1994 
reauthorization, through the mechanism of the consolidated 
plans provision in Title XIV of ESEA, which offers an 
alternative to filing individual program applications, the 
burden on state and local governments was greatly reduced. 
State educational agencies no longer have to file specific 
program applications. The consolidated plan provisions had the 
effect of relieving the agencies of including information on 
many regulatory and statutory requirements.
    In the Title I program regulations, long detailed sections 
on how to select children to be served and how to involve 
parents were eliminated. Programs such as the Safe and Drug-
Free Schools and Communities Act program (Title IV of ESEA), 
the Eisenhower Professional Development Program (Title II of 
ESEA), and the Innovative Programs (Title VI of ESEA) now 
operate entirely without regulations. Their predecessor 
programs before the 1994 reauthorization operated with detailed 
regulations.
    Recent surveys indicate that most states, districts, and 
schools agree that the federal government is providing the 
flexibility they need to improve their schools. Based on its 
analysis of state plans and waiver requests, the Citizens' 
Commission on Civil Rights concluded that the new Title I has 
not imposed unduly burdensome requirements on state or local 
fund recipients.
    In addition, all states can now apply for additional 
flexibility under the Education-Flexibility Partnership Act. By 
giving states the authority to waive certain statutory and 
regulatory restrictions under current law, we give states 
greater flexibility to do the best job they can in meeting 
their fundamental education goals to help all children reach 
high standards of achievement. The Act contains important 
provisions to ensure that the new flexibility is matchedwith 
reasonable provisions on accountability, so that it will be clear 
whether the flexibility is being used to achieve the education goals 
intended. But, according to the Washington Post, on March 27, 2000, 
more flexibility is not a priority for states. Only North Carolina has 
applied to be an ``ED-Flex'' state under the new law. Rhode Island 
won't apply because, as the state's education commissioner said, ``I 
can get the flexibility I want under the current opportunities.''
    According to the General Accounting Office, state officials 
believe that Goals 2000 is helping states meet their own 
education reform goals. In fact, nearly 90 percent of districts 
report that Goals 2000 funds have been helping train teachers 
to implement standards. 76 percent of districts use funds for 
aligning curriculum and instruction with standards, and 70 
percent use funds for developing aligned assessments.
    More than 80 percent of poor school districts, and almost 
half of all districts nationwide, report that Title I is 
``driving standards-based reform in the district as a whole.'' 
In addition, Title I funds, as well as all federal education 
funds, are more targeted to high-poverty districts than state 
and local funds. Title I now supports 95% of the highest-
poverty schools and is helping these schools to dramatically 
improve student performance.
    With federal support, all 50 states, the District of 
Columbia, and Puerto Rico have made progress in establishing 
high academic standards. Where states continue work on 
standards-based reform over a period of time, students have 
benefitted.
    While it is clear that progress has been made since the 
bipartisan reauthorization in 1994, we must strengthen our 
national effort to increase the pace and magnitude of change 
needed in the nation's public schools. We must focus our 
efforts on public schools, because 90 percent of the nation's 
children are educated in these schools.
    We need an effective national education agenda which builds 
on the 1994 Acts by increasing accountability for results, so 
that no child is left out or left behind. In addition, we must 
make sure that there is a qualified teacher in every classroom, 
continue our national effort to reduce class size, improve our 
action plan for providing after-school programs, and enact a 
comprehensive plan to modernize and repair the nation's public 
schools.

More Progress Needs to be Made

    Although it is clear that progress has been made since the 
bipartisan reauthorization in 1994, much remains to be done. 
U.S. 12th graders score below the international average in 
mathematics and science, compared to the 21 nations 
participating in the TIMSS assessment. The high school dropout 
rate has declined since peaking in 1979, but has been slowly 
rising in the 1990s, according to the National Center for 
Education Statistics.
    Achievement gaps remain between minority and non-minority 
students, as well as between poor and non-poor students. In 
1998, 32 percent of students in the highest poverty schools met 
or exceeded the NAEP basic level in reading--about half the 
rate nationally of students in public schools. In math, 42 
percent of students in the highest-poverty schools scored at or 
above the NAEP basic level in 1996, compared with 62 percent in 
all public schools. Although dropout rates have declined 
nationally, African Americans and Hispanic students still 
graduate from high school at lower rates (82% and 66.7% 
respectively in 1997) than white students (90.5% in 1997). Over 
30 percent of all math teachers are teaching outside their 
field of academic preparation--and the percentages are higher 
in other academic areas and in high-poverty schools. Almost 15 
percent of the new teachers hired in high-minority districts 
lack full teaching credentials. Obtaining such credentials 
usually involves passing tests to demonstrate needed skills and 
knowledge.
    We must strengthen our national effort to increase the pace 
and magnitude of change needed in public schools. We must have 
an effective national education agenda which builds on the 1994 
Act by increasing accountability for results, so that no child 
is left out or left behind. In addition, we must make sure 
there is a qualified teacher in every classroom, and provide 
substantial support for other resources that are the tools for 
accelerated progress in schools, such as reduced class size; 
more after-school programs; and modern, technologically-
equipped schools that are not overcrowded and that provide an 
atmosphere conducive to learning.

              ESEA 2000--A Disappointing Partisan Process

    Although parts of the Committee bill are bipartisan, such 
as Safe and Drug-Free Schools, Ready-to-Learn, Impact Aid, 
Public Charter Schools, Title VII, Even Start, and magnet 
schools, we are disappointed by the fundamental partisan nature 
of the bill.
    Our commitment to producing a strong bipartisan bill, as we 
have done many times in the past when we were in the majority, 
is without question. We participated in the Committee's 
detailed and thoughtful hearings, and worked steadily 
throughout the last 18 months toward a bill that the whole 
Committee could support.
    Indeed it appeared to us that the outlines of a bipartisan 
bill were coming into focus after detailed discussions on the 
substance of federal policy in education. We agreed, in 
principle, to set aside the most partisan issues for the floor 
so that we could focus on a strong bipartisan bill in the 
committee. We worked together for three months and made 
substantial progress, reaching bipartisan agreements on Safe 
and Drug-Free Schools, many provisions of Title I, Technology, 
Teacher Quality, and other issues. Our approach was not 
ideological, but pragmatic. It focused on key policy questions 
and their solutions. We looked at research on how to get better 
results for all children. We were hopeful that working together 
we could report a strong, bipartisan bill out of Committee.
    Unfortunately, as we completed a second round of 
discussions on ESEA issues, our Republican colleagues announced 
that they were unilaterally replacing the bipartisan approach 
to teacher quality in the draft bill with the partisan, 
divisive Teacher Empowerment block grant. Republicans refused 
to agree to any compromise on the program, and negotiations 
broke down at that point.
    By the time we began the committee mark up of the bill on 
March 1st, many of the key bipartisan provisions negotiated had 
been stripped from the bill, and many partisan provisions had 
been included, such as the Straight A's block grant.

  Republicans Focused on Block Grants, Which Will Not Bring Change or 
                      Better Results for Children

    The committee bill makes block grants the central focus of 
reauthorizing ESEA, creating a tangled web of administrative 
chaos and policies that undermine national priorities in 
education, such as reducing class size, improving teacher 
quality, and closing the digital divide. Block grants undermine 
the targeting of resources to the neediest students and 
eliminate critical accountability provisions that help ensure 
better results for all children. Democrats unanimously voted 
against the bill for many reasons, but first and foremost 
because the block grant approach undermines the federal 
commitment to helping communities and parents reform and 
improve public schools in every neighborhood for every child.
    Republicans supported and approved the Teacher Empowerment 
Block grant, the 50-state Straight A's Block grant, and a 
second 15-state Straight A's block grant. Block grants are the 
wrong direction for education, and do nothing to spur change in 
public schools.

Straight A's Block Grants Are Anti-Local Control, Anti-Accountability, 
        and Pro-Status Quo

    The Academic Achievement for All Act--``Straight A's,'' 
whether in the 50-state form, or the 15-state form--abandons 
the national commitment to help the nation's most disadvantaged 
children get a good education through proven effective reforms 
of public schools. The bill gives states a blank check for over 
$12 billion--and then turns its back on holding states 
accountable for results.
    History shows that block grants haven't worked and they 
won't work now. Block grants eliminate accountability. A 1997 
study by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that 
the Maternal and Child Health Block Grant suffered from lack of 
accountability and illustrated the difficulty of tracking how 
states use funds and how many children were reached. In the 
bill, states are not held accountable for educational results 
until after 5 years. By that time, many students will have lost 
five years of potential gains in student achievement. Under the 
bill, states must only demonstrate statewide performance. They 
can ignore failing schools if a few schools excel--and increase 
the statewide average. A state could demonstrate statewide 
overall progress based on progress by wealthier communities, 
while a lack of progress in disadvantaged communities remains 
statistically hidden. States should have to demonstrate 
progress in student achievement in each school and each 
district, so that no community or child is left behind.
    In addition, the accountability provisions in the 
Republican block grant proposals are of little significance. If 
states fail to make progress, the only required response is to 
prohibit the state from participating in the block grant 
program. Even this weak repercussion is unlikely to be 
implemented, because the states define progress without any 
federal or local input or general legislative parameters. Under 
the Democratic accountability proposal, which builds on current 
law, states set goals for student performance, but these goals 
are reviewed by the Secretary of Education and must be set 
within the context of the goal that all students attain 
proficiency within 10 years. Annual, numeric goals must be set 
for improved performance, as well as separate goals for low 
income and minority students, in order to ensure that 
achievement gaps are eliminated. If schools or districts fail 
to meet these goals, districts and states, respectively, must 
take action to assist the school or district, and supplemental 
resources are provided. Research-based school improvement 
strategies must be implemented. If the school or district 
continues to fail, sanctions are imposed.
    There is no real accountability for closing the achievement 
gap in the majority's block grant proposals. Although the 
proposals require states to set goals for certain groups, as 
mentioned above, goals for student performance are set at the 
state level and there is little repercussion for failure. In 
addition, the proposal would free participants from 
requirements in current law to include all students in state 
assessments. Under the majority's block grant proposal, ``all 
students'' is defined as ``all students attending public or 
charter schools that are participating in the state's 
assessment system.'' There are no provisions requiring states 
to include all students in that assessment system. Therefore, a 
state could exclude students from assessments without any 
accountability for their performance.
    Block grants threaten funding for education. Historically, 
Congress increases funding for programs targeted on national 
priorities, not block grants. This is no time to reduce our 
investment in education. We should increase it. According to a 
1995 GAO study, total funding for nine block grants created in 
1981 declined by 12 percent, or $1 billion, in 1982. Funding 
for Title VI (formerly Chapter 2) has decreased by 50 percent 
since FY82, when the block grant was created. In FY82, $708 
million (in 1999 dollars) was appropriated for the programs. In 
FY99, $375 million was appropriated.
    In contrast, because Title I, technology, and other federal 
programs are targeted to important national priorities, 
appropriations for these programs have increased over time. For 
example, funding for Title I has almost doubled since FY82, 
from $4.1 billion (in FY99 dollars) to $7.9 billion in 2000. 
Unfortunately, even with the increases, these programs are 
still underfunded.
    In addition, some of the programs that were originally 
consolidated, such as grants for professional development, 
magnet schools, and gifted and talented education, were later 
re-created as separate federal programs. After submerging these 
programs in a block grant, Congress--on a bipartisan basis--
decided that these needs were not being met at the state and 
local levels and remained priorities of national importance.
    Block grants leave the door open for waste and abuse--and 
provide no focus on proven effective strategies to improve 
schools. Senator DeWine, in urging increased accountability 
measures, noted the poor history of states and local districts 
in spending Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities funds; 
he characterized those dollars as being ``raided'' for pet 
projects or to support ineffective methods. School districts 
and schools could use scarce public taxdollars to support fads 
and gimmicks with no basis in research or proven practice. They could 
even use the money to support the football team, to buy computer games, 
or to buy new office furniture, if they decide that these uses serve 
``educational purposes.'' In short, the Act provides no assurance that 
federal funds will go to improve instruction and teacher quality, 
strengthen curriculum, reduce class size, provide extended learning 
opportunities, or support other proven strategies for helping all 
students learn to high standards.
    Under Straight A's, there is no accountability at the 
school district or school level. Only the state must show that 
it has substantially--not entirely--met its own goals. The only 
penalty if a state does not partially meet its goals is that 
after five years, it can no longer block grant the programs. 
There is no requirement for reporting at the district or school 
level on progress in improving student achievement, and there 
is no requirement for helping to improve low-performing 
schools.
    History also shows that block grants allow the misdirection 
of funds. When states and localities received billions of 
dollars in the tobacco settlement, we heard their good 
intentions to use the funds to improve health care and stop 
children from smoking. Some state and local officials have kept 
that commitment. But many others have succumbed to the pressure 
to use the tobacco funds to build new sidewalks, provide new 
tax breaks, build new prisons, and, in the case of Los Angeles, 
pay the legal settlement costs in the recent police corruption 
cases. The tobacco funds do not have the limitations that would 
apply to this education bill. But we all know that there will 
be large pressures on the states to use the education block 
grant proposed in this bill for activities that do very little 
to enhance the quality of public schools.
    The block grants authorized by the bill harken back to 
mistakes made during the early days of Title I--mistakes we 
thought were long since corrected. A 1969 report on how the 
1965 Title I program funds were spent--when Title I was a state 
block grant--shows that states seriously misused the funds. 
State bureaucracies were fattened with funds that were supposed 
to go to schools. States and districts used funds to purchase 
football and band uniforms. Some purchased swimming pools. We 
cannot afford to go back to those days. We must insist that 
federal funds are spent on improving the academic achievement 
of all students.
    Block grants also undermine targeting to disadvantaged 
communities. The 15-State Straight A's program holds school 
districts harmless for the amount of funding they received 
under Title I in the previous year. Therefore, any new money 
appropriated could be reallocated to wealthier districts and 
schools. Needy districts would no longer be assured the 
additional funding they should get due to increased enrollments 
of poor children. In addition, the amendment does not protect 
any within-district targeting provisions under Title I. At 
FY2000 funding levels other than Title I, over $4.7 billion 
could be spent in any district without any targeting.
    We understand the pressures that state governments face to 
fund education. But, we know that states don't target resources 
to the neediest schools and children who need additional help. 
Federal funds are significantly more targeted to low-income 
children than state funds. A recent General Accounting Office 
report found that state formulas are less targeted on high-need 
children and school districts than federal formulas. GAO found 
that states provide an additional 62 cents for each needy child 
for every dollar for all children, while the federal investment 
provided $4.73 per poor child for every dollar for all 
children.
    The Straight A's program also undermines local control. The 
amendment concentrates educational decision-making at the state 
level. By authorizing the state to decide whether it will enter 
into a performance agreement, the Act gives the state ultimate 
authority to determine the parameters of the agreement, 
including which schools and school districts will receive funds 
and how funds may be spent. Far from giving local districts 
flexibility, as policies and waiver provisions under current 
law have, Straight A's would increase the power of governors 
over local education policy at the expense of local districts, 
local school officials, and parents.
    The majority argued that block grants are needed to return 
control of education to local communities. The reality is that 
there is already clear local control of education, and the 1994 
Act provided even more flexibility to local authorities in how 
they spend Title I dollars. States and communities provide 92 
percent of funding for education. It is preposterous to think 
that the federal government--which provides only 8 percent of 
all K-12 education funding--can run schools. What Washington 
can do is help local communities meet education reform 
priorities when their budgets are stretched too thin. 
Washington can also target scarce public tax dollars on areas 
of national need, serve as a strong partner in education 
reform, and help establish a system that holds all officials 
accountable for children's academic progress.
    GAO found that for major federal elementary and secondary 
education programs, the Department of Education sent over 99 
cents of every dollar to states, and states, in turn, sent 94 
cents to local school districts. There is no massive waste or 
federal bureaucracy in federal education programs.
    The Straight A's block grants also deny special populations 
of students guaranteed help for meeting high standards. 
Migrant, homeless, and immigrant students would no longer be 
assured the extra help they need to stay in school and succeed 
in school. Senator Kennedy and Senator Bingaman offered 
amendments to exclude programs that support these students from 
the block grant, but the majority rejected the amendments.
    States could use the money for any ``educational 
purposes,'' including private school vouchers that would drain 
funds away from public schools. In the Senate mark up, Senator 
Gregg confirmed that funds under his 15-state block grant could 
be used to support private school vouchers if a state approved 
them. Billions of public tax dollars could be diverted to 
private and religious schools, with no accountability for 
raising students' academic achievement. This diversion would 
represent a major shift in priorities for the role of the 
federal government in education.
    Finally, Straight A's abdicates our responsibility in a 
reauthorization to examine and improve federal efforts. If 
there are issues with federal programs, we should fix them--not 
justhand them off to the states and local communities.

 Undermining Standards-Based Reform Under Title I and Diverting Scarce 
  Public Dollars from Needy Public Schools to Private Schools Through 
                                Vouchers

    The Republican majority further undermines public school 
reform through ``portability'' of Title I. Currently, Title I 
is funded at approximately $8 billion, only one-third of the 
level needed to fully fund the program. We are pleased that the 
committee unanimously adopted Senator Dodd's amendment to 
increase the Title I authorization from $10 billion to $15 
billion. However, at the same time that we signaled strong 
support for the program, the Republican majority voted to 
undermine it, and refused to strengthen it or hold Title I 
schools more accountable for results.
    We are extremely disappointed that the Republican majority 
did not make significant changes to strengthen Title I to 
accelerate successful reforms in schools across the country, 
and to turn around failing schools. Title I is the cornerstone 
of federal elementary and secondary education, but it was 
undercut in nearly every amendment offered and adopted by the 
majority. Its unique purposes and focus are lost within the new 
maze of Straight A's proposals included in the bill. Additional 
amendments provide for Title I funds, without any limitation, 
to go to support private school vouchers and to transport 
students to other schools. The Republican majority adopted a 
provision to allow 10 states and 20 districts to undermine 
Title I and the reform of schools in the most disadvantaged 
communities. The Republicans turned their backs on the recent 
success of standards-based reform by adopting Senator Gregg's 
amendment to make Title I ``portable.''
    The portability proposal gives students and parents false 
hope by promising increased educational support for low-income 
students. ``Portability'' under the Gregg amendment would 
allocate a per-child share of Title I funds to virtually every 
school in a district, regardless of whether a school contains 
the concentration of poverty presently required to receive a 
Title I allocation. Because Title I funding levels are only 
sufficient to serve about one-third of eligible students, this 
provision would result in an immediate and drastic cut in the 
level and quality of supplementary educational services 
provided to low-achieving children.
    Under portability, the targeting of Title I funds on 
schools and pupils with the greatest need for assistance would 
be substantially reduced. Districts in the highest poverty 
quartile currently receive 43 percent of Title I funds, but 
only 23 percent of State and local funds. This amendment would 
enable States to distribute Title I funds in a way that creates 
further inequities in spending and result in a significant 
reduction in Title I resources for the neediest recipients and 
the highest poverty schools. For decades, Congress has 
recognized that schools enrolling high concentrations of 
children living in poverty face the most difficult challenges, 
and are much more likely to have higher proportions of children 
who are failing to meet State academic standards. As a result, 
Title I grants have been historically concentrated on the 
higher poverty schools, and they should continue to be targeted 
in this way if they are to address the greatest needs. If Title 
I funds are dispersed among public schools regardless of need, 
or to numerous private outside providers, the program will not 
be able to function as intended. The solution to ensure that 
all eligible children are served by Title I is not an 
unworkable portability scheme, but for Congress to fully fund 
Title I. The Congressional Research Service has estimated that 
it would cost $24 billion to fully serve all eligible 
children--three times the current funding level.
    Redistributing funds through portability hurts poor 
children. The Congressionally-mandated Prospects Study strongly 
suggests that the need for federal assistance is greatest in 
schools with high concentrations of poverty. As shown before, 
children can be given more public school choice, without 
destroying the targeting of funds to schools with high 
concentrations of poverty.
    Portability would also provide too little money to purchase 
educational services on an individual basis, or in schools with 
small numbers of Title I students. When funds are combined and 
concentrated on a substantial number of low-income pupils, 
however, they are far more effective. In fact, the bill already 
recognizes this important fact. Section 1001 (Statement of 
Purpose) states that one of the purposes of Title I is 
accomplished by ``* * * distributing resources sufficient to 
make a difference to local education agencies and schools where 
the needs are greatest.'' Under the Gregg amendment, if 
students opt to take their allotment to an outside provider, 
what happens to the students who remain in the original school? 
The school will not be able to maintain the same level of 
services with only a fraction of what it had been receiving. 
Further, what if a parent requests supplemental services from 
an outside provider but also elects to stay in the home school 
and continue to receive Title I services there?
    Portability undermines reform. Since the 1994 
reauthorization, States, districts and schools have been 
restructuring their Title I programs with a focus on helping 
all children achieve to high state standards. The National 
Assessment of Title I reports that these changes are beginning 
to show results and are contributing to increased student 
achievement. Portability would wreak havoc on this process by 
disrupting program funding in current Title I schools. The 
current average Title I per-pupil expenditure of $600 to $650 
can provide a significant amount of resources and services, but 
only if combined to help a substantial number of students in a 
school. Tying Title I dollars to individual students diminishes 
the benefits and success of schoolwide programs and research-
based school reform models.
    Portability reduces or eliminates Title I program 
accountability for the achievement of eligible students. 
Current provisions hold schools accountable for improved 
student achievement. Under this proposal, parents of eligible 
children could use their Title I funds to purchase 
supplementary educational services from a wide variety of 
providers, including private and religious schools and for-
profit businesses. There is no mechanism to ensure such 
providers provide quality services to children, and no 
accountability measures are required of these providers. Who 
will decide which providers are acceptable? Who will be liable 
for the children's safety and well-being while they are in the 
care of outside providers? If parents choose an outside 
provider and are dissatisfied, can they opt to make another 
choice and receive another allotment?
    Portability also opens the door to vouchers, at a time when 
courts are again rejecting these questionable policies enacted 
at the state and local levels. Public schools would be required 
at the request of parents to contract with a tutorial 
assistance provider, which could include private and religious 
schools and other religious entities. The proposal would allow 
public money to pay such entities for provision of educational 
services. Since the public school administers the program, will 
the public school also be responsible for assuring that a 
child's academic achievement is improving, even if the students 
are receiving services at nonpublic schools?
    Finally, portability would create enormous administrative 
burdens. It would disrupt school planning and budgeting, 
because large numbers of students could change schools in the 
middle of the school year. It would also be difficult to 
administer, because school budgets are usually set far in 
advance to allow for the extensive planning needed to hire 
teachers and arrange classes. How will schools plan their 
budgets if they do not know how many students will stay at 
their schools or opt to take their allotments to an outside 
provider? Who is responsible for providing transportation to 
the outside providers or nonpublic schools? How would the 
school track the achievement of students being served by 
outside providers?
    Portability doesn't guarantee any child a better education. 
Allowing children to take their portable grant to a private 
school or an off-campus after-school program does not 
necessarily mean they will receive a better education. Unless 
private schools are required to publicly report student 
achievement data in the same manner as public schools, we have 
no information regarding the quality of education in those 
schools. It would be irresponsible to send public dollars into 
``mystery'' institutions of questionable quality.
    We know that standards-based reform and schoolwide programs 
are making a difference. For example, in Atlanta, Georgia, 
Burgess Elementary School is a Title I schoolwide school that 
serves 430 students, 99% of whom are African-American. More 
than 80% are eligible for free or reduced-price lunches. In 
1998, 64% of Burgess' students performed above the national 
norm in reading, an increase of 35% over 1995. 72% scored above 
the national norm in math, an increase of 38% over 1995.
    In Boston, the Harriet A. Baldwin School is a Title I 
schoolwide program that serves 283 students, 93 percent of whom 
are minorities. 80 percent are eligible for free or reduced-
price lunches. From 1996 to 1998, Stanford 9 math and reading 
scores improved substantially, and are currently well above the 
national median and are much higher than district scores. In 
1996, 66 percent of 3rd graders scored in math at Levels 1&2 
(little or partial mastery of basic knowledge and skills); in 
1998, 100 percent scored at Levels 3&4 (solid academic 
performance and superior performance beyond grade-level 
mastery). In 1997, 75 percent of 4th graders were at Level 1&2 
in reading, and only 25 percent at higher levels of 
proficiency. In 1998, more than 50 percent were at higher 
levels of proficiency.
    The minority unanimously opposed the Gregg portability 
amendment because we believe we should do more to improve 
federal support for Title I to help the neediest students 
achieve better results, not undermine it.

      Holding Schools Accountable for Better Results for Children

    In 1994, we made important changes to the Title I program. 
We created an accountability system that--along with the Goals 
2000 program--has spurred standards-based reform efforts across 
the nation. During the last 5 years, however, experience in 
many states has demonstrated that we must do more. The federal 
government has succeeded in targeting funds--better than 
virtually any state or local government--on those most in need. 
Over the last three decades, we also have had success in 
closing the achievement gap between economically disadvantaged 
students and their peers. But we have not done enough to 
accelerate those results and to ensure that there is real 
performance-based accountability for the billions of dollars 
spent for Title I programs.
    Senator Bingaman and the other Committee Democrats proposed 
a package of changes to the Title I legislation that would have 
ensured accountability for student performance. The Chairman's 
mark incorporated some of these proposals, including notifying 
parents when their child's school is struggling or failing, and 
requiring that school improvement methods be based on research-
based strategies.
    Nevertheless, key provisions related to accountability were 
omitted. Title I has the very specific purpose of raising the 
achievement of disadvantaged students. Yet the Title I 
accountability system used in many States depends on growth in 
overall student achievement, rather than looking at the 
progress of students with special needs such as economically 
disadvantaged or minority students. Accountability systems that 
depend upon average student achievement data--data in the 
aggregate--will not close the achievement gaps that separate 
low-income students from more affluent students and minority 
students from white students. The definition of progress 
included in Title I should require States and districts to set 
annual, numerical goals for student achievement by subgroup, so 
that existing achievement gaps can be eliminated. The 
disaggregated goals should include at least income, race, 
ethnicity and English proficiency.
    The committee bill actually takes a step backward with 
respect to ensuring that poor and limited English proficient 
students are not left behind. It indicates that States do not 
have to consider their progress if there are not ``sufficient'' 
numbers of them in any given State. In addition, the majority 
rejected provisions that would have helped to ensure inclusion 
of all students in assessments. States often mask a lack of 
progress by improperly excluding certain students from state 
assessments, such as students with disabilities or with limited 
English proficiency, even though the 1994 Act calls for 
inclusion of these students. At a minimum, we should require 
public reporting of the number of students excluded from 
assessments, by race, ethnicity, income, gender, English 
proficiency, disability and migrant status.
    Also, the Rural Education Initiative would greatly weaken 
accountability by allowing small, rural districts to 
consolidate funds from Titles II, IV, and VI, without any 
realisticaccountability for improving student achievement.
    In addition, we should insist that each state's 
accountability system should incorporate significant 
consequences for chronic failure. The corrective action 
provisions must be strengthened to ensure that when schools are 
chronically under-performing, significant consequences are 
imposed. The majority rejected amendments to ensure that the 
governance structure of these schools is changed. In addition, 
the majority rejected provisions to impose consequences upon 
States that fail to implement rigorous accountability, 
including limiting access to flexibility programs and 
decreasing administrative funding. A single accountability 
system for all schools also should be required, to ensure that 
Title I schools are held to the same standards as other 
schools.
    We also must give parents the information that they need to 
be informed participants in their children's education. We 
should require schools to provide school report cards with 
basic information, including student performance data, dropout 
and graduation rates, teacher qualifications, average class 
size and access to technology.
    We learned in the days before the mark up that the 
Department of Education does not have an exact accounting of 
the numbers and names of failing schools and schools in need of 
improvement. States are not required to report such data, and 
many states have chosen not to. Senator Reed offered an 
amendment to address this situation. We are disappointed that 
this simple and common-sense amendment was not adopted to 
require states to report the names and numbers of low-
performing schools, and the steps that states are taking to 
meet their responsibility to help such schools improve.
    In addition, because qualified and well-prepared teachers 
are critical to improving student achievement, we are 
disappointed that another Reed amendment, which would set the 
funding bar under Title I for professional development at the 
district level at 10%, was rejected. We are also disappointed 
that the majority rejected language proposed by Senator 
Bingaman, which would require states to ensure that poor 
children are not taught by unqualified teachers at higher rates 
than other children. States should be required to commit 
necessary resources to provide incentives to attract teachers 
to high poverty schools through voluntary transfers and/or new 
hires, and to provide necessary training to the teachers 
currently in those schools so that they can become fully 
qualified.
    We are pleased that the bill included a state-level set-
aside to assist low-performing schools, implement the 
accountability provisions, provide rewards for progress, and 
develop assessments. However, the provision does not ensure 
that any funds reach school districts. It does not require any 
funds to be spent on improving low-performing schools. A state 
may use all of its new Title I funds for the purpose of 
providing financial awards to teachers and principals in 
schools that have made gains in academic achievement. While we 
do not oppose such financial awards, they should be separately 
authorized, and not funded by taking money from Title I that 
would otherwise be used to provide better services to students 
and turn around failing schools.
    A better approach to improve low-performing schools was 
contained in the Bingaman amendment, which would increase the 
state set-aside for school improvement, while requiring that 
70% of such funds be distributed to local school districts.
    We are pleased that the bill gives students in failing 
schools the right to transfer to higher performing schools. We 
also support a student's ability to transfer out of an unsafe 
school. We had several concerns, however, about the majority's 
provision on the right to transfer. The bill does not clearly 
define what constitutes an unsafe school and allows for Title I 
funds--intended to be used to improve academic achievement in 
high poverty schools--to be used for transportation expenses 
incurred by transferring students to safer schools. In 
addition, the legislation sets an extremely high cap for the 
amount of Title I funds that may be used to transport students 
from failing schools to higher performing schools. We prefer 
the proposal offered by Senator Bingaman, which would ensure 
that most of a district's Title I funds are used to turn around 
low-performing and failing schools, while requiring districts 
to assume the cost of transportation for students opting to 
transfer out of failing schools. This proposal also would 
enable students in districts with no schools demonstrating 
adequate performance to transfer to schools in neighboring 
districts.

Addressing the National Need for a Qualified Teacher in Every Classroom

Teacher Empowerment Act Eliminates the National Commitment to Ensuring 
        Better Teachers in Small Classes

    Teacher quality is a vitally important factor in student 
achievement. The federal government has an important role to 
play in providing leadership and resources to states and 
districts, particularly districts that serve large numbers of 
low-income and minority students, in their efforts to attract 
and maintain a qualified teaching force. It is unfortunate that 
the majority does not support a strong federal role in the 
federal-state-local partnership to improve teacher quality.
    The greatest needs for qualified teachers are in the 
highest poverty schools, which have the highest proportions of 
unqualified teachers. Finding qualified teachers for these 
schools is critical to the success of standards-based reform. 
Yet the majority rejected the Bingaman amendment, which would 
require Title I schools to have comparable proportions of 
qualified teachers as low-poverty schools.
    Title II of the bill, the Teacher Empowerment Block Grant, 
undermines the federal commitment to improving teacher quality. 
It decreases the federal investment in helping communities to 
reduce class size in the early grades and to ensure a qualified 
teacher in every classroom. It eliminates the Class Size 
Reduction Program and the Eisenhower Professional Development 
Program, and it authorizes a $2 billion block grant for teacher 
quality. Under the President's budget request for fiscal year 
2001, states and communities would have received $2.75 billion 
to reduce class size and improve teacher quality. All school 
boards know that a $750 million cut in funding means they can 
do less to improve academic achievement of theirstudents. The 
Teacher Empowerment Act does not hold school districts accountable for 
results. There is no guarantee that either class size reduction or 
teacher professional development will be done well. We need to do 
more--not less--to help communities improve public schools, teacher 
quality, and student achievement.
    The Teacher Empowerment Act does nothing to ensure that 
teachers are trained to help students with special educational 
needs, such as students with disabilities, students with 
limited English proficiency, and economically disadvantaged 
students. In order to ensure that all children have the 
opportunity to meet high state standards, teachers need 
training in how to address the needs of a diverse population of 
students.
    The amendment would reverse more than 15 years of 
professional development support for teachers through the 
Eisenhower Professional Development Program. In fact, under 
Title II of the bill, a ``portion''--which could mean very 
little actual resources--would have to be spent for 
professional development. The amendment fails to reform 
professional development from the current system of short-term, 
ineffective, and fragmented workshops. It ignores the need for 
teachers to be taught to work effectively with parents to help 
improve student achievement.

A Qualified Teacher in Every Classroom

    Senator Kennedy offered a Democratic alternative to the 
Teacher Empowerment Act that would ensure a qualified teacher 
in every classroom. The amendment is based on proven practices 
that have been shown to improve teacher skills and knowledge, 
and improve student achievement. It guarantees communities that 
they would receive substantial funds to: (1) recruit qualified 
teachers; (2) provide qualified mentors for new teachers; (3) 
provide professional development for classroom teachers; and 
(4) hold schools accountable for results.
    As a result of increasing enrollments, teacher turnover, 
and retirements of veteran teachers, the nation faces the 
challenge of hiring more than 2 million new teachers over the 
next ten years. Unfortunately, the need for new teachers in 
1998 was met by admitting 50,000 unqualified teachers to the 
classroom. Of those who do enter teaching, nearly 50% leave the 
profession within 5 years. It is obvious that too many 
beginning teachers are being thrown into classrooms without the 
guidance and support they need in order to succeed.
    We must make a renewed commitment to attract, train, and 
support the highest quality teachers for our children. We must 
ensure that all children--our nation's future--are learning 
from academically qualified and highly trained teachers. No 
classroom anywhere is any better than the teacher who teaches 
in it. We should do all we can to make sure that every teacher 
is well qualified.
    The Kennedy amendment would provide the Secretary of 
Education with the authority to support activities of national 
significance to meet urgent teacher shortages through national 
recruitment activities such as the Transition to Teacher and 
Hometown Teachers Program, establishment of a national Job 
Bank, and continuation of the Eisenhower National Clearinghouse 
for Mathematics and Science Education.
    The bulk of the funds--$1.7 billion--will go to local 
communities to recruit new qualified teachers, provide mentors 
for new teachers, and provide professional development for all 
teachers. States will receive funds by formula based 50% on 
poverty and 50% on population. States will be able to keep up 
to 10% of their funds to meet statewide teacher shortages, 
implement strategies to increase teacher salaries, improve 
alternative routes to state certification, and help districts 
reduce the number of teachers with out-of-field placements and 
emergency credentials.
    The state would distribute 56% of its funds through a 
formula based 75% on poverty and 25% on population for 
implementing high quality professional development and 
mentoring activities, with a priority for math and science. 
This provision will help communities provide 200,000 new 
teachers with mentors each year and provide teachers and 
principals in thousands of districts with innovative 
professional development programs. The programs are locally 
designed, but must be based on proven effective strategies.
    Research shows that current professional development 
practices often fail to improve or even impact teacher quality. 
In addition, a recent survey of teachers found that current 
professional development is too short term, and lacks 
intensity. In 1998, participation in professional development 
programs typically lasted only 1 to 8 hours. As a consequence, 
only about 1 in 5 teachers felt well prepared for addressing 
the needs of students with limited English proficiency, those 
from culturally diverse backgrounds, and those with 
disabilities, or for integrating educational technology into 
the curriculum.
    Research shows that effective professional development 
approaches should be sustained, intensive activities that focus 
on deepening teachers' knowledge of content; that allow 
teachers to work collaboratively; that provide opportunities 
for teachers to practice and reflect upon their teaching; that 
are aligned with standards and the daily work of the school; 
and that involve parents and other community members. High-
quality professional development improves student achievement. 
Last June, during our committee hearing on professional 
development, Barbara Schneider of Community School District 2 
in New York City testified about the positive impact of the 
District's investment in sustained, intensive professional 
development on student achievement.
    Unlike the Teacher Empowerment Act, our substitute would 
increase investment in professional development and mentoring, 
and focus on the kind of activities and opportunities for 
teachers that research shows is effective. Our substitute would 
offer resources, but demand results through strong 
accountability provisions. We believe that this approach is 
more effective than the bill's Title II in ensuring that 
teachers have the training, assistance, and support to increase 
student achievement and sustain them throughout their careers.
    To help communities recruit qualified candidates from other 
fields to become teachers, states would also distribute 30% of 
their funds through competitive grants for Local TeacherCorps 
recruitment grants. Local partnerships must consist of, at a minimum, a 
school district and an institution of higher education, and the grants 
must be targeted to high-poverty districts and districts with the 
greatest need for qualified teachers.
    Finally, our amendment would hold state and local districts 
accountable for results. States must ensure that there is a 
qualified teacher in every classroom by the 4th year after 
enactment of the law. In addition, the state must publicly 
report information on the percentage of classes in core 
academic subjects that are taught by out-of-field teachers and 
the average statewide class size. Local school districts would 
be required to publicly report information on the 
qualifications of classroom teachers and the academic subject 
in which the teacher teaches. Local professional development, 
mentoring, and recruitment activities must be based on proven 
effective methods and lead to improved student performance 
throughout the district. Schools are held accountable for 
reducing the beginning teacher attrition rate, the number of 
uncertified teachers, and the number of teachers teaching out 
of field. In order to continue a local grant for a 4th or 
subsequent fiscal year, the district must have shown progress 
in meeting its goals and objectives for the local grants.
    This amendment makes sense. It provides the needed 
resources and interventions that parents are calling for to 
ensure that every child is taught by a qualified teacher.

Investing in Qualified School Principals

    Successful schools are led by principals who have a deep 
understanding of teaching and learning, and who are well-
informed about state and local standards. We must provide 
greater support for the nation's principals. It is often true 
that a qualified principal can turn around an entire school.
    Today, however, principals often lack opportunities for 
high-quality professional development. Too often, such 
development is in the form of one-day workshops not geared to 
the needs of most principals. We must do all we can to provide 
opportunities for professional development for principals--and 
it must be high-quality, readily available, and geared toward 
the practical needs of principals. In addition, we should 
encourage local districts to provide mentoring opportunities 
for principals.
    We are pleased that the bill includes the Leadership 
Education and Development Program to help improve and expand 
professional development opportunities for school principals 
and superintendents. We hope that it can be strengthened by 
increasing accountability, targeting more resources to high-
poverty communities, addressing the need to train prospective 
and current principals, providing effective evaluations of the 
program, and providing for dissemination of information about 
the best practices for training principals. Although we believe 
that we should improve the program, the provision is a strong 
and positive bipartisan signal to the nation's communities that 
we will help provide stronger school leaders in every school.

                          Reducing Class Size

    For the past two years, Congress--with a large majority--
has provided more than $2.5 billion for the specific purpose of 
recruiting, hiring, and training teachers to reduce class size. 
What message do we now want to send to parents, teachers, and 
others in school communities across the nation by backing away 
from this commitment?
    We are particularly disappointed that the committee 
rejected Senator Murray's Class Size Amendment. The 8 to 10 
vote highlights the Republican Majority's disregard for the 
educational needs of the country and the concerns of American 
parents. The Class Size Reduction initiative was enacted with 
bipartisan support and praised by many from both parties as a 
major achievement for students.
    The majority backed away from its commitment to reducing 
class size in grades one through three, to a national average 
of eighteen students. The majority backed away from its 
commitment to hire 100,000 fully qualified teachers to help 
ensure that all students can learn to read independently and 
well by the end of the third grade. In effect, the majority 
broke the promise it made to the children of America. Last 
November, the Congress, on a bipartisan basis, as part of the 
Fiscal Year 2000 appropriations bill, continued for the second 
year the class size reduction program, with new provisions that 
provide additional flexibility for school districts, that made 
clear that only fully qualified teachers are hired with these 
funds.
    Smaller class size enhances student achievement. Smaller 
classes enable teachers to provide greater individual attention 
and assistance to students in need. Smaller classes enable 
teachers to spend more time on instruction, and less time on 
discipline and behavior problems. In smaller classes, teachers 
cover material more effectively, and are able to work with 
parents more effectively to enhance their children's education.
    We must continue to guarantee that the 1.7 million children 
who are currently learning in less crowded classrooms will be 
taught in small classes next year. We must not back away from 
the commitment. We must continue to support the 29,000 fully 
qualified teachers currently teaching under the Class Size 
Reduction Program. We must work to ensure that the students who 
stand to benefit most from smaller class sizes lower-achieving, 
minority, poor, and inner-city students continue to receive 
instruction in small classes.

  Expanding and Strengthening After School Opportunities for Children

    Also of substantial disappointment to us was the 
Committee's failure to support parents and schools struggling 
to address the after-school needs of today's students. After 
school programs must not be an after-thought in education 
policy. Each day, 5 million children leave school without 
supervised care. These students are at higher risk of juvenile 
delinquency, teenage pregnancy and tobacco, alcohol and drug 
use. We also know that juvenile crime peaks between the hours 
of 3 p.m and 7 p.m. Yet, many schools are left vacant when they 
could be used as valuable community resources.
    The 21st Century Community Learning Centers Program, 
created in 1994 by Senator Jeffords, has grown substantially in 
recent years, with current funding of $453 million. These 
dollars support 4,000 school centers focused on providing high-
quality after-school programs, and on better utilizing the 
schools to meet wider community needs. Senator Dodd proposed an 
amendment to clarify the focus of the program on after-school 
activities, use state-based competitive grants, enhance the 
role of community-based organizations, and increase the 
authorization to $1 billion, in recognition of the serious 
needs on this issue. This common-sense amendment reflected the 
concerns of the whole committee and parents across the country, 
but it was rejected on a party line vote. We continue to hope 
the committee can find a way to work together on this important 
initiative, and not abdicate our responsibility to reauthorize 
this program of vital importance to families, students and 
schools.

             Repairing and Modernizing the Nation's Schools

    The distressing condition of too many of the nation's 
schools is well known. The average age of the nation's schools 
is 42 years. 14 million children attend classes in buildings 
that are unsafe or inadequate. The General Accounting Office 
reports that $112 billion is needed to bring the nation's 
schools up to good condition.
    GAO also noted in its report, School Facilities: The 
Condition of America's Schools, that two-thirds of schools need 
repairs and renovations to improve accessibility for students 
with disabilities, or to address health and safety problems 
such as asbestos, lead in water or paint, materials in 
underground storage tanks, and radon. Half of the schools 
report unsatisfactory environmental conditions, such as poor 
ventilation, furnace problems, inadequate lighting, or 
insufficient physical security. Forty percent of schools need 
to repair or replace building features, such as a roof or 
plumbing. Thirty percent of rural districts, 38 percent of 
urban districts, and 29 percent of suburban districts have at 
least one building that needs extensive repair or total 
replacement.
    Nearly three-quarters of the nation's schools are over 30 
years old. According to the National Center for Education 
Statistics, when a school is between 20 and 30 years of age, 
frequent replacement of equipment is necessary. Between 30 and 
40 years, all of the original equipment should have been 
replaced, including the roof and electrical systems. After 40 
years, a school begins to deteriorate rapidly, and after 60 
years most schools are abandoned.
    The need for modernization and new construction of school 
facilities has become a crisis in school districts throughout 
the United States. Schools face the enormous challenges of 
record- high enrollments, new demands for educational 
technology, the need for before- and after-school programs, and 
the hazards of deteriorating facilities. Nearly 53 million 
students are currently enrolled in elementary and secondary 
schools, and this number is expected to rise to 54.4 million by 
2008.
    The American Society of Civil Engineers released a Report 
Card of America's Infrastructure in April 1999. A team of civil 
engineers examined the condition, performance, capacity, and 
funding of the nation's infrastructure and scored each category 
with a letter grade. Included in the examination were roads, 
bridges, dams, solid waste, mass transit, aviation, hazardous 
waste, and schools. The report card's worst marks went to 
schools, which received a failing grade.
    In addition, a new study from the National Education 
Association suggests there is substantial unmet need today--
even greater than in 1995--for school renovation and 
construction.
    There are a number of reasons for the poor physical state 
of schools, including student overcrowding, deferred 
maintenance, the age of the buildings, and the need to adapt to 
changing technology. One thing is certain: The problem is not 
going away. School enrollment is increasing, and schools will 
need renovations to ensure that students have access to 
educational technology and the Internet.
    This is clearly a national problem, and we must have a 
comprehensive national response. The Committee Bill not only 
ignores this pressing national concern--it retreats, by 
repealing Title XII, the Education Infrastructure Act.
    An effort to correct this serious shortcoming was rejected 
on a party line vote against the Harkin-Bingaman Amendment, 
strongly supported by all Democrats, to amend and reauthorize 
Title XII. The amendment authorized $1.3 billion to provide 
grants and zero interest loans to help public schools make 
urgent repairs such as roof replacements or electrical wiring, 
or to remedy fire code violations.
    The Harkin-Bingaman amendment is a complement to Senator 
Robb's proposal for tax credits to subsidize the interest on 
$25 billion of school construction bonds. It is focused on 
urgent repairs, and will help school districts that are unable 
to pass a bond referendum. It would have authorized funding for 
8,300 repair projects for 5,000 public schools as proposed by 
the President's FY 2001 budget.

                    Increasing Parental Involvement

    While the bill does add new parental involvement 
provisions, it does not make important changes that are needed. 
Research shows that regardless of economic, ethnic, or cultural 
background, parental involvement is a major factor in 
determining a child's academic success. Too often, schools fail 
to do enough to inform and involve parents.
    To increase parental involvement, we must depend on 
parents, teachers, and school administrators to work together 
to implement effective programs. National leadership is needed 
to provide schools, teachers, and parents with the tools 
adequate to this task. Simply hoping that parents will become 
engaged is not enough.
    The bill takes some steps to address these concerns, such 
as by ensuring that Title I families can obtain information on 
their children's progress in terms they can understand; 
havingstates collect and disseminate information about effective 
parental involvement practices; allowing schools to use technology to 
foster communication with parents; and ensuring parents are involved in 
violence prevention and drug prevention programs, so that parents can 
reinforce the safe and drug-free message at home.
    However, the bill fails to provide the accountability 
needed to ensure that the parental involvement provisions of 
ESEA are actually followed. We are disappointed that provisions 
included in the Reed amendment were not adopted to address this 
situation. The amendment would require state parental 
involvement plans, annual reviews of parental involvement 
activities, and technical assistance for districts having 
difficulty implementing the parental involvement requirements 
of Title I. We urge the addition of these common-sense 
accountability provisions, which are essential to improving 
schools and the performance of students, ensuring that schools 
significantly involve parents.
    We are particularly disappointed that the majority chose 
not to support the Local Family Information Centers. This 
program would provide funds for community based organizations 
to facilitate interactions between Title I schools and those 
parents who are the hardest to reach--parents with limited 
English proficiency, parents who are homeless and other parents 
who are isolated. With appropriate support, these parents too 
can play a meaningful role in their children's education and in 
their children's schools.
    In addition, we are disappointed that the bill eliminates 
the Title XI Coordinated Services Title. At the same time, it 
fails to add the Reed Amendment to authorize school-community 
partnerships to provide children and families with links to 
existing community prevention and intervention services. Such 
services exist in a fragmented fashion in many communities. 
Families which would otherwise be eligible to receive the 
services cannot obtain them without coordination at a site 
housed under one familiar roof-- their child's school. Research 
shows that school-community links are a cost-effective way to 
help meet the basic needs of children and ensure they are ready 
and able to succeed in school.

                       Closing the Digital Divide

    We are pleased that the committee bill recognizes the 
important federal role in education technology, and that it 
continues support for programs that have helped schools adopt 
and integrate technology in their classrooms. In particular, we 
are pleased by the increased authorization for the Technology 
Literacy Fund and the National Technology Innovation Grants. We 
commend the dedicated funding for these programs, and for the 
Regional Technical Centers and the Star Schools program. 
Increased support for the National Program for Technology in 
Education is needed. The committee accepted amendments offered 
by Senator Bingaman, which will ensure the inclusion of current 
technologies such as web-based learning, online classes, and 
wireless technologies, and which will also ensure that 
education technology is used to support student performance in 
core academic courses. In addition, the provisions require the 
states to outline their goals for student achievement, 
dissemination, and technical assistance with respect to the 
Technology Literacy Fund. These measures will promote the use 
of technology as a tool for enhanced student learning. We are 
also pleased that the committee included the programs from the 
bipartisan Digital Education Act, including Ready-to-Learn, and 
that the committee accepted Senator Mikulski's amendment 
setting a goal for all students gaining computer literacy by 
the 8th grade.
    Given the growing and unquestionable importance of 
technology in today's economy, we believe that additional 
modifications will significantly improve the federal 
government's ability to ensure greater equality in access to 
technology in educational contexts, and to ensure that such 
technologies are being used to their maximum potential. In low-
poverty schools, 74 percent of classrooms have Internet access, 
while only 39 percent of classrooms in high-poverty schools 
have such access. Similarly, the number of students per 
instructional computer (with Internet access) is 7 in schools 
with less than 11 percent poverty, compared to 16 in schools 
with 71 percent poverty. The Technology Literacy Fund must be 
more targeted toward low income and disadvantaged students. 
Many states receiving these funds do not direct the funds to 
high poverty districts. Greater targeting of these federal 
technology funds will use federal dollars more effectively, and 
will also provide the opportunity for disadvantaged areas to 
leverage assistance from non-governmental entities.
    While the Technology Innovation Grants provision allows the 
Secretary to provide continuation grants under the Preparing 
Tomorrow's Teachers to Use Technology Program, it does not 
continue dedicated funding for this purpose. The fact that only 
20 percent of teachers feel comfortable integrating technology 
in their classrooms suggests a need for greater attention to 
adequate pre-service and in-service professional development 
activities for teachers, so that students derive the full 
benefits of access to advanced technologies at school. Pre-
service programs are particularly important. We must integrate 
educational technology into the curriculum of schools of 
education, so that teachers entering the workforce begin their 
careers with the training they need to integrate technology 
into their instruction.
    In addition, the digital divide extends beyond the 
schoolhouse. The Community Technology Centers Program addresses 
this reality. It provides access to technology for families in 
their own communities. Households with incomes greater than 
$75,000 a year are eight times more likely to have computers 
than households at the lowest income levels. Urban households 
with incomes over $75,000 a year are over twenty times more 
likely to have home Internet access than rural households at 
the lowest income levels. If the nation is serious about 
including everyone in the digital economy, it is essential that 
we continue providing access to computers and training through 
these Community Technology Centers. The need for this program 
is demonstrated by the fact that the Department of Education 
received 750 applications for 40 grants last year.

                     Expanding Public School Choice

    Bipartisanship was also evident in efforts to reauthorize 
programs supporting public school choice. Modest changes to the 
Magnet Schools Assistance Program were supported by the 
committee, in recognition of the strong record of this program 
in improving diversity inschools and in developing innovative 
models of excellence in education. Similarly, the committee worked 
closely together on the changes in the Charter Schools Program, which 
was reauthorized last Congress, but is extended in this bill.
    We commend the Chairman's continued support of federal 
funding for the magnet school and charter school programs. 
Though relatively small, these two programs have provided 
incentives for innovation and positive reform, and they have 
also provided many parents with greater choice for their 
child's education. The popularity of magnet and charter schools 
among educators and parents alike is commendable. At the same 
time, the Department of Education must do more to assure that 
schools funded by these programs are truly diverse and held as 
accountable for student progress as other public schools. 
Expanding public school choice in ways that maintain targeted 
funding while also promoting high standards for all students 
will extend these benefits to more communities and families.
    We were dismayed that the majority rejected Senator 
Bingaman's proposal to authorize the Opportunities to Improve 
Our National's Schools Program (OPTIONS), which would identify 
and support innovative approaches to high-quality public school 
choice. Many of our Republican colleagues have spoken of the 
need for greater reform in public schools. Yet they are 
unwilling to dedicate federal assistance for the development, 
implementation, and evaluation of the very kinds of public 
school choice programs that stimulate innovation and contribute 
to standards-based reform. Under OPTIONS, states and localities 
would be given a pool of resources for a wide variety of 
activities related to public school choice. The funds would be 
targeted toward high-poverty communities.

             Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act

    The Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act, 
authored by Senators DeWine, Dodd, and Murray, is one of the 
strongest areas of bipartisanship. Changes made to the Safe and 
Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act focus on improving the 
accountability and enhancing the effectiveness of this program. 
The legislation requires states and schools to adhere to the 
``Principles of Effectiveness'' in the design, implementation, 
and evaluation of their programs. The bill also increases 
federal coordination, while providing states with the 
flexibility to better target these dollars. In addition, the 
passage of Senator Harkin's amendment on reinstating the 
Tobacco-Free Schools requirement that schools be smoke-free 
demonstrates a bipartisan commitment to this important issue.
    Similarly, we are especially pleased that an amendment to 
repeal the hate crimes provisions in this Act was resoundingly 
defeated. This vote also demonstrates our bipartisan commitment 
to the important goals of keeping our students safe and 
creating strong, healthy communities.
    Despite these improvements, however, additional efforts 
need to be made to strengthen the bill on these issues. Project 
SERV, a program to provide schools with emergency assistance 
after a traumatic crisis or violence, is an important component 
missing from the Act. Senator Wellstone proposed an amendment 
to provide training to teachers to develop and implement 
domestic violence prevention, intervention, early 
identification, and referral strategies for students and school 
personnel. Since domestic violence and child abuse are both 
causes and predictors of juvenile violence, this program would 
greatly enhance the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities 
Act. In addition, the bill fails to include an authorization 
supporting training of early childhood educators in violence 
prevention strategies, as proposed in legislation offered by 
Senator Dodd.
    The bipartisan consensus on this program was undermined by 
the Committee's adoption of an amendment that creates loopholes 
allowing spending of federal funds on potentially ineffective 
measures. The amendment also included several other provisions 
of concern, including burdensome requirements on local schools 
that all educational material supported with ESEA funds must be 
posted with a notice of the use of the federal funds, and that 
bureaucratic and costly procedures for handling complaints must 
be put in place.

         Meeting the National Need to Support School Libraries

    The bill also fails to restore critical funding for school 
libraries or to increase student access to up-to-date school 
library materials. Research has documented a clear connection 
between well-equipped, well-staffed school libraries and 
reading achievement and overall academic success. 
Unfortunately, schools across the nation are still dependent on 
collections purchased in the mid-1960s and 1970s with dedicated 
funding provided under the original Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act. Since 1981, when this funding was folded into 
what is now the Title VI block grant, school libraries have 
suffered. This 19-year experiment in leaving school library 
funding to states and school districts has failed. School 
library shelves are now filled with outdated books which 
predate the landing of manned spacecraft on the moon, the 
breakup of the Soviet Union, the end of apartheid, the growth 
of the Internet, and advances in scientific research.
    Given the clear examples of outdated school library books 
filled with offensive stereotypes presented at the Committee 
mark up, we are dismayed that the committee rejected the Reed 
School Library amendment. The needs of school libraries have 
been unaddressed for too long. We urge the restoration of 
funding to update and improve the nation's school libraries.

Support for Urban and Rural Communities

    We share the majority's concern that federal programs must 
serve all areas, including rural districts, and we recognize 
that each school district has unique needs. 46 percent of the 
nation's public schools serve rural areas. These schools often 
face problems associated with their remote location and sparse 
populations, such as lower salaries which make it particularly 
difficult to attract and retain qualified teachers and 
administrators. Teachers in rural schools are almost twice as 
likely to provide instruction in three or more subjects than 
teachers in urban schools. The course offerings, especially 
advanced courses, are more limited than in other areas. Many 
rural school districts have high transportation costs because 
of the greater distances that childrentravel to school. Like 
other areas, rural districts often have aging school buildings that 
must be modernized to take full advantage of education technology.
    Unlike most other jurisdictions, many rural schools also 
face shrinking tax bases. This problem is particularly true in 
areas that have been hit hard by the agriculture crisis. The 
result is that the ability of these areas to raise local 
resources is even more limited than in other regions.
    Federal resources are important to help these districts 
address these problems. While many rural schools do compete 
effectively for federal grants, many smaller rural schools 
often lack the personnel needed to prepare applications and 
grant proposals. Except under Title I, smaller districts often 
do not receive sufficient funds for effective programs, and 
they lack the ability to raise additional funds locally.
    The majority has acknowledged the problems facing rural 
schools and has included a rural proposal in the committee 
bill. Unfortunately, their approach suffers from two 
deficiencies. It creates a new and unnecessary system of forms 
and bureaucracy, and it has the effect of creating a new block 
grant. By block granting these funds, districts are not held 
accountable for the results, and the national priority is lost.
    We prefer an approach that continues to target specific 
problems, such as reducing class size, improving teacher 
training, and integrating technology effectively into the 
classroom, and that also makes sure the districts have the 
resources they need to operate effective programs.
    We support an amendment to provide a supplemental payment 
to qualifying rural districts. Under this approach, a district 
would simply indicate on its application for existing class 
size, teacher training, and technology programs how it would 
use the supplemental funds. It would be held accountable for 
using the funds effectively through the same mechanism applied 
to the underlying program. We believe this approach is a simple 
and effective way to help rural districts address their 
problems.
    We recognize that urban schools also face unique and acute 
issues that create challenges for them to implement effective 
programs. Like rural districts, they have difficulty attracting 
and retaining qualified teachers. This problem can affect their 
course offerings. Many urban districts also have significant 
problems with aging and unsafe facilities. In addition, urban 
schools face challenges unique to their urban nature. The high 
numbers of homeless children, children with limited English 
proficiency, and children from extreme poverty make it 
difficult for them to close the achievement gap between low and 
high performing students. While the causes of these problems 
may be different, they are no less significant, and they should 
be addressed by this legislation. Yet, unlike rural areas, they 
were not provided with an alternative funding source.
    We are disappointed, therefore, that by repealing the Urban 
Demonstration Grant Program, the majority eliminated the 
possibility for urban districts to receive supplementary funds 
to meet their unique needs. While the rural demonstration 
program was repealed as well, it was replaced by the rural 
education initiative.

             Other Programs to Improve Student Achievement

    The Committee was able to come together around the 
reauthorization of several smaller but important national 
initiatives supporting change in schools, including the 
Character Education Partnership Program, the Javits Gifted and 
Talented Program, the Elementary School Counseling Program, and 
the Women's Educational Equity Act. While small, these programs 
have demonstrated the capacity of a modest federal investment 
to leverage real change in schools across the county. 
Throughout the committee's hearings on the reauthorization, we 
heard from witnesses across the country about the fundamental 
difference that these programs have made in improving schools 
and strengthening the achievement of students.
    We are pleased that the smaller learning communities 
program within the Fund for the Improvement of Education is 
included in the committee bill. The smaller learning 
communities program has proven benefits, such as improved 
learning environments, improved student achievement, and 
improved attendance indicators. We hope that this year's 
appropriations of $45 million for the program will provide a 
greater opportunity for our colleagues to see these important 
benefits in schools in their own communities and to expand the 
funding pool.
    We were also pleased that the committee accepted Senator 
Bingaman's amendments authorizing funding for dropout 
prevention and for building upon the extremely successful 
program that expands access to Advanced Placement classes and 
exams. These two programs are important tools to ensure that 
poor and minority youth stay in school and learn to high 
standards. The AP program also helps to ensure that all 
students, regardless of racial or economic background, are 
given access to rigorous courses that prepare them for 
enrollment in education beyond high school.
    We are pleased by the bipartisan commitment to maintaining 
and strengthening Title VII, which provides critical support 
for communities to implement innovative model programs to 
ensure that children with limited English proficiency learn 
English and master academic content. The changes are designed 
to ensure that the assistance will be aligned with the 
standards-based reforms under Title I. We are also pleased that 
the committee accepted the Reed amendment to preserve the 
current law's priority for districts that enroll a large number 
of limited English proficient students.
    We are pleased that the committee accepted an amendment by 
Senator Reed to provide greater accountability under Title VI, 
Innovative Education Program Strategies. This amendment 
requires all innovative education programs and activities to be 
tied to promoting high academic standards, be used to improve 
student performance, and be part of an overall education reform 
strategy. It successfully addresses many of the concerns raised 
about this program.
    We need to continue to work together to improve on other 
areas of concern, such as comprehensive secondary school reform 
and technical assistance centers. We also remain deeply 
concerned about the extent to which these strong, improved 
policies are undermined by their inclusion in Straight A's. 
This block grant proposal undoes all the hard work of reforming 
these major federal efforts.
    We are disappointed that the Republican Majority rejected 
Senator Murray's Amendment to make it possible for students and 
other youth to engage more fully in the process of school 
reform and school improvement. Student involvement is an 
important aspect of school reform and improvement. Students 
benefit when they are given significant roles in their schools 
and communities. Special attention is needed to ensure the 
effective involvement of students in decisions that affect 
their education. It is regrettable that the majority does not 
share our concerns in this area.
    We are also disappointed that the Republican Majority 
rejected Senator Murray's Amendment to provide national 
challenge grants for innovation in the education of homeless 
children. In spite of our prosperous economy, homelessness is 
on the rise in America. Children represent one of the fastest 
growing segments of the homeless population, but states, 
schools and service providers often do not have the resources 
to meet their needs. When children become homeless, they are 
often uprooted from their communities, and drift from school to 
school. Academic achievement suffers greatly under such 
conditions.
    The Murray Amendment would provide needed funds for 
innovative programs to address the transportation needs of 
homeless children. By helping districts create model 
transportation programs, the Murray Amendment would help 
improve student achievement by making it possible for homeless 
children to continue attending their original schools. It is 
disappointing that the majority did not support our efforts in 
this area.

                               Conclusion

    We hope to make bipartisan progress on strengthening and 
improving public schools in every community. But this progress 
should not come at the expense of a strong federal helping 
hand, accountability for results, targeting to the neediest 
communities, and a clear focus on priority areas of national 
need. The nation's children deserve no less.

                                   Ted Kennedy.
                                   Tom Harkin.
                                   Jeff Bingaman.
                                   Patty Murray.
                                   Chris Dodd.
                                   Barbara A. Mikulski.
                                   Paul Wellstone.
                                   Jack Reed.

                      XI. Changes in Existing Law

    In compliance with rule XXVI paragraph 12 of the Standing 
Rules of the Senate, the following provides a print of the 
statute or the part or section thereof to be amended or 
replaced (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in 
black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, existing law 
in which no change is proposed is shown in roman):

EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES ACT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. References.
Sec. 3. Short title; purpose; definitions.

       TITLE I--HELPING DISADVANTAGED CHILDREN MEET HIGH STANDARDS

Sec. 101. Policy and purpose.
Sec. 102. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 103. Reservation and allocation for school improvement.

                         Part A--Basic Programs

Sec. 111. State plans.
Sec. 112. Local educational agency plans.
Sec. 113. Eligible school attendance areas.
Sec. 114. Schoolwide programs.
Sec. 115. Targeted assistance schools.
Sec. 116. Pupil safety and family school choice.
Sec. 117. Assessment and local educational agency and school 
          improvement.
Sec. 118. Assistance for school support and improvement.
Sec. 119. Parental involvement.
Sec. 120. Professional development.
Sec. 120A. Participation of children enrolled in private schools.
Sec. 120B. Early childhood education.
Sec. 120C. Allocations.
Sec. 120D. Establishment of the child centered program.

               Part B--Even Start Family Literacy Programs

Sec. 121. Even start family literacy programs.

                 Part C--Education of Migratory Children

Sec. 131. Program purpose.
Sec. 132. State application.
Sec. 133. Comprehensive plan.
Sec. 134. Coordination.

                       Part D--Parental Assistance

Sec. 141. Parental assistance.

 Part E--General Provisions; Comprehensive School Reform; Assistance To 
                     Address School Dropout Problems

Sec. 151. General provisions; comprehensive school reform; assistance to 
          address school dropout problems.

             TITLE II--PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR TEACHERS

Sec. 201. Teacher quality.
Sec. 202. Leadership education and development program.
Sec. 203. Reading excellence.
Sec. 204. National Writing Project.
Sec. 205. General provisions.
Sec. 206. New century program and digital education content 
          collaborative.
Sec. 207. Conforming amendments.

                    TITLE III--ENRICHMENT INITIATIVES

Sec. 301. Enrichment initiatives.
Sec. 302. Dissemination of advanced placement information.

          TITLE IV--SAFE AND DRUG-FREE SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITIES

Sec. 401. Amendment to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
          1965.
Sec. 402. Gun-free requirements.
Sec. 403. School safety and violence prevention.
Sec. 404. Background checks.
Sec. 405. Constitutionality of memorial services and memorials at public 
          schools.
Sec. 406. Environmental tobacco smoke.

              TITLE V--EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY INITIATIVES

Sec. 501. Educational opportunity initiatives.

                      Part A--Technology Education

Sec. 511. Technology education.

            Part B--Women's Educational Equity; Star Schools

Sec. 521. Women's educational equity.
Sec. 522. Star schools.

                    Part C--Magnet Schools Assistance

Sec. 531. Magnet schools assistance.

                     Part D--Public Charter Schools

Sec. 541. Public charter schools.

   Part E--Civic Education; FIE; Ellender Fellowships; Ready-to-Learn 
                Television; Inexpensive Book Distribution

Sec. 551. Civic education; FIE; Ellender Fellowships; Ready-to-Learn 
          Television; Inexpensive Book Distribution.

                     TITLE VI--INNOVATIVE EDUCATION

Sec. 601. Innovative education.

                     TITLE VII--BILINGUAL EDUCATION

Sec. 701. Purpose.
Sec. 702. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 703. Repeal of program development and implementation grants.
Sec. 704. Program enhancement projects.
Sec. 705. Comprehensive school and systemwide improvement grants.
Sec. 706. Repeal of systemwide improvement grants.
Sec. 707. Applications.
Sec. 708. Repeal of intensified instruction.
Sec. 709. Repeal of subgrants, priority, and coordination provision.
Sec. 710. Evaluations.
Sec. 711. Research.
Sec. 712. Academic excellence awards.
Sec. 713. State grant program.
Sec. 714. National Clearinghouse.
Sec. 715. Instructional materials development.
Sec. 716. Training for all teachers program.
Sec. 717. Graduate fellowships.
Sec. 718. Repeal of program requirements.
Sec. 719. Program evaluations.
Sec. 720. Special rule.
Sec. 721. Repeal of finding relating to foreign language assistance.
Sec. 722. Foreign language assistance applications.
Sec. 723. Emergency immigrant education purpose.
Sec. 724. Emergency immigrant education State administrative costs.
Sec. 725. Conforming amendment.
Sec. 726. Emergency immigrant education authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 727. Coordination and reporting requirements.

                         TITLE VIII--IMPACT AID

Sec. 801. Short title.
Sec. 802. Purpose.
Sec. 803. Payments relating to Federal acquisition of real property.
Sec. 804. Payments for eligible federally connected children.
Sec. 805. Sudden and substantial increases in attendance of military 
          dependents.
Sec. 806. School construction and facility modernization.
Sec. 807. State consideration of payments in providing State aid.
Sec. 808. Federal administration.
Sec. 809. Administrative hearings and judicial review.
Sec. 810. Forgiveness of overpayments.
Sec. 811. Definitions.
Sec. 812. Authorization of appropriations.

     TITLE IX--INDIAN, NATIVE HAWAIIAN, AND ALASKA NATIVE EDUCATION

Sec. 901. Programs.
Sec. 902. Conforming amendments.

                       TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 10001. Uniform provisions.
Sec. 10002. Evaluations.
Sec. 10003. America's Education Goals.
Sec. 10004. America's Education Goals Panel.
Sec. 10005. Comprehensive regional assistance centers.
Sec. 10006. Repeals.

                   TITLE XI--AMENDMENTS TO OTHER LAWS

                             Part A--Repeals

Sec. 11101. Goals 2000: Educate America Act.
Sec. 11102. Higher Education Amendments of 1998.

            Part B--Education for Homeless Children and Youth

Sec. 11201. Statement of policy.
Sec. 11202. Grants for State and local activities.
Sec. 11203. Local educational agency grants.
Sec. 11204. Secretarial responsibilities.
Sec. 11205. Definitions.
Sec. 11206. Authorization of appropriations.

             Part C--Albert Einstein Distinguished Educators

Sec. 11301. Albert Einstein Distinguished Educator Act of 1994.

SECTION 1. [20 U.S.C. 6301 NOTE] [TABLE OF CONTENTS] SHORT TITLE.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 2. PURPOSE

    It is the purpose of this Act to support programs and 
activities that will improve the Nation's schools and enable 
all children to achieve high standards.

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

    Except as otherwise provided, in this Act:
          (1) Average daily attendance.--
                  (A) In general.--Except as provided otherwise 
                by State law or this paragraph, the term 
                ``average daily attendance'' means--
                          (i) the aggregate number of days of 
                        attendance of all students during a 
                        school year; divided by
                          (ii) the number of days school is in 
                        session during such school year.
                  (B) Conversion.--The Secretary shall permit 
                the conversion of average daily membership (or 
                other similar data) to average daily attendance 
                for local educational agencies in States that 
                provide State aid to local educational agencies 
                on the basis of average daily membership or 
                such other data.
                  (C) Special rule.--If the local educational 
                agency in which a child resides makes a tuition 
                or other payment for the free public education 
                of the child in a school located in another 
                school district, the Secretary shall, for 
                purposes of this Act--
                          (i) consider the child to be in 
                        attendance at a school of the agency 
                        making such payment; and
                          (ii) not consider the child to be in 
                        attendance at a school of the agency 
                        receiving such payment.
                  (D) Children with disabilities.--If a local 
                educational agency makes a tuition payment to a 
                private school or to a public school of another 
                local educational agency for a child with a 
                disability, as defined in section 602 of the 
                Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 
                theSecretary shall, for the purposes of this 
Act, consider such child to be in attendance at a school of the agency 
making such payment.
          (2) Average per-pupil expenditure.--The term 
        ``average per-pupil expenditure'' means, in the case of 
        a State or of the United States--
                  (A) without regard to the source of funds--
                          (i) the aggregate current 
                        expenditures, during the third fiscal 
                        year preceding the fiscal year for 
                        which the determination is made (or, if 
                        satisfactory data for that year are not 
                        available, during the most recent 
                        preceding fiscal year for which 
                        satisfactory data are available) of all 
                        local educational agencies in the State 
                        or, in the case of the United States 
                        for all States (which, for the purpose 
                        of this paragraph, means the 50 States 
                        and the District of Columbia); plus
                          (ii) any direct current expenditures 
                        by the State for the operation of such 
                        agencies; divided by
                  (B) the aggregate number of children in 
                average daily attendance to whom such agencies 
                provided free public education during such 
                preceding year.
          (3) Child.--The term ``child'' means any person 
        within the age limits for which the State provides free 
        public education.
          (4) Community-based organization.--The term 
        ``community-based organization'' means a public or 
        private nonprofit organization of demonstrated 
        effectiveness that--
                  (A) is representative of a community or 
                significant segments of a community; and
                  (B) provides educational or related services 
                to individuals in the community.
          (5) Consolidated local application.--The term 
        ``consolidated local application'' means an application 
        submitted by a local educational agency pursuant to 
        section 6505.
          (6) Consolidated local plan.--The term ``consolidated 
        local plan'' means a plan submitted by a local 
        educational agency pursuant to section 6505.
          (7) Consolidated state application.--The term 
        ``consolidated State application'' means an application 
        submitted by a State educational agency pursuant to 
        section 6502.
          (8) Consolidated state plan.--The term ``consolidated 
        State plan'' means a plan submitted by a State 
        educational agency pursuant to section 14302.
          (9) County.--The term ``county'' means one of the 
        divisions of a State used by the Secretary of Commerce 
        in compiling and reporting data regarding counties.
          (10) Covered program.--The term ``covered program'' 
        means each of the programs authorized by--
                  (A) part A of title I;
                  (B) part C of title I;
                  (C) title II (other than section 2103 and 
                part D);
                  (D) Subpart 2 of part A of title V;
                  (E) part A of title IV (other than section 
                4114); and
                  (F) title VI.
          (11) The term ``current expenditures'' means 
        expenditures for free public education--
                  (A) including expenditures for 
                administration, instruction, attendance and 
                health services, pupil transportation services, 
                operation and maintenance of plant, fixed 
                charges, and net expenditures to cover deficits 
                for food services and student body activities; 
                but
                  (B) not including expenditures for community 
                services, capital outlay, and debt service, or 
                any expenditures made from funds received under 
                title I and title VI.
          (12) Department.--The term ``Department'' means the 
        Department of Education.
          (13) Educational service agency.--The term The term 
        ``educational service agency'' means a regional public 
        multi service agency authorized by State statute to 
        develop, manage, and provide services or programs to 
        local educational agencies.
          (14) Elementary school.--The term ``elementary 
        school'' means a nonprofit institutional day or 
        residential school, including a public elementary 
        charter school, that provides elementary education, as 
        determined under State law.
          (15) Free public education.--The term ``free public 
        education'' means education that is provided--
                  (A) at public expense, under public 
                supervision and direction, and without tuition 
                charge; and
                  (B) as elementary school or secondary school 
                education as determined under applicable State 
                law, except that such term does not include any 
                education provided beyond grade 12.
          (16) Gifted and talented.--The term ``gifted and 
        talented'', when used with respect to students, 
        children or youth, means students, children or youth 
        who give evidence of high performance capability in 
        areas such as intellectual, creative, artistic, or 
        leadership capacity, or in specific academic fields, 
        and who require services or activities not ordinarily 
        provided by the school in order to fully develop such 
        capabilities.
          (17) Institution of higher education.--The term 
        ``institution of higher education'' has the meaning 
        given the term in section 101 of the Higher Education 
        Act of 1965.
          (18) Local educational agency.--
                  (A) In general.--The term ``local educational 
                agency'' means a public board of education or 
                other public authority legally constituted 
                within a State for either administrative 
                control or direction of, or to perform a 
                service function for, public elementary schools 
                or secondary schools in a city, county, 
                township, school district, or other political 
                subdivision of a State, or for such combination 
                of school districtsor counties as are 
recognized in a State as an administrative agency for the State's 
public elementary or secondary schools.
                  (B) Administrative control and direction.--
                The term includes any other public institution 
                or agency having administrative control and 
                direction of a public elementary or secondary 
                school.
                  (C) BIA schools.--The term includes an 
                elementary school or secondary school funded by 
                the Bureau of Indian Affairs but only to the 
                extent that such inclusion makes such school 
                eligible for programs for which specific 
                eligibility is not provided to such school in 
                another provision of law and such school does 
                not have a student population that is smaller 
                than the student population of the local 
                educational agency receiving assistance under 
                this Act with the smallest student population, 
                except that such school shall not be subject to 
                the jurisdiction of any State educational 
                agency other than the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
          (19) Mentoring.--The term ``mentoring'' means a 
        program in which an adult works with a child or youth 
        on a 1-to-1 basis, establishing a supportive 
        relationship, providing academic assistance, and 
        introducing the child or youth to new experiences that 
        enhance the child or youth's ability to excel in school 
        and become a responsible citizen.
          (20) Other staff.--The term ``other staff'' means 
        pupil services personnel, librarians, career guidance 
        and counseling personnel, education aides, and other 
        instructional and administrative personnel.
          (21) Outlying area.--The term ``outlying area'' means 
        the United States Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, 
        the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and 
        for the purpose of section 1121 and any other 
        discretionary grant program under this Act, the 
        Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States 
        of Micronesia, and the Republic of Palau.
          (22) Parent.--The term ``parent'' includes a legal 
        guardian or other person standing in loco parentis.
          (23) Parental involvement.--The term ``parental 
        involvement'' means the participation of parents on all 
        levels of a school's operation, including all of the 
        activities described in section 1118.
          (24) Public telecommunications entity.--The term 
        ``public telecommunication entity'' has thesame meaning 
given to such term in section 397 of the Communications Act of 1934.
          (25) Pupil services personnel; pupil services.--
                  (A) Pupil services personnel.--The term 
                ``pupil services personnel'' means school 
                counselors, school social workers, school 
                psychologists, and other qualified professional 
                personnel involved in providing assessment, 
                diagnosis, counseling, educational, 
                therapeutic, and other necessary services 
                (including related services as such term is 
                defined in section 602 of the Individuals with 
                Disabilities Education Act) as part of a 
                comprehensive program to meet student needs.
                  (B) Pupil services.--The term ``pupil 
                services'' means the services provided by pupil 
                services personnel.
          (26) Research-based.--The term ``research-based'' 
        used with respect to an activity or a program, means an 
        activity based on specific strategies and 
        implementation of such strategies that, based on 
        theory, research and evaluation, are effective in 
        improving student achievement and performance and other 
        program objectives.
          (27) Secondary school.--The term ``secondary school'' 
        means a nonprofit institutional day or residential 
        school, including a public secondary charter school, 
        that provides secondary education, as determined under 
        State law, except that such term does not include any 
        education beyond grade 12.
          (28) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the 
        Secretary of Education.
          (29) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the 50 
        States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of 
        Puerto Rico, and each of the outlying areas.
          (30) State educational agency.--The term ``State 
        educational agency'' means the agency primarily 
        responsible for the State supervision of public 
        elementary schools and secondary schools.
          (31) Technology.--The term ``technology'' means the 
        latest state-of-the-art technology products and 
        services, such as closed circuit television systems, 
        educational television or radio programs and services, 
        cable television, satellite, copper fiber optic 
        transmission, computer hardware and software, video and 
        audio laser and CD-ROM disks, video and audio tapes, 
        including interactive forms of such products and 
        services, or other technologies.

[SEC. 1001. [20 U.S.C. 6301] DECLARATION OF POLICY AND STATEMENT OF 
                    PURPOSE.

    [(a) Statement of Policy.--
          [(1) In general.--The Congress declares it to be the 
        policy of the United States that a high-quality 
        education for all individuals and a fair and equal 
        opportunity to obtain that education are a societal 
        good, are a moral imperative, and improve the life of 
        every individual, because the quality of our individual 
        lives ultimately depends on the quality of the lives of 
        others.
          [(2) Additional policy.--The Congress further 
        declares it to be the policy of the United States to 
        expand the program authorized by this title over the 
        fiscal year 1996 through 1999 by increasing funding for 
        this title by at least $750,000,000 over baseline each 
        fiscal year and thereby increasing the percentage of 
        eligible children served in each fiscal year with the 
        intent of serving all eligible children by fiscal year 
        2004.
    [(b) Recognition of Need.--The Congress recognizes that--
          [(1) although the achievement gap between 
        disadvantage children and other children has been 
        reduced by half over the past two decades, a sizable 
        gap remains, and many segments of our society lack the 
        opportunity to become well educated;
          [(2) the most urgent need for educational 
        improvements is in schools with high concentrations of 
        children from low-income families and achieving the 
        National Education Goals will not be possible without 
        substantial improvements in such schools;
          [(3) educational needs are particularly great for 
        low-achieving children in our Nation's highest-poverty 
        schools, children with limited English proficiency, 
        children of migrant workers, children with 
        disabilities, Indian children, children who are 
        neglected or delinquent, and young children and their 
        parents who are in need of family-literacy services;
          [(4) while title I and other programs funded under 
        this Act contribute to narrowing the achievement gap 
        between children in high-poverty and low-poverty 
        schools, such programs need to become even more 
        effective in improving schools in order to enable all 
        children to achieve high standards; and
          [(5) in order for all students to master challenging 
        standards in core academic subjects as described in the 
        third National Education Goal described in section 
        102(3) of the goals 2000: Educate America Act, students 
        and schools will need to maximize the time spent on 
        teaching and learning the core academic subjects.
    [(c) What Has Been Learned Since 1988.--To enable schools 
to provide all children a high-quality education, this title 
builds upon the following learned information:
          [(1) All children can master challenging content and 
        complex problem-solving skills. Research clearly shows 
        that children, including low-achieving children, can 
        succeed when expectations are high and all children are 
        given the opportunity to learn challenging material.
          [(2) Conditions outside the classroom such as hunger, 
        unsafe living conditions, homelessness, unemployment, 
        violence inadequate health care, child abuse, and drug 
        and alcohol abuse can adversely affect children's 
        academic achievement and must be addressed through the 
        coordination of services, such as health and social 
        services, in order for the Nation to meet the National 
        Education Goals.
          [(3) Use of low-level tests that are not aligned with 
        schools' curricula fails to provide adequate 
        information about what children know and can do and 
        encourages curricula and instruction that focus on the 
        low-level skills measured by such tests.
          [(4) Resources are more effective when resources are 
        used to ensure that children have full access to 
        effective high-quality regular school programs and 
        receive supplemental help through extended-time 
        activities.
          [(5) Intensive and sustained professional development 
        for teachers and other school staff, focused on 
        teaching and learning and on helping children attain 
        high standards, is too often not provided.
          [(6) Insufficient attention and resources are 
        directed toward effective use of technology in schools 
        and the role technology can play in professional 
        development and improved teaching and learning.
          [(7) All parents can contribute to their children's 
        success by helping at home and becoming partners with 
        teachers so that children can achieve high standards.
          [(8) Decentralized decisionmaking is a key ingredient 
        of systemic reform. Schools need the resources, 
        flexibility, and authority to design and implement 
        effective strategies for bringing their children to 
        high levels of performance.
          [(9) Opportunities for students to achieve high 
        standards can be enhanced through a variety of 
        approaches such as public school choice and public 
        charter schools.
          [(10) Attention to academics alone cannot ensure that 
        all children will reach high standards. The health and 
        other needs of children that affect learning are 
        frequently unmet, particularly in high-poverty schools, 
        thereby necessitating coordination of services to 
        better meet children's needs.
          [(11) Resources provided under this title can be 
        better targeted on the highest-poverty local 
        educational agencies and schools that have children 
        most in need.
          [(12) Equitable and sufficient resources, 
        particularly as such resources relate to the quality of 
        the teaching force, have an integral relationship to 
        high student achievement.
    [(d) Statement of Purpose.--The purpose of this title is to 
enable schools to provide opportunities for children served to 
acquire the knowledge and skills contained in the challenging 
State content standards and to meet the challenging State 
performance standards developed for all children. This purpose 
shall be accomplished by--
          [(1) ensuring high standards for all children and 
        aligning the efforts of States, local educational 
        agencies, and schools to help children served under 
        this title to reach such standards;
          [(2) providing children an enriched and accelerated 
        educational program, including, when appropriate, the 
        use of the arts, through schoolwide programs or through 
        additional services that increase the amount and 
        quality of instructional time so that children served 
        under this title receive at least the classroom 
        instruction that other children receive;
          [(3) promoting schoolwide reform and ensuring access 
        of children (from the earliest grades) to effective 
        instructional strategies and challenging academic 
        content that includes intensive complex thinking and 
        problem-solving experiences;
          [(4) significantly upgrading the quality of 
        instruction by providing staff in participating schools 
        with substantial opportunities for professional 
        development;
          [(5) coordinating services under all parts of this 
        title with each other, with other educational services, 
        and, to the extent feasible, with health and social 
        service programs funded from other sources;
          [(6) affording parents meaningful opportunities to 
        participate in the education of their children at home 
        and at school;
          [(7) distributing resources, in amounts sufficient to 
        make a difference, to areas and schools where needs are 
        greatest;
          [(8) improving accountability, as well as teaching 
        and learning, by using State assessment systems 
        designed to measure how well children served under this 
        title are achieving challenging State student 
        performance standards expected of all children; and
          [(9) providing greater decisionmaking authority and 
        flexibility to schools and teachers in exchange for 
        greater responsibility for students performance.]

SEC. 1001. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE.

    The purpose of this title is to enable schools to provide 
opportunities for children served under this title to acquire 
the knowledge and skills contained in the challenging State 
content standards and to meet the challenging State student 
performance standards developed for all children. This purpose 
should be accomplished by--
          (1) ensuring high standards for all children and 
        aligning the efforts of States, local educational 
        agencies, and schools to help children served under 
        this title to reach such standards;
          (2) providing children an enriched and accelerated 
        educational program, including the use of schoolwide 
        programs or additional services that increase the 
        amount and quality of instructional time so that 
        children served under this title receive at least the 
        classroom instruction that other children receive;
          (3) promoting schoolwide reform and ensuring access 
        of children (from the earliest grades, 
includingprekindergarten) to effective instructional strategies and 
challenging academic content that includes intensive complex thinking 
and problem-solving experiences;
          (4) significantly elevating the quality of 
        instruction by providing staff in participating schools 
        with substantial opportunities for professional 
        development;
          (5) coordinating services under all parts of this 
        title with each other, with other educational services, 
        and to the extent feasible, with other agencies 
        providing services to youth, children, and families 
        that are funded from other sources;
          (6) affording parents substantial and meaningful 
        opportunities to participate in the education of their 
        children at home and at school;
          (7) distributing resources in amounts sufficient to 
        make a diffference to local educational agencies and 
        schools where needs are greatest;
          (8) improving and strengthening accountability, 
        teaching, and learning by using State assessment 
        systems designed to measure how well children served 
        under this title are achieving challenging State 
        student performance standards expected of all children; 
        and
          (9) providing greater decisionmaking authority and 
        flexibility to schools and teachers in exchange for 
        greater responsibility for student performance.

SEC. 1002 [20 U.S.C. 6302] AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    (a) Local Educational Agency Grants.--For the purpose of 
carrying out part A, other than section 1120(e), there are 
authorized to be appropriated [$7,400,000,000 for fiscal year 
1995] $15,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2001 and such sums as may 
be necessary for each of the four succeeding fiscal years.
    (b) Even Start.--For the purpose of carrying out part B, 
there are authorized to be appropriated [$118,000,000 for 
fiscal year 1995] $500,000,000 for fiscal year 2001 and such 
sums as may be necessary for each of the four succeeding fiscal 
years.
    (c) Education of Migratory Children.--For the purpose of 
carrying out part C, there are authorized to be appropriated 
[$310,000,000 for fiscal year 1995] $400,000,000 for fiscal 
year 2001 and such sums as may be necessary for each of the 
four succeeding fiscal years.
    [(d) Prevention and Intervention Programs for Youth Who Are 
Neglected, Delinquent, or at Risk of Dropping Out.--For the 
purpose of carrying out part D, there are authorized to be 
appropriated $40,000,000 for fiscal year 1995 and such sums as 
may be necessary for each of the four succeeding fiscal year.]
    (d) Perental Assistance.--For the purpose of carrying out 
part D, there are authorized to be appropriated $50,000,000 for 
fiscal year 2001 and such sums as may be necessary for each of 
the 4 succeeding fiscal years.
    [(e) Capital Expenses.--For the purpose of carrying out 
section 1120(e), there are authorized to be appropriated 
$41,434,000 for fiscal year 1995 and such sums as may be 
necessary for each of the four succeeding fiscal years.]
    (e) Capital Expenses.--For the purpose of carrying out 
section 1120(e), there are authorized to be appropriated 
$15,000,000 for fiscal year 2001, $15,000,000 for fiscal year 
2002, and $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2003.
    (f) Additional Assistance for School Improvement.--For the 
purpose of providing additional needed assistance to carry out 
sections 1116 and 1117, there are authorized to be appropriated 
such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year [1996 and each of 
the three] 2001 and each of the four succeeding fiscal years.
    [(g) Federal Activities.--
          [(1) Section 1501.--For the purpose of carrying out 
        section 1501, there are authorized to be appropriated 
        $9,000,000 for fiscal year 1995 and such sums as may be 
        necessary for each of the four succeeding fiscal years.
          [(2) Sections 1502 and 1503.--For the purpose of 
        carrying out sections 1502 and 1503, there are 
        authorized to be appropriated $50,000,000 for fiscal 
        year 1995 and such sums as may be necessary for each of 
        the four succeeding fiscal years.]
    (g) Federal Activities.--
          (1) Section 1501.--For the purpose of carrying out 
        section 1501, there are authorized to be appropriated 
        $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2001 and such sums as may 
        be necessary for each of the four succeeding fiscal 
        years.
          (2) Section 1502.--For the purpose of carrying out 
        section 1502 there are authorized to be appropriated 
        $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2001 and such sums as may 
        be necessary for each of the four succeeding fiscal 
        years.
    (h) Comprehensive School Reform.--For the purpose of 
carrying out part F, there are authorized to be appropriated 
$200,000,000 for fiscal year 2001 and such sums as may be 
necessary for each of the four succeeding fiscal years.

[SEC. 1003. [20 U.S.C. 6303] RESERVATION AND ALLOCATION FOR SCHOOL 
                    IMPROVEMENT.

    [(a) Payment for School Improvement.--
          [(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph 
        (3), each State may reserve for the proper and 
        efficient performance of its duties under subsections 
        (c)(5) and (d) of section 1116, and section 1117, one-
        half of 1 percent of the funds allocated to the State 
        under subsections (a), (c), and (d), of section 1002 
        for fiscal year 1995 and each succeeding fiscal year.
          [(2) Minimum.--The total amount that may be reserved 
        by each State, other than the outlying areas, under 
        this subsection for any fiscal year, when added to 
        amounts appropriated for such fiscal year, when added 
        to amounts appropriated for such fiscal year under 
        section 1002(f) that are allocated to the State under 
        subsection (b), if any, may not be less than $200,000. 
        The total amount that may be reserved by each outlying 
        area under this subsection for any fiscal year, when 
        added to amounts appropriated for such fiscal year 
        under section 1002(f) that are allocated under 
        subsection (b) to the outlying area, if any, may not be 
        less than $25,000.
          [(3) Special rule.--If the amount reserved under 
        paragraph (1) when added to the amount made available 
        under section 1002(f) for a State is less than $200,000 
        for any fiscal year, then such State may reserve such 
        additional funds under subsections (a), (c) and (d) of 
        section 1002 as are necessary to make $200,000 
        available to such State.
    [(b) Additional State Allocations for School Improvement.--
From the amount appropriated under section 1002(f) for any 
fiscal year, such State shall be eligible to receive an amount 
that bears the same ratio to the amount appropriated as the 
amount allocated to the State under this part (other than 
section 1120(e)) bears to the total mount allocated to all 
States under this part (other than section 1120)e)).]

SEC. 1003. RESERVATIONS AND ALLOCATIONS FOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT.

    (a) Secretary's Reservation and Allocation for School 
Improvement From Amounts in Excess of $8,076,000,000.--
          (1) Reservation.--The Secretary shall reserve 50 
        percent of the amount appropriated to carry out part A 
        for fiscal year 2001 and each of the 4 succeeding 
        fiscal years that is in excess of $8,076,000,000 to 
        make allotments to States under paragraph (2).
          (2) Additional state allotments for assessment 
        development, school improvement, and academic 
        achievement awards.--
                  (A) Allotments.--The Secretary shall allot to 
                each State for a fiscal year an amount that 
                bears the same relation to the amount reserved 
                under paragraph (1) for the fiscal year as the 
                amount all local educational agencies in the 
                State received under section 1124 for the 
                fiscal year bears to the amount all local 
                educational agencies in all States received 
                under section 1124 for the fiscal year, except 
                that no State shall receive less than 0.5 
                percent of the amount reserved under paragraph 
                (1) for the fiscal year.
                  (B) Use of funds.--Funds allotted under 
                subparagraph (A) shall be used by a State to 
                carry out section 1111(b)(3), subsections (c) 
                and (d) of section 1116, and section 1117.
                  (C) Public notice and comment.--Each State 
                using funds allotted under this subsection 
                shall--
                          (i) provide the public with adequate 
                        and efficient notice of the proposed 
                        uses of the funds;
                          (ii) provide the opportunity for 
                        parents, educators, and all other 
                        interested members of the community to 
                        comment regarding the proposed uses of 
                        funds; and
                          (iii) provide the opportunity 
                        described in clause (ii in accordance 
                        with any applicable State law 
                        specifying how the comments may be 
                        received, and how the comments may be 
                        received by any member of the public.
                  (D) Definition.--For purposes of this 
                subsection, the term ``State'' means each of 
                the several States of the United States, the 
                District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of 
                Puerto Rico.
    (b) State Reservation and Allocation for School 
Improvement.--
          (1) Payment for school improvement.--
                  (A) In general.--Except as provided in 
                paragraph (3), for fiscal year 2001 and each 
                succeeding fiscal year each State may reserve 
                for the proper and efficient performance of its 
                duties under subsections (a), (c) and (d) of 
                section 1116, and section 1117, one-half of 1 
                percent of the funds made available to the 
                State under--
                          (i) part A, except that such reserved 
                        amount shall not exceed one-half of 1 
                        percent of the funds made available to 
                        the State under part A for fiscal year 
                        2000;
                          (ii) part C of this title, and part B 
                        of title III, for the fiscal year for 
                        which the reservation is made.
                  (B) Minimum.--The total amount that may be 
                reserved by each State, other than the outlying 
                areas, under this subsection for any fiscal 
                year, when added to amounts appropriated for 
                such fiscal year under section 1002(f) that are 
                allocated to the State under paragraph (2), if 
                any, may not be less than $200,000. The total 
                amount that may be reserved by each outlying 
                area under this subsection for any fiscal year, 
                when added to amounts appropriated for such 
                fiscal year under section 1002(f) that are 
                allocated under paragraph (2) to the outlying 
                area, if any, may not be less than $25,000.
                  (C) Special rule.--If the amount reserved 
                under subparagraph (A) when added to the amount 
                made available under section 1002(f) for a 
                State is less than $200,000 for any fiscal 
                year, then such State may reserve such 
                additional funds under parts A and C of this 
                title, and part C of title III, as are 
                necessary to make $200,000 available to such 
                State.
          (2) Additional state allocations for school 
        improvement.--From the amount appropriated under 
        section 102(f) for any fiscal year, each State shall be 
        eligible to receive an amount that bears the same ratio 
        to the amount appropriated as the amount allocated in 
        the State under part A (other than section 1120(e)) 
        hours to the total amount allocated to all States under 
        part A (other than section 1120(e)).

SEC. 1111. [20 U.S.C. 6311] STATE PLANS.

    (a) Plans Required.--
          (1) In general.--Any State desiring to receive a 
        grant under this part shall submit to the Secretary a 
        plan, developed in consultation with local educational 
        agencies, teachers, pupil services personnel, 
        administrators, other staff, and parents, that 
        satisfies the requirements of this section, and that is 
        coordinated with other programs under this Act, [the 
        Goals 2000: Educate America Act,] the Individuals with 
        Disabilities Education Act, the Carl D. Perkins 
        Vocational and Technical Education Act of 1998, the 
        Head Start Act, and other Acts, as appropriate, 
        consistent with section [14306] 6506.
          (2) Consolidation plan.--A State plan submitted under 
        paragraph (1) may be submitted as part of a 
        consolidation plan under section [14302] 6502.
    (b) Standards and Assessments.--
          (1) Challenging standards.--(A) * * *
          [(B) If a State has State content standards or State 
        student performance standards developed under title III 
        of the Goals 2000: Educate America Act and an aligned 
        set of assessments for all students developed under 
        such title, or, if not developed under such title, 
        adopted under another process, the State shall use such 
        standards and assessments, modified, if necessary, to 
        conform with the requirements of subparagraphs (A) and 
        (D) of this paragraph, and paragraphs (2) and (3).]
          (B) The standards described in subparagraph (A) shall 
        be the same standards that the State applies to all 
        schools and children in the State.
          [(C) If a State has not adopted State content 
        standards and State student performance standards for 
        all students, the State plan shall include a strategy 
        and schedule for developing State content standards and 
        State student performance standards for elementary and 
        secondary school children served under this part in 
        subjects as determined by the State, but including at 
        least mathematics and reading or language arts by the 
        end of the one-year period described in paragraph (6), 
        which standards shall include the same knowledge, 
        skills, and levels of performance expected of all 
        children.]
          (C) The State shall have the standards described in 
        subparagraph (A) for elementary school and secondary 
        school children served under this part in subjects 
        determined by the State that include at least 
        mathematics, and reading or language arts, and such 
        standards shall require the same knowledge, skills, and 
        levels of performance for all children.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (2) Yearly progress.--
                  (A) * * *
                  [(B) Adequate yearly progress shall be 
                defined in a manner--
                          [(i) that is consistent with 
                        guidelines established by the Secretary 
                        that result in continuous and 
                        substantial yearly improvement of each 
                        local educational agency and school 
                        sufficient to achieve the goal of all 
                        children served under this part meeting 
                        the State's proficient and advanced 
                        levels of performance, particularly 
                        economically disadvantaged and limited 
                        English proficient children; and
                          [(ii) that links progress primarily 
                        to performance on the assessments 
                        carried out under this section while 
                        permitting progress to be established 
                        in part through the use of other 
                        measures.]
                  (B) Adequate yearly progress shall be defined 
                in a manner--
                          (i) that is sufficient to achieve the 
                        goal of all children served under this 
                        part meeting the State's proficient and 
                        advanced levels of performance within 
                        10 years;
                          (ii) that results in continuous and 
                        substantial academic improvement for 
                        all students, including economically 
                        disadvantaged and limited English 
                        proficient students, except that this 
                        clause shall not apply if the State 
                        demonstrates to the Secretary that the 
                        State has an insufficient number of 
                        economically disadvantaged or limited 
                        English proficient students;
                          (iii) that is based primarily on the 
                        standards described in paragraph (1) 
                        and the assessments aligned to State 
                        standards described in paragraph (3), 
                        and shall include specific State 
                        determined yearly progress requirements 
                        in subjects and grades included in the 
                        State assessments; and
                          (iv) that is linked to performance on 
                        the assessments carried out under this 
                        section while permitting progress to be 
                        established in part through other 
                        academic indicators, whether defined in 
                        the State plan or in a State-approved 
                        local educational agency plan, such as 
                        dropout rates.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                  (F) provide for--
                          (i) the participation in such 
                        assessments of all students;
                          (ii) the reasonable adaptations and 
                        accommodations for students with 
                        diverse learning needs, necessary to 
                        measure the achievement of such 
                        students relative to State content 
                        standards; [and]
                          (iii) the inclusion of limited 
                        English proficient students who shall 
                        be assessed, to the extent practicable, 
                        in the language and form most likely to 
                        yield accurate and reliable information 
                        on what such students know and can do, 
                        to determine such students' mastery of 
                        skills in subjects other than English; 
                        and
                          (iv) notwithstanding clause (iii), 
                        the assessment (using tests written in 
                        English) of reading or language arts of 
                        any student who has attended school in 
                        the United States (excluding the 
                        Commonwealth of Puerto Rico) for 3 or 
                        more consecutive years for the purpose 
                        of school accountability;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                  [(H) provide individual student interpretive 
                and descriptive reports, which shall include 
                scores, or other information on the attainment 
                of student performance standards; and]
                  (H) provide individual student interpretive 
                and descriptive reports, which shall include 
                scores or other information on the attainment 
                of student performance standards, such as 
                measures of student course work over time, 
                student attendance rates, student dropout 
                rates, and student participation in advanced 
                level courses;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (5) Language assessments.--Each State plan shall 
        indentify the languages other than English that are 
        present in the participating student population and 
        indicate the languages for which yearly student 
        assessments are not available and are needed. The State 
        shall make every effort to develop such assessments and 
        may request assistance from the Secretary if 
        linguistically accessible assessment measures are 
        needed. Upon request, the Secretary shall assist with 
        the identification of appropriate assessment measures 
        in the needed languages [through the Office of 
        Bilingual Education and Minority Languages Affairs], 
        but shall not mandate a specific assessment or mode of 
        instruction

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (c) Other Provisions To Support Teaching and Learning.--
Each State plan shall contain assurances that--
          (1)(A) * * *
          (B) the State educational agency will work with other 
        agencies, including educational service agencies or 
        other local consortia, and institutions to provide 
        technical assistance to local educational agencies and 
        schools to carry out the State educational agency's 
        responsibilities under this part, including technical 
        assistance in providing professional development under 
        section [1119 and] 1119, technical assistance under 
        section 1117, and parental involvement under section 
        1118; and

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (5) the State educational agency will inform the 
        Secretary and the public regarding how Federal laws 
        hinder, if at all, the ability of States to hold local 
        educational agencies and schools accountable for 
        student academic performance;
          (6) the State educational agency will inform the 
        Secretary and the public regarding how the State 
        educational agency is reducing, if necessary, State 
        fiscal, accounting, and other barriers to local school 
        and school district reform, including barriers to 
        implementing schoolwide programs;
          (7) the State educational agency will inform local 
        educational agencies of the local educational agencies' 
        ability to obtain waivers under part F of title VI and, 
        if the State is an Ed-Flex Partnership State, waivers 
        under the Educational Flexibility Partnership Act of 
        1999 (20 U.S.C. 5891a et seq.);
          [(5)] (8) the Committee of Practitioners established 
        under section 1603(b) will be substantially involved in 
        the development of the plan and will continue to be 
        involved in monitoring the plan's implementation by the 
        State; and
          [(6)] (9) the State will coordinate activities funded 
        under this part with school-to-work, vocational 
        education, cooperative education and mentoring 
        programs, and apprenticeship programs involving 
        business, labor, and industry, as appropriate.]
          (9) the State will coordinate activities funded under 
        this part with other Federal activities as appropriate.
    (d) Parental Involvement.--Each State plan shall 
demonstrate that the State will support, in collaboration with 
the regional educational laboratories, the collection and 
dissemination to local educational agencies and schools of 
effective parental involvement practices. Such practices 
shall--
          (1) be based on the most current research of 
        effective parental involvement that fosters achievement 
        to high standards for all children; and
          (2) be geared toward lowering barriers to greater 
        participation in school planning, review, and 
        improvement experienced by parents.
    [(d)] (e) Peer Review and Secretarial Approval.--
          (1) In general.--The Secretary shall--
                  (A) establish a peer review process to assist 
                in the review and recommendations for revision 
                of State plans;
                  (B) appoint individuals to the peer review 
                process who are representative of State 
                educational agencies, local educational 
                agencies, teachers, and parents, and who are 
                familiar with educational standards, 
                assessments, accountability, and other diverse 
                educational needs of students;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    [(e)] (f) Duration of the Plan.--

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    [(f)] (g) Limitation on Conditions.--Nothing in this part 
shall be construed to authorize an officer or employee of the 
Federal Government to mandate, direct, or control a State, 
local educational agency, or school's specific instructional 
content or student performance standards and assessments, 
curriculum, or program of instruction, as a condition of 
eligibility to receive funds under this part.
    [(g)] (h) Special Rule.--If the aggregate State expenditure 
by a State educational agency for the operation of elementary 
and secondary education programs in the State is less than such 
agency's aggregate Federal expenditure for the State operation 
of all Federal elementary and secondary education programs, 
then the State plan shall include assurances and specific 
provisions that such State will provide State expenditures for 
the operation of elementary and secondary education programs 
equal to or exceeding the level of Federal expenditures for 
such operation by October 1, [1998] 2005.
    (i) Privacy.--Information collected under this section 
shall be collected and disseminated in a manner that protects 
the privacy of individuals.

SEC. 1112. [20 U.S.C. 6312] LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCY PLANS.

    (a) Plans Required.--
          (1) Subgrants.--A local educational agency may 
        receive a subgrant under this part for any fiscal year 
        only if such agency has on file with the State 
        educational agency a plan, approved by the State 
        educational agency, that is coordinated with other 
        programs under this Act, [the Goals 2000: Educate 
        America Act, and other Acts, as appropriate, as 
        specified in section 14306] the Individuals with 
        Disabilities Education Act, the Carl D. Perkins 
        Vocational and Technical Education Act of 1998, the 
        Head Start Act, and other Acts, as appropriate.
          (2) Consolidated application.--The plan may be 
        submitted as part of a consolidated application under 
        section [4304] 6504.
    (b) Plan Provisions.--Each local educational agency plan 
shall include--

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (3) a description of the strategy the local 
        educational agency will use to provide professional 
        development for teachers, and, where appropriate, pupil 
        services personnel, administrators, parents and other 
        staff, including local educational agency level staff 
        in accordance with section 1119, which strategy shall 
        be coordinated with activities under title II if the 
        local educational agency receives funds under title II;
          (4) * * *
                  (A) Even Start, Head Start, and other 
                preschool programs, including plans for the 
                transition of participants in such programs to 
                local elementary school [programs, vocational] 
                programs and vocational education programs[, 
                and school-to-work transition programs]; and
                  (B) services for children with limited 
                English proficiency or with disabilities, 
                migratory children [served under part C or who 
                were formerly eligible for services under part 
                C in the two-year period preceding the date of 
                the enactment of the Improving America's School 
                Act of 1994], neglected or delinquent youth and 
                youth at risk of dropping out [served under 
                part D], homeless children, and immigrant 
                children in order to increase program 
                effectiveness, eliminate duplication, and 
                reduce fragmentation of the instructional 
                program;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          [(9) where appropriate, a description of how the 
        local educational agency will use funds under this part 
        to support pre-school programs for children, 
        particularly children participating in a Head Start or 
        Even Start program, which services may be provided 
        directly by the local educational agency or through a 
        subcontract with the local Head Start agency designated 
        by the Secretary of Health and Human Services under 
        section 641 of the Head Start Act, agencies operating 
        Even Start programs, or another comparable public early 
        childhood development program.]
          (9) where appropriate, a description of how the local 
        educational agency will use funds under this part to 
        support early childhood educational programs under 
        section 1120B.
    [(c) Assurances.--
          [(1) In general.--Each local educational agency plan 
        shall provide assurances that the local educational 
        agency will--
                  [(A) inform eligible schools and parents of 
                schoolwide project authority;
                  [(B) provide technical assistance and support 
                to schoolwide programs;
                  [(C) work in consultation with schools as the 
                schools develop the school's plans pursuant to 
                section 1114 and assist schools as the schools 
                implement such plans or undertake activities 
                pursuant to section 1115 so that each school 
                can make adequate yearly progress toward 
                meeting the State content standards and State 
                student performance standards;
                  [(D) fulfill such agency's school improvement 
                responsibilities under section 1116, including 
                taking corrective actions under section 
                1116(c)(4);
                  [(E) coordinate and collaborate, to the 
                extent feasible and necessary as determined by 
                the local educational agency, with other 
                agencies providing services to children, youth, 
                and families, including health and social 
                services;
                  [(F) provide services to eligible children 
                attending private elementary and secondary 
                schools in accordance with section 1120, and 
                timely and meaningful consultation with private 
                school officials regarding such services;
                  [(G) take into account the experience of 
                model programs for the educationally 
                disadvantaged, and the findings of relevant 
                research indicating that services may be most 
                effective if focused on students in the 
                earliest grades at schools that receive funds 
                under this part; and
                  [(H) beginning in fiscal year 1997 and in the 
                case that a local educational agency chooses to 
                use funds under this part to provide early 
                childhood development services to low-income 
                children below the age of compulsory school 
                attendance, ensure that such services comply 
                with the performance standards established 
                under section 641A(a) of the Head Start Act or 
                under section 651 of such Act, as such section 
                651 was in effect on the day preceding the date 
                of enactment of the Human Service Amendments of 
                1994.
          [(2) Special rule.--In carrying out subparagraph (H) 
        of paragraph (1) the Secretary--
                  [(A) in fiscal year 1995, shall consult with 
                the Secretary of Health and Human Services on 
                the implementation of such subparagraph and 
                shall establish procedures (taking into 
                consideration existing State and local laws, 
                and local teacher contracts) to assist local 
                educational agencies to comply with such 
                subparagraph; and
                  [(B) in fiscal year 1996, shall disseminate 
                to local educational agencies the Head Start 
                Performance Standards revised pursuant to 
                section 641A(a) of the Head Start Act, and such 
                agencies effected by such subparagraph shall 
                plan for the implementation by such subparaph 
                (taking into consideration existing State and 
                local laws, and local teachers contracts), 
                including pursuing the availability of other 
                Federal, State, and local funding sources to 
                assist in compliance with such subparagraph.
          [(3) Inapplicability.--The provisions of this 
        subsection shall not apply to preschool programs under 
        the Even Start model or to Even Start programs which 
        are expanded through the use of funds under this part.]
    (c) Assurances.--Each local educational agency plan shall 
provide assurances that the local educational agency will--
         (1) inform eligible schools and parents of schoolwide 
        project authority;
         (2) provide technical assistance and support to 
        schoolwide programs;
         (3) work in consultation with schools as the schools 
        develop the schools' plans pursuant to section 1114 and 
        assist schools as the schools implement such plans or 
        under take activities pursuant to section 1115 so that 
        each school can make adequate yearly progress toward 
        meeting the State content standards and State student 
        performance standards;
         (4) fulfill such agency's school improvement 
        responsibilities under section 1116, including taking 
        corrective actions under section 1116(c)(5);
         (5) work in consultation with schools as the schools 
        develop and implement their plans or activities under 
        sections 1118 and 1119;
         (6) coordinate and collaborate, to the extent feasible 
        and necessary as determined by the local educational 
        agency, with other agencies providing services to 
        children, youth, and families, including health and 
        social services;
         (7) provide services to eligible children attending 
        private elementary and secondary schools in accordance 
        with section 1120, and timely and meaningful 
        consultation with private school officials regarding 
        such services;
         (8) take into account the experience of model programs 
        for the educationally disadvantaged, and the findings 
        of relevant research indicating that services may be 
        most effective if focused on students in the earliest 
        grades at schools that receive funds under this part;
         (9) comply with the requirements of section 1119 
        regarding professional development;
         (10) inform eligible schools of the local educational 
        agency's authority to obtain waivers on the school's 
        behalf under part F of title VI, and if the State is an 
        Ed-Flex Partnership State, waivers under the Education 
        Flexibility Partnership Act of 1999; and
         (11) coordinate and collaborate, to the extent 
        feasible and necessary as determined by the local 
        educational agency, with other agencies providing 
        services to children, youth, and families.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (e) State Approval.--
         (1) In general.--Each local educational agency plan 
        shall be filed according to a schedule established by 
        the State educational agency[, except that a local 
        educational agency shall have not more than one year 
        after the date of enactment of the Improving America's 
        Schools Act of 1994 to have such plan provisionally 
        approved by the State educational agency and not more 
        than two years after the date of enactment of such Act 
        to have such plan finally approved by the State 
        educational agency].

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

         (3) Review.--The State educational agency shall review 
        the local educational agency's plan to determine if 
        such agency's [professional development] activities are 
        in accordance with [section 1119] sections 1118 and 
        1119.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 1113. [20 U.S.C. 6313] ELIGIBLE SCHOOL ATTENDANCE AREAS.

    (a) Determination.--
         (1) In general.-- * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (b) Local Educational Agency Discretion.--

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                 (B) use funds received under this part in a 
                school that is not in an eligible school 
                attendance area, if the percentage of children 
                from low-income families enrolled in the school 
                is equal to or greater than the percentage of 
                such children in a participating school 
                attendance area of such agency; [and]
                 (C) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                         (iii) the funds expended from such 
                        other sources equal or exceed the 
                        amount that would be provided under 
                        this part[.]; and
                 (D) designate and serve a school attendance 
                area or school that is not an eligible school 
                attendance area under subsection (a)(2), but 
                that was an eligible school attendance area and 
                was served in the fiscal year preceding the 
                fiscal year for which the determination is 
                made, but only for 1 additional fiscal year.

SEC. 1114. [20 U.S.C. 6314] SCHOOLWIDE PROGRAMS.

    (a) Use of Funds for Schoolwide Programs.--
          [(1) In general.--A local educational agency may use 
        funds under this part, in combination with other 
        Federal, State, and local funds, in order to upgrade 
        the entire educational program in a school described in 
        subparagraph (A) or (B) if, for the initial year of the 
        schoolwide program, the school meets either of the 
        following criteria:]
          (1) In general.--A local education agency may use 
        funds under this part, together with other Federal, 
        State, and local funds, to upgrade the entire 
        educational program of a school that serves an eligible 
        school attendance area in which not less than 40 
        percent of the children are from low-income families, 
        or not less than 40 percent of the children enrolled in 
        the school are from such families, for the initial year 
        of the schoolwide program.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (4) [Special rule.--] Exemption from statutory and 
        regulatory requirements._(A) Except as provided in 
        subsection (b), the Secretary may, through publication 
        of a notice in the Federal Register, exempt schoolwide 
        programs under this section from statutory or 
        regulatory provisions of any other noncompetitive 
        formula grant program administered by the Secretary, or 
        any discretionary grant program administered by the 
        Secretary (other than formula or discretionary grant 
        programs under the Individuals with Disabilities 
        Education Act), to support schoolwide programs, if the 
        intent and purposes of such other programs are met.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (C) A school that chooses to use funds from such 
        other programs under this sections shall not be 
        required to maintain separate fiscal accounting 
        records, by program, that identify the specific 
        activities supported by those particular funds as long 
        as the school maintains records that demonstrate that 
        the schoolwide program, considered as a whole, 
        addresses the intent and purposes of each of the 
        programs that were consolidated to support the 
        schoolwide program.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (b) Components of a Schoolwide Program.--
          (1) In general.--A schoolwide program shall include 
        the following components:
                  (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                  (B) * * *
                          (vii) are consistent with, and are 
                        designed to implement, the State and 
                        local improvement plans[, if any, 
                        approved under title III of the Goals 
                        2000: Educate America Act].

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                  (E) Strategies to increase parental 
                involvement[, such as family literary 
                services]. (including activities described in 
                section 1118), such as family literacy 
                services, in-school volunteer opportunities, or 
                parent membership on school-based leadership or 
                management teams.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (2) Plan.--(A) Any eligible school that desires to 
        operate a schoolwide program shall first develop (or 
        amend a plan for such a program that was in existence 
        before the date of enactment of the [Improving 
        America's Schools Act of 1994] Educational 
        Opportunities Act), in consultation with the local 
        education agency and its school support team or other 
        technical assistance provider under subsections (c)(1) 
        and (e) of section 1117, a comprehensive plan for 
        reforming the total instructional program in the school 
        that--
                  (i) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                  (iv) describes how the school will provide 
                individual student assessment results, 
                including an interpretation of those results in 
                a language the family can understand, to the 
                parents of a child who participates in the 
                assessment required by section 1111(b)(3);

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (C) The comprehensive plan shall be--
                  (i) developed during a one-year period, 
                unless--
                          (I) * * *
                          (II) the school is operating a 
                        schoolwide program on the day preceding 
                        the date of enactment of the [Improving 
                        America's Schools Act of 1994] 
                        Educational Opportunities Act, in which 
                        case such school may continue to 
                        operate such program, but shall develop 
                        a new plan during the first year of 
                        assistance under such Act to reflect 
                        the provisions of this section;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                  (v) where appropriate, developed in 
                coordination with programs under [the School-
                to-Work Opportunities Act of 1994] part C of 
                title II, the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and 
                Technical Education Act of 1998, and the 
                National and Community Service Act of 1990.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 1115. [20 U.S.C. 6315] TARGETED ASSISTANCE SCHOOLS.

    (a) In General.--* * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (b) Eligible Children.--

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                          (i) * * *
                          (ii) children who are not yet at a 
                        grade level where the local educational 
                        agency provides a free public 
                        education[, yet are of an age at which 
                        such children can benefit from an 
                        organized instructional program 
                        provided in a school or other 
                        educational setting].

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (2) Children included.--(A)(i) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (B) A child who, at any time in the two years 
        preceding the year for which the determination is made, 
        participated in a Head Start or Even Start program, or 
        in early childhood education services under this title, 
        is eligible for services under this part.
          (C)(i) A child who, at any time in the two years 
        preceding the year for which the determination is made, 
        received services under the program for youth who are 
        neglected, delinquent, or at risk of dropping out 
        [under part D (or its predecessor authority)] may be 
        eligible for services under this part.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (c) Components of a Targeted Assistance School Program.--
          (1) In general.--* * *
                  (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                  [(G) in accordance with subsection (e)(3) and 
                section 1119, provide opportunities for 
                professional development with resources 
                provided under this part, and from other 
                sources to the extent feasible, for 
                administrators and for teachers and other 
                school staff who work with participating 
                children in programs under this section or in 
                the regular education program; and]
                  (G) provide opportunities for professional 
                development with resources provided under this 
                part, and to the extent practicable, from other 
                sources, for teachers, principals, 
                administrators, paraprofessionals, pupil 
                services personnel, and parents, who work with 
                participating children in programs under this 
                section or in the regular education program; 
                and
                  (H) provide strategies to increase parental 
                involvement[, such as family literary services] 
                (including activities described in section 
                1118), such as family literacy services, in-
                school volunteer opportunities, or parent 
                membership on school-based leadership or 
                management teams.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 1115B. PUPIL SAFETY AND FAMILY SCHOOL CHOICE.

    (a) In General.--If a student is eligible to be served 
under section 1115(b), or attends a school eligible for a 
schoolwide program under section 1114, and--
          (1) becomes a victim of a violent criminal offense 
        while in or on the grounds of a public elementary 
        school or secondary school that the student attends and 
        that receives assistance under this part, then the 
        local educational agency shall allow such student to 
        transfer to another public school or public charter 
        school in the same State as the school where the 
        criminal offense occurred, that is selected by the 
        student's parent unless allowing such transfer is 
        prohibited--
                  (A) under the provisions of a State or local 
                law; or
                  (B) by a local educational agency policy that 
                is approved by a local school board; or
          (2) the public school that the student attends and 
        that receives assistance under this part has been 
        designated as an unsafe public school, then the local 
        educational agency may allow such student to transfer 
        to another public school or public charter school in 
        the same State as the school where the criminal offense 
        occurred, that is selected by the student's parent.
    (b) State Educational Agency Determinations.--
          (1) The State educational agency shall determine, 
        based upon State law, what actions constitute a violent 
        criminal offense for purposes of this section.
          (2) The State educational agency shall determine 
        which schools in the State are unsafe public schools.
          (3) The Term ``unsafe public schools'' means a public 
        school that has serious crime, violence, illegal drug, 
        and discipline problems, as indicated by conditions 
        that may include high rates of--
                  (A) expulsions and suspensions of students 
                from school;
                  (B) referrals of students to alternative 
                schools for disciplinary reasons, to special 
                programs or schools for delinquent youth, or to 
                juvenile court;
                  (C) victimization of students or teachers by 
                criminal acts, including robbery, assault and 
                homicide;
                  (D) enrolled students who are under court 
                supervision for past criminal behavior;
                  (E) possession, use, sale or distribution of 
                illegal drugs;
                  (F) enrolled students who are attending 
                school while under the influence of illegal 
                drugs or alcohol;
                  (G) possession or use of guns or other 
                weapons;
                  (H) participation in youth gangs; or
                  (I) crimes against property, such as theft or 
                vandalism.
    (c) Transportation Costs.--The local educational agency 
that serves the public school in which the violent criminal 
offense occurred or that serves the designated unsafe public 
school may use funds provided under this part to provide 
transportation services or to pay the reasonable costs of 
transportation for the student to attend the school selected by 
the student's parent.
    (d) Special Rule.--Any school receiving assistance provided 
under this section shall comply with title VI of the Civil 
Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.) and not 
discriminate on the basis of race, color, or national origin.
    (e) Part B of the Individuals With Disabilities Education 
Act.--Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect the 
requirements of part B of the Individuals with Disabilities 
Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1411 et seq.).
    (f) Maximum Amount.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
this section, the amount of assistance provided under this part 
for a student who elects a transfer under this section shall 
not exceed the per pupil expenditures for elementary or 
secondary school students as provided by the local educational 
agency that serves the school involved in the transfer.

SEC. 1116. [20 U.S.C. 6317] ASSESSMENT AND LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCY AND 
                    SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT.

    [(a) Local Review.--Each local educational agency receiving 
funds under this part shall--
          [(1) use the State assessments described in the State 
        plan;
          [(2) use any additional measures or indicators 
        described in the local educational agency's plan to 
        review annually the progress of each school served 
        under this part to determine whether the school is 
        meeting, or making adequate progress as defined in 
        section 1111(b)(2)(A)(i) toward enabling its students 
        to meet the State's student performance standards 
        described in the State plan;
          [(3) publicize and disseminate to teachers and other 
        staff, parents, students, and the community, the 
        results of the annual review under paragraph (2) of all 
        schools served under this part in individual school 
        performance profiles that include statistically sound 
        disaggregated results as required by section 
        1111(b)(3)(I); and
          [(4) provide the results of the local annual review 
        to schools so that the schools can continually refine 
        the program of instruction to help all children served 
        under this part in those schools meet the State's 
        student performance standards.]
    (a) Local Review.--
          (1) In general.--Each local educational agency 
        receiving funds under this part shall--
                  (A) use the State assessments described in 
                the State plan;
                  (B) use any additional measures or indicators 
                described in the local educational agency's 
                plan to review annually the progress of each 
                school served under this part to determine 
                whether the school is meeting, or making 
                adequate progress as defined in section 
                1111(b)(2)(A)(i) toward enabling its students 
                to meet the State's student performance 
                standards described in the State plan; and
                  (C) provide the results of the local annual 
                review to schools so that the schools can 
                continually refine the program of instruction 
                to help all children served under this part in 
                those schools meet the State's student 
                performance standards.
          (2) Local reports.--(A) Following the annual review 
        specified in paragraph (1)(B), each local educational 
        agency receiving funds under this part shall prepare 
        and disseminate an annual performance report regarding 
        each school that receives funds under this part. The 
        report, at a minimum, shall include information 
        regarding--
                  (i) each school's performance in making 
                adequate yearly progress and whether the school 
                has been identified for school improvement;
                  (ii) the progress of each school in enabling 
                all students served under this part to meet the 
                State-determined levels of performance, 
                including the progress of economically 
                disadvantaged students and limited English 
                proficient students, except that this clause 
                shall not apply to a State if the State 
                demonstrates that the State has an insufficient 
                number of economically disadvantaged or limited 
                English proficient students; and
                  (iii) any other information the local 
                educational agency determines appropriate (such 
                as information on teacher quality, school 
                safety, and drop-out rates).
          (B) The local educational agency shall publicize and 
        disseminate the report to teachers and other staff, 
        parents, students, and the community. Such report shall 
        be concise and presented in a formal and manner that 
        parents can understand. The local educational agency 
        may issue individual school performance reports 
        directly to teachers and other staff, parents, 
        students, and the community, or the local educational 
        agency may publicize and disseminate the report through 
        a widely read or distributed medium, such as posting on 
        the Internet or distribution to the media.
          (C) Information collected and reported under this 
        section shall be collected and disseminated in a manner 
        that protects the privacy of individuals.
          (D) In the case of a local educational agency for 
        which the State report described in section 1116(d) 
        contains data about an individual school served by the 
        local educational agency that is equivalent to the data 
        required by this subsection, such local educational 
        agency shall not be required to prepare or distribute a 
        report regarding such school under this paragraph.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    [(c) School Improvement.--
          [(1) In general.--A local educational agency shall 
        identify for school improvement any school served under 
        this part that--
                  [(A) has been in program improvement under 
                section 1020 of the elementary and Secondary 
                Education Act of 1965 (as such section was in 
                effect on the day preceding the date of 
                enactment of the Improving America's Schools 
                Act of 1994), for at least two consecutive 
                school years prior to such day;
                  [(B) has not made adequate progress as 
                defined in the State's plan under section 
                1111(b)(2)(A)(i) for two consecutive school 
                years, except that--
                          [(i) this subparagraph shall not 
                        apply to a school if almost every 
                        student in such school is meeting the 
                        State's advanced level of performance; 
                        or
                          [(ii) in the case of a targeted 
                        assistance school, such school may be 
                        reviewed on the progress of only those 
                        students that have been or are served 
                        under this part; or
                  [(C) has failed to meet the criteria 
                established by the State through the State's 
                transitional procedure under section 
                1111(b)(7)(B) for two consecutive years.
          (2) Requirement.--(A) Each school identified under 
        paragraph (1) shall--
                  [(i) in consultation with parents, the local 
                educational agency, and the school support 
                team, develop or revise a school plan in ways 
                that have the greatest likelihood of improving 
                the performance of participating children in 
                meeting the State's student performance 
                standards; and
                  [(ii) submit the plan or revised plan to the 
                local educational agency for approval.
          [(B) Before identifying a school for school 
        improvement under paragraph (1), the local educational 
        agency shall provide the school with an opportunity to 
        review the school-level data, including assessment 
        data, on which such identification is based. If the 
        school believes that such identification for school 
        improvement is in error for statistical or other 
        substantive reasons, such school may provide evidence 
        to the local educational agency to support such belief.
          [(C) During the first year immediately following such 
        identification, the school shall implement such schools 
        plan or revised plan.
          [(3) Professional development.--(A) Each school 
        identified under paragraph (1) shall, as part of the 
        school plan under paragraph (2), improve the skills of 
        its staff by providing effective professional 
        development activities. A school shall demonstrate such 
        school's compliance with this paragraph by--
                  [(i) devoting to such activities, over two 
                consecutive years, an amount equivalent to at 
                least 10 percent of the funds received by the 
                school under this part during one fiscal year; 
                or
                  [(ii) otherwise demonstrating that such 
                school is effectively carrying out professional 
                development activities.
          [(B) A school may use funds from any source to meet 
        the requirements of this subsection.
          [(C) Decisions about how to use the funds made 
        available under this part which the school makes 
        available for professional development shall be made by 
        teachers, principals, and other school staff in that 
        school.
          [(4) Technical assistance.--(A) For each school 
        identified under paragraph (1), the local educational 
        agency shall provide technical or other assistance as 
        the school develops and implements such school's plan 
        or revised plan, such as a joint plan between the local 
        educational agency and school that addresses specific 
        elements of student performance problems and that 
        specifies school and local education agency 
        responsibilities under the plan, and waivers or 
        modifications of requirements of local educational 
        agency policy or regulation that impede the ability of 
        the school to educate students.
          [(B) Such technical assistance may be provided 
        directly by the local educational agency, through 
        mechanisms authorized under section 1117, or with the 
        local educational agency's approval, by an institution 
        of higher education, a private nonprofit organization, 
        an educational service agency, a comprehensive regional 
        assistance center under part A of title XIII, or other 
        entities with experience in helping schools improve 
        achievement.
          [(5) Corrective action.--(A) Except as provided in 
        subparagraph (C), after providing technical assistance 
        pursuant to paragraph (4) and taking other remediation 
        measures, the local educational agency may take 
        corrective action at any time against a school that has 
        been identified under paragraph (1), but, during the 
        third year following identification under paragraph 
        (1), shall take such action against any school that 
        still fails to make adequate progress.
          [(B)(i) Corrective actions are those, consistent with 
        State and local law, determined and made public and 
        disseminated by the local educational agency, which may 
        include--
                  [(I) withholding funds;
                  [(II) interagency collaborative agreements 
                between the school and other public agencies to 
                provide health, counseling, and other social 
                services needed to remove barriers to learning;
                  [(III) revoking authority for a school to 
                operate a schoolwide program;
                  [(IV) decreasing decisionmaking authority at 
                the school level;
                  [(V) making alternative governance 
                arrangements such as the creation of a public 
                charter school;
                  [(VI) reconstituting the school staff; and
                  [(VII) authorizing students to transfer, 
                including transportation costs, to other public 
                schools served by the local educational agency.
          [(ii) Notwithstanding clause (i), corrective actions 
        taken pursuant to this part shall not include the 
        actions described in subclause (I), (III), (IV), (VI), 
        or (VII) of clause (i) until the State has developed 
        assessments that meet the requirements of subparagraph 
        (C) of section 1111(b)(3).
          [(C) Prior to implementing any corrective action, the 
        local educational agency may refrain from such 
        corrective action for one additional year to the extent 
        that the failure to make progress can be attributed to 
        extenuating circumstances as determined by the local 
        educational agency.
          [(D) A school that is no longer operating its 
        schoolwide program due to a corrective action may not 
        resume operation of such a program until the local 
        educational agency determines that the school has 
        adequately reformed its schoolwide program plan to 
        enable the school to make adequate progress toward 
        meeting the State's challenging student performance 
        standards.
          [(6) State educational agency responsibilities.--The 
        State educational agency shall--
                  [(A) make technical assistance under section 
                1117 available to the schools farthest from 
                meeting the State's challenging student 
                performance standards, if requested by the 
                school or local educational agency; and
                  [(B) if such agency determines that a local 
                educational agency failed to carry out the 
                local educational agency's responsibilities 
                under paragraphs (4) and (5), take such 
                corrective actions as the State educational 
                agency deems appropriate and which are in 
                compliance with State law.
          [(7) Special rule.--Schools that, for at least two of 
        the three years following identification under 
        paragraph (1), make adequate progress toward meeting 
        the State's proficient and advanced levels of 
        performance shall no longer need to be identified for 
        school improvement.]
    (c) School Improvement.--
          (1) In general.--(A) A local educational agency shall 
        identify for school improvement any school served under 
        this part that for 2 consecutive years failed to make 
        adequate yearly progress as defined in the State's plan 
        in section 1111, except that in the case of a targeted 
        assistance program under section 1115, a local 
        educational agency may review the progress of only 
        those students in such school who are served under this 
        part.
          (B) The 2 year period described in clause (i) shall 
        include any continuous period of time immediately 
        preceding the date of enactment of the Education 
        Opportunities Act, during which a school did not make 
        adequate yearly progress as defined in the State's 
        plan, as such plan was in effect on the day preceding 
        the date of such enactment.
          (C) Before identifying a school for school 
        improvement under subparagraph (A), the local 
        educational agency shall provide the school with an 
        opportunity to review the school-level data, including 
        assessment data, on which such identification is based. 
        The review period shall not exceed 30 days, and at the 
        end of the review period the local educational agency 
        shall make a final determination as to the school 
        improvement status of the school. If the school 
        believes that such identification for school 
        improvement is in error for statistical or other 
        substantive reasons, such school may provide evidence 
        to the local educational agency to support such belief.
          (2) School plan.--(A) Each school identified under 
        paragraph (1), in consultation with parents, the local 
        educational agency, and the school support team or 
        other outside experts, shall revise a school plan that 
        addresses the fundamental teaching and learning needs 
        in the school and--
                  (i) describes the specific achievement 
                problems to be solved;
                  (ii) includes research-based strategies, 
                supported with specific goals and objectives, 
                that have the greatest likelihood of improving 
                the performance of participating children in 
                meeting the State's student performance 
                standards;
                  (iii) explains how those strategies will work 
                to address the achievement problems identified 
                under clause (i);
                  (iv) addresses the need for high-quality 
                staff by setting goals for ensuring that high 
                quality professional development programs are 
                supported with funds under this part;
                  (v) addresses the professional development 
                needs of instructional staff by committing to 
                spend not less than 10 percent of the funds 
                received by the school under this part during 1 
                fiscal year for professional development, which 
                professional development shall increase the 
                content knowledge of teachers and build the 
                capacity of the teachers to align classroom 
                instruction with challenging content standards 
                and to bring all students to proficient or 
                advanced levels of performance as determined by 
                the State;
                  (vi) identifies specific goals and objectives 
                the school will undertake for making adequate 
                yearly progress, which goals and objectives 
                shall be consistent with State and local 
                standards;
                  (vii) specifies the responsibilities of the 
                school and the local educational agency, 
                including how the local educational agency will 
                hold the school accountable for, and assist the 
                school in, meeting the school's obligations to 
                provide enriched and accelerated curricula, 
                effective instructional methods, high quality 
                professional development, and timely and 
                effective individual assistance, in partnership 
                with parents; and
                  (viii) includes strategies to promote 
                effective parental involvement in the school.
          (B) The school shall submit the plan or revised plan 
        to the local educational agency for approved within 3 
        months of being identified. The local educational 
        agency shall promptly subject the plan to a review 
        process, work with the school to revise the plan as 
        necessary, and approve the plan within 1 monthof 
submission. The school shall implement the plan as soon as the plan is 
approved.
          (3) Parental notification.--Each school identified 
        under paragraph (1) shall in understandable language 
        and form, promptly notify the parents of each student 
        enrolled in the school that the school was designated 
        by the local educational agency as needing improvement 
        and provide with the notification--
                  (A) the reasons for such designation;
                  (B) information about opportunities for 
                parents to participate in the school 
                improvement process; and
                  (C) an explanation of the option afforded to 
                parents, pursuant to paragraph (6), to transfer 
                their child to another public school, including 
                a public charter school, that is not identified 
                for school improvement.
          (4) Technical assistance.--(A) For each school 
        identified for school improvement under paragraph (1), 
        the local educational agency shall provide technical 
        assistance as the school develops and implement its 
        plan. Such technical assistance shall include effective 
        methods and research-based instructional strategies.
          (B) Such technical assistance shall be designed to 
        strengthen the core academic program for the students 
        served under this part and addresses specific elements 
        of student performance problems, including problems, if 
        any, in implementing the parental involvement 
        requirements described in section 1118, the 
        professional development requirements described in 
        section 1119, and the responsibilities of the school 
        and local educational agency under the school plan.
          (5) Corrective action.--In order to help students 
        served under this part meet challenging State 
        standards, each local educational agency shall 
        implement a system of corrective action in accordance 
        with the following:
                  (A) After providing technical assistance 
                under paragraph (4), the local educational 
                agency may take corrective action at any time 
                with respect to a school that has been 
                identified under paragraph (1), but shall take 
                corrective action with respect to any school 
                that fails to make adequate yearly progress, as 
                defined by the State, at the end of the second 
                year following the school's identification 
                under paragraph (1) and shall continue to 
                provide technical assistance while instituting 
                any corrective action.
                  (B) Consistent with State and local law, in 
                the case of a school described in subparagraph 
                (A) for which corrective action is required, 
                the local educational agency shall not take 
                less than 1 of the following corrective 
                actions:
                          (i) Instituting and fully 
                        implementing a new curriculum that is 
                        based on State and local standards, 
                        including appropriate research-based 
                        professional development for all 
                        relevant staff that offers substantial 
                        promise of improving educational 
                        achievement for low-performing 
                        students.
                          (ii) Restructuring the school, such 
                        as by--
                                  (I) making alternative 
                                governance arrangements (such 
                                as the creation of a public 
                                charter school); or
                                  (II) creating schools within 
                                schools or other small learning 
                                environments.
                          (iii) Developing and implementing a 
                        joint plan between the local 
                        educational agency and the school that 
                        addresses specific elements of student 
                        performance problems and that specifies 
                        the responsibilities of the local 
                        educational agency and the school under 
                        the plan.
                          (iv) Reconstituting the school staff.
                          (v) Decreasing decisionmaking 
                        authority at the school level.
                  (C) Consistent with State and local law, in 
                the case of a school described in subparagraph 
                (A), the local educational agency may take the 
                following corrective actions:
                          (i) Deferring, reducing, or 
                        withholding funds.
                          (ii) Restructuring or abolishing the 
                        school.
                  (D) A local educational agency may delay, for 
                a period not to exceed 1 year, implementation 
                of corrective action--
                          (i) the local educational agency 
                        assesses the school's performance and 
                        determines that the school is meeting 
                        the specific State-determined yearly 
                        progress requirements in subjects and 
                        grades included in the State 
                        assessments; and
                          (ii) the school will meet the State's 
                        criteria for adequate yearly progress 
                        within 1 year;
                  (E) The local educational agency shall 
                publish, and disseminate to the public and to 
                parents, in a format and, to the extent 
                practicable, in a language that the parents can 
                understand, any corrective action the local 
                educational agency takes under this paragraph, 
                through such means as the Internet, the media, 
                and public agencies.
          (6) Public school choice.--
                  (A) School identified for improvement.--
                          (i) Schools identified on or before 
                        enactment.--Not later than 6 months 
                        after the date of the enactment of the 
                        Educational Opportunities Act, a local 
                        educational agency shall provide all 
                        students enrolled in a school 
                        identified (on or before such date of 
                        enactment) under paragraphs (1) and (5) 
                        with an option to transfer to any other 
                        public school within the local 
                        educational agency or any public school 
                        consistent with subparagraph (B), 
                        including a public charter school that 
                        has not been identified for school 
                        improvement,unless such option to 
transfer is prohibited--
                                  (I) under the provisions of a 
                                State or local law; or
                                  (II) by a local educational 
                                agency policy that is approved 
                                by a local school board.
                          (ii) Schools identified after 
                        enactment.--Not later than 6 months 
                        after the date on which a local 
                        educational agency identifies a school 
                        under paragraphs (1) and (5), the 
                        agency shall provide all students 
                        enrolled in such school with an option 
                        described in clause (i).
                  (B) Cooperative agreements.--If all public 
                schools in the local educational agency to 
                which a child may transfer are identified under 
                paragraphs (1) and (5), then the agency, to the 
                extent practicable, shall establish a 
                cooperative agreement with other local 
                educational agencies in the area for the 
                transfer, unless the transfer is prohibited 
                under--
                          (i) the provisions of a State or 
                        local law; or
                          (ii) a local educational agency 
                        policy that is approved by a local 
                        school board.
                  (C) Transportation.--
                          (i) In general--.The local 
                        educational agency in which the schools 
                        have been identified under paragraph 
                        (1) may use funds under this part to 
                        provide transportation to students 
                        whose parents choose to transfer their 
                        child or children to a different 
                        school.
                          (ii) Corrective action.--If a school 
                        has been identified under paragraph 
                        (5), the local educational agency shall 
                        provide such students transportation 
                        (or the costs of transportation) to 
                        schools not identified under paragraph 
                        (1) or (5).
                          (iii) Maximum amount.--
                        Notwithstanding any other provisions of 
                        this paragraph, the amount of 
                        assistance provided under this part for 
                        a student who elects a transfer under 
                        this paragraph shall not exceed the per 
                        pupil expenditures for elementary 
                        school or secondary school students as 
                        provided by the local educational 
                        agency that serves the school involved 
                        in the transfer.
                  (D) Continue option.--Once a school is no 
                longer identified for school improvement, the 
                local educational agency shall continue to 
                provide public school choice as an option to 
                students in such school for a period of not 
                less than 2 years.
          (7) State educational agency responsibilities.--If a 
        State educational agency determines that a local 
        educational agency failed to carry out the local 
        educational agency's responsibilities under this 
        section, the State educational agency shall take into 
        account such action as the State educational agency 
        finds necessary, consistent with this section, to 
        improve the affected schools and to ensure that the 
        local educational agency carries out the local 
        educational agency's responsibilities under this 
        section.
          (8) Special rule.--Schools that, for at least 2 of 
        the 3 years following identification under paragraph 
        (1), make adequate progress toward meeting the State's 
        proficient and advanced levels of performance shall no 
        longer need to be identified for school improvement.
          (9) Waivers.--The State educational agency shall 
        review any waivers approved for a school designated for 
        improvement or corrective action prior to the date of 
        enactment of the Educational Opportunities Act and 
        shall terminate any waiver approved by the State under 
        the Educational Flexibility Partnership Act of 1999 if 
        the State determines, after notice and an opportunity 
        for a hearing, that the waiver is not helping such 
        school to make yearly progress to meet the objectives 
        and specific goals described in the school's 
        improvement plan.
    (d) State Review and Local Educational Agency 
Improvement.--
          [(1) In general.--A State educational agency shall--
                  [(A) annually review the progress of each 
                local educational agency receiving funds under 
                this part to determine whether schools 
                receiving assistance under this part are making 
                adequate progress as defined in section 
                1111(b)(2)(A)(ii) toward meeting the State's 
                student performance standards; and
                  [(B) publicize and disseminate to local 
                education agencies, teachers and other staff, 
                parents, students, and the community the result 
                of the State review, including statistically 
                sound disaggregated results, as required by 
                section 1111(b)(3)(I).]
          (1) In general.--(A) A State educational agency shall 
        annually review the progress of each local educational 
        agency receiving funds under this part to determine 
        whether schools receiving assistance under this part 
        are making adequate progress as defined in section 
        1111(b)(2)(A)(ii) toward meeting the State's student 
        performance standards.
          (B) State reports.--Following the annual review 
        specified in subparagraph (A), each State educational 
        agency that receives funds under this part shall 
        prepare and disseminate an annual performancereport 
regarding each local educational agency that receives funds under this 
part.
          (C) Contents.--The State, at a minimum, shall include 
        in the report information on each local educational 
        agency regarding--
                  (i) local educational agency performance in 
                making adequate yearly progress, including the 
                number and percentage of schools that did and 
                did not make adequate yearly progress.
                  (ii) the progress of the local educational 
                agency in enabling all students served under 
                this part to meet the State's proficient and 
                advanced levels of performance, including the 
                progress of economically disadvantaged students 
                and limited English proficient students, except 
                that this clause shall not apply to a state if 
                the State demonstrates that the State has an 
                insufficient number of economically 
                disadvantaged or limited English proficient 
                students; and
                  (iii) any other information the State 
                determines appropriate (such as information on 
                teacher quality, school safety, and drop-out 
                rates).
          (D) Parent and public dissemination.--The State shall 
        publicize and disseminate to local educational 
        agencies, teachers and other staff, parents, students, 
        and the community, the report. Such report shall be 
        concise and presented in a format and manner that 
        parents can understand. The State may issue local 
        educational agency performance reports directly to the 
        local educational agencies, teachers and other staff, 
        parents, students, and the community or the State may 
        publicize and disseminate the report through a widely 
        read or distributed medium, such as posting on the 
        Internet or distribution to the media.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          [(4) Local educational agency revisions.--(A) Each 
        local educational agency identified under paragraph (3) 
        shall, in consultation with schools, parents, and 
        educational experts, revise its local educational 
        agency plan under section 1112 in ways that have the 
        greatest likelihood of improving the performance of 
        schools served by the local educational agency under 
        this part in meeting the State's student performance 
        standards.
          [(B) Such revision shall include determining why the 
        local educational agency's plan failed to bring about 
        increased achievement.]
          (4) Local educational agency revisions.--(A) Each 
        local educational agency identified under paragraph (3) 
        shall, not later than 3 months after being so 
        identified, revise a local educational agency plan as 
        described under section 1112. The plan shall--
                  (i) include specific State-determined yearly 
                progress requirements in subjects and grades to 
                ensure that all students will meet proficient 
                levels of performance within 10 years;
                  (ii) address the fundamental teaching and 
                learning needs in the schools of that agency, 
                and the specific academic problems of low-
                performing students including a determination 
                of why the local educational agency's prior 
                plan failed to bring about increased student 
                achievement and performance;
                  (iii) incorporate research-based strategies 
                that strengthen the core academic program in 
                the local educational agency;
                  (iv) address the professional development 
                needs of the instructional staff by committing 
                to spend not less than 10 percent of the funds 
                received by the school under this part during 1 
                fiscal year for professional development, which 
                professional development shall increase the 
                content knowledge of teachers and build the 
                capacity of the teachers to align classroom 
                instruction with challenging content standards 
                and to bring all students to proficient or 
                advanced levels of performance as determined by 
                the State;
                  (v) identify specific goals and objectives 
                the local educational agency will undertake for 
                making adequate yearly progress, which goals 
                and objectives shall be consistent with State 
                standards;
                  (vi) identify how the local educational 
                agency will provide written notification to 
                parents in a format, and to the extent 
                practicable, in a language that the parents can 
                understand;
                  (vii) specify the responsibility of the State 
                educational agency and the local educational 
                agency under the plan; and
                  (viii) include strategies to promote 
                effective parental involvement in the school.
          (5) State educational agency responsibility.--(A) * * 
        *